Havamal 43

[Doug Freyburger]

Over a quarter way through as of yesterday's stanza 42. Any
suggestions on what to cover next? Under a year to go. ;^)

43. To his friend a man should be a friend,
to him and to his friend;
but of his foe no man shall
the friend's friend be.

Yesterdays' discussion about the 42 line of trading lies with
lies brought up an interesting point. Plenty of lines are
duplicates or near duplicates. Of course part of this is a
poetic mechanism that makes the words easier to memorize.
But I think there's more to it than that. I think that repetition
in the first half of a stanza is for stress and repetition in the
second half of a stanza is for contrast.

This is one of a bunch that discuss friendship. Stanzas
41 through 44 are about dealing with established friends and
then the poem moves on to folks with other types of status.
Friendship and maintaining friendship is *important*. It's
important on more than just a practical plane. The Aesir
are friends among themselves and they try to build
friendships with other classes of wights. They occasionally
build friendships even with various giants and they recruit
mates from their opponents. The network of friendship
weaves a web of wyrde with positive feedback.

And that brings us to the non-practical view of the second
half. Asatru teaches about opponents and enemies as
being conceptually different. Today's opponent might be
tomorrow's ally but a real enemy can be trusted to shift
allegiences just to stay in opposition to you.

Since friendships weave a web of wyrde with positive
feedback and enemyships weave a web of wyrde with
negative feedback, you need to think long and hard about
entaggling with an opponent. Is the guy on the far end of the
web someone who just happens to be fighting you now
because of circumstances, or is he on the other side because
he's a dedicated opponent? Are you recruiting friends in
an attempt to change the balance of power or are you
risking contamination from your devoted enemy? It takes a
great deal of wisdom to judge such an issue.

If someone's on the other side today but it's just a matter
of timing, you won't lose much by waiting until the
circumstances change. Keep building that web of friends.
Someone who's opposing you now could become a potential
friend later so let that happen then. Right now the risk is
too high to figure out the odds.

Staying on the up-and-up is a simple but effective tactic in
life. Befriend your allies to keep them on your side. Avoid
your opponents and there friends to avoid the risk. As
circumstances change keep sweeping up more folks on
your side. As mundane as Machiavelli's The Prince, as
spiritual as the game played by the Aesir to keep their side
strong, as simple as the fact that it's easier to remember the
truth than what you made up to whom.

There's always time to swing your partner dose-ie-doe and
build more friends as the dance of life progresses to when
they guy calling the square dance says switch your partners
dose-ie-doe.

Be a friend today and into the past. Let tomorrow hand you
what it will. If it hands you more allies, befriend them. If
it hands you more opponents, go to your friends.

Okay, now let's take the paranoid approach to this stanza.
They're all out to get you, ya'know. So be paranoid and don't
get sucked in. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and
the friend of my enemy is my enemy so act like it. The
trouble with that logic is it's the middle-eastern all-or-nothing
approach. The advantage with that is it is a very effective
short term tactic.

Ah, the dance of tactics and strategy. Always try to have
both in mind.

[Michael Martin (Heathen Libertarian Forum)]

Maybe runes could be the next topic?

Michael Martin HEATHEN LIBERTARIAN FORUM
http://MichaelMartin.blogsource.com/

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by Michael Martin (Heathen Libertarian Forum)
Maybe runes could be the next topic?

Anyone interested in doing a runestave at a time? I ended
up learning the runes by osmosis but they've never held
much direct interest for me.

[rorik]

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by Michael Martin (Heathen Libertarian Forum)
Maybe runes could be the next topic?

Anyone interested in doing a runestave at a time? I ended
up learning the runes by osmosis but they've never held
much direct interest for me.

The problem would be choosing a resource to work from. Something on
the order of 99.44% of everything published on the runes (and 100% of
what you will find in the neighborhood bookstore) is flat-out bullshit.
Unlike Hávamál, there is no core text to anchor a discussion.

regards,
rorik

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by rorik

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by Michael Martin (Heathen Libertarian Forum)
Maybe runes could be the next topic?

Anyone interested in doing a runestave at a time? I ended
up learning the runes by osmosis but they've never held
much direct interest for me.

The problem would be choosing a resource to work from. Something on
the order of 99.44% of everything published on the runes (and 100% of
what you will find in the neighborhood bookstore) is flat-out bullshit.
Unlike Hávamál, there is no core text to anchor a discussion.

In which case, this is the era when Runes are given their meanings.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik
The problem would be choosing a resource to work from. Something on
the order of 99.44% of everything published on the runes (and 100% of
what you will find in the neighborhood bookstore) is flat-out bullshit.
Unlike Hávamál, there is no core text to anchor a discussion.

In which case, this is the era when Runes are given their meanings.

Beyond things like "þ = TH and is called thurisaz," I'm not sure what
other meaning can or should be given. Blather about this rune meaning
"strength," or that rune meaning "wisdom" makes no more sense than "the
letter 'D' = Socialism, 'Q' = cowardice, 'P' = up and 'Y' = purple."

This rant brought to you by the letters "F" and "O."

[bowman]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com
Beyond things like "þ = TH and is called thurisaz," I'm not sure what
other meaning can or should be given.

afaik, "is called thurisaz" is already pushing the envelope.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by bowman

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com
Beyond things like "þ = TH and is called thurisaz," I'm not sure what
other meaning can or should be given.

afaik, "is called thurisaz" is already pushing the envelope.

Well, Rorik seems to be claiming otherwise:
"...two crucial facts: (1) the runes had
specific uses and meanings to the pre-Xian northern Europeans who
inscribed and read them; and (2) we can know what those uses and
meanings were. "

Maybe he should tell us.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[bowman]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
"...two crucial facts: (1) the runes had
specific uses and meanings to the pre-Xian northern Europeans who
inscribed and read them; and (2) we can know what those uses and
meanings were. "
Maybe he should tell us.

I'm all ears. I tend to agree with R.I. Page. Years ago I noticed that a
friend who went to a different school would write JMJ at the top of his
homework pages. Rather opaque without the social context, I think, much
like ALU.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by bowman

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
"...two crucial facts: (1) the runes had
specific uses and meanings to the pre-Xian northern Europeans who
inscribed and read them; and (2) we can know what those uses and
meanings were. "
Maybe he should tell us.

I'm all ears. I tend to agree with R.I. Page. Years ago I noticed that a
friend who went to a different school would write JMJ at the top of his
homework pages. Rather opaque without the social context, I think, much
like ALU.

I think the lore is still evolving.
Rorik seems to believe that it's fixed.

Lore evolves because tales that continue to be told do not die out, and they
mutate with telling. New tales are invented and those that seize the collective
imagination live on. That obviously happens in pre-literate societies. It also
happens in post-literate societies like ours is becoming, but for different reasons.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[bowman]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
I think the lore is still evolving.
Rorik seems to believe that it's fixed.

Fixed is like one of those insects embedded in amber -- it can be quite
beautiful but in the end it is dead.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[rorik]

Post by bowman

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
I think the lore is still evolving.
Rorik seems to believe that it's fixed.

Fixed is like one of those insects embedded in amber -- it can be quite
beautiful but in the end it is dead.

This is, of course, the central point of contention in modern
heathenism. The prevailing view is that there is no need to inquire
into historical pre-Xian knowledge and beliefs (if indeed one has even
heard that such things existed), because, predating U2, they are
useless and "dead." Much more fun to buy a Freyja Aswynn paperback and
a Ouija board, and make up "Norse heathenism" as we play.

The minority view holds that the actual, historical knowledge of such
things as the runes is all that exists. We can learn it, use it, and
build on it, or we can, as Scott says, make shit up. The part I don't
understand is, given that one commits to making shit up, why one would
want to call it "Norse heathenism."

regards,
rorik

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by rorik
The minority view holds that the actual, historical knowledge of such
things as the runes is all that exists. We can learn it, use it, and
build on it, or we can, as Scott says, make shit up. The part I don't
understand is, given that one commits to making shit up, why one would
want to call it "Norse heathenism."

Because a religion that's thousands of years old has more cache than
one thousands of seconds old. And by tacking on ancient trappings to
modern claptrap, you can pretend to have an ancient religion, without
the hastle of actually waiting thousands of years.

In my view, the Lore is like the US Constitution: you can add to it,
revise it here and there, tinker, delete the bits that no longer
work... you still have the same religion (or nation). But if you just
give it lip service while actually throwing it away and doing something
quite different, then it's not the same religion.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by rorik
The minority view holds that the actual, historical knowledge of such
things as the runes is all that exists. We can learn it, use it, and
build on it, or we can, as Scott says, make shit up. The part I don't
understand is, given that one commits to making shit up, why one would
want to call it "Norse heathenism."

Because a religion that's thousands of years old has more cache than
one thousands of seconds old. And by tacking on ancient trappings to
modern claptrap, you can pretend to have an ancient religion, without
the hastle of actually waiting thousands of years.
In my view, the Lore is like the US Constitution: you can add to it,
revise it here and there, tinker, delete the bits that no longer
work... you still have the same religion (or nation). But if you just
give it lip service while actually throwing it away and doing something
quite different, then it's not the same religion.

So where is the line drawn, and who draws it?

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com
In my view, the Lore is like the US Constitution: you can add to it,
revise it here and there, tinker, delete the bits that no longer
work... you still have the same religion (or nation). But if you just
give it lip service while actually throwing it away and doing something
quite different, then it's not the same religion.

So where is the line drawn, and who draws it?

Line? Ain't no friggen' "line." It's like obscenity, I suppose... you
know it when you see it.

In time, a religion can probably be completely replaced and survive,
but only if done a bit at a time. Big jumps are killers.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com
In my view, the Lore is like the US Constitution: you can add to it,
revise it here and there, tinker, delete the bits that no longer
work... you still have the same religion (or nation). But if you just
give it lip service while actually throwing it away and doing something
quite different, then it's not the same religion.

So where is the line drawn, and who draws it?

Line? Ain't no friggen' "line." It's like obscenity, I suppose... you
know it when you see it.
In time, a religion can probably be completely replaced and survive,
but only if done a bit at a time. Big jumps are killers.

We are living in an age of speed.
What once took a decade now takes weeks.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
We are living in an age of speed.
What once took a decade now takes weeks.

Indeed. Where once bullshit tooks weeks or months to spread around,
crackpots, hack authors, con artists, journalists and New
Agey-fruitloops can re-write history and post it for all the world to
see in a matter of seconds. So, now there are a bajillion new runes all
with Majickal Importance because some chick named Galactica Bubbles
said so.

Gah.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
We are living in an age of speed.
What once took a decade now takes weeks.

Indeed. Where once bullshit tooks weeks or months to spread around,
crackpots, hack authors, con artists, journalists and New
Agey-fruitloops can re-write history and post it for all the world to
see in a matter of seconds. So, now there are a bajillion new runes all
with Majickal Importance because some chick named Galactica Bubbles
said so.

That's what I meant by 'post literate society'.
Not illiterate, but far less filtered information.
Still, a fertile ground for the evolution of mythology both new and old.


FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Fwap]

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:22:48 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
We are living in an age of speed.
What once took a decade now takes weeks.

Indeed. Where once bullshit tooks weeks or months to spread around,
crackpots, hack authors, con artists, journalists and New
Agey-fruitloops can re-write history and post it for all the world to
see in a matter of seconds. So, now there are a bajillion new runes all
with Majickal Importance because some chick named Galactica Bubbles
said so.

That's what I meant by 'post literate society'.
Not illiterate, but far less filtered information.
Still, a fertile ground for the evolution of mythology both new and old.

Weird thing that. It seems that it's never occured to these
guys who talk about "evolving" the "lore", and incidentally
can sell you a quite cheap book containing millenia of
cosmic wisdom, that the culture to which this religion and
mythology belongs is still around, and has been evolving the
whole time?

It's a rather hard choice; tell them, cooperate, teach them,
and be appropriated. Tell them, and be dismissed and
ridiculed. Or shut up and leave them to it.

What would you do?

...

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by Fwap
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:22:48 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
We are living in an age of speed.
What once took a decade now takes weeks.

Indeed. Where once bullshit tooks weeks or months to spread around,
crackpots, hack authors, con artists, journalists and New
Agey-fruitloops can re-write history and post it for all the world to
see in a matter of seconds. So, now there are a bajillion new runes all
with Majickal Importance because some chick named Galactica Bubbles
said so.

That's what I meant by 'post literate society'.
Not illiterate, but far less filtered information.
Still, a fertile ground for the evolution of mythology both new and old.

Weird thing that. It seems that it's never occured to these
guys who talk about "evolving" the "lore", and incidentally
can sell you a quite cheap book containing millenia of
cosmic wisdom, that the culture to which this religion and
mythology belongs is still around, and has been evolving the
whole time?
It's a rather hard choice; tell them, cooperate, teach them,
and be appropriated. Tell them, and be dismissed and
ridiculed. Or shut up and leave them to it.
What would you do?

I'm a fan of information being freely available.
The alternative of 'keep it to yourself' is pointless.
Why do that? It's volunteering to be cut off from influencing the future.
That's my criticism of Rorik. He's not out here in the world amongst the morons
getting his hands dirty. As a result the world turns out not to his liking.
Who's to blame?

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Fwap]

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 03:42:08 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Fwap
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:22:48 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
We are living in an age of speed.
What once took a decade now takes weeks.

Indeed. Where once bullshit tooks weeks or months to spread around,
crackpots, hack authors, con artists, journalists and New
Agey-fruitloops can re-write history and post it for all the world to
see in a matter of seconds. So, now there are a bajillion new runes all
with Majickal Importance because some chick named Galactica Bubbles
said so.

That's what I meant by 'post literate society'.
Not illiterate, but far less filtered information.
Still, a fertile ground for the evolution of mythology both new and old.

Weird thing that. It seems that it's never occured to these
guys who talk about "evolving" the "lore", and incidentally
can sell you a quite cheap book containing millenia of
cosmic wisdom, that the culture to which this religion and
mythology belongs is still around, and has been evolving the
whole time?
It's a rather hard choice; tell them, cooperate, teach them,
and be appropriated. Tell them, and be dismissed and
ridiculed. Or shut up and leave them to it.
What would you do?

I'm a fan of information being freely available.
The alternative of 'keep it to yourself' is pointless.
Why do that? It's volunteering to be cut off from influencing the future.
That's my criticism of Rorik. He's not out here in the world amongst the morons
getting his hands dirty. As a result the world turns out not to his liking.
Who's to blame?

I'm inclined to agree. All the crap out there has grown up
to fill a need (heh), which no one else fed. I'm hoping that
more of nordic runology and history will get translated and
popularized in the future. Only way to the fight all the
politically tinted misinformation, which is much more
dangerous than a few kooks making a quick buck by being the
only ones on the market.

It's just that the quick and easy tends to spread much
further than the complicated but authentic. All you need to
do is look at the shit native american culture has had to
take - without further historical comparsions. We haven't
actually had to endure genocide...

..

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by Fwap
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 03:42:08 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Fwap
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:22:48 +0000, Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
We are living in an age of speed.
What once took a decade now takes weeks.

Indeed. Where once bullshit tooks weeks or months to spread around,
crackpots, hack authors, con artists, journalists and New
Agey-fruitloops can re-write history and post it for all the world to
see in a matter of seconds. So, now there are a bajillion new runes all
with Majickal Importance because some chick named Galactica Bubbles
said so.

That's what I meant by 'post literate society'.
Not illiterate, but far less filtered information.
Still, a fertile ground for the evolution of mythology both new and old.

Weird thing that. It seems that it's never occured to these
guys who talk about "evolving" the "lore", and incidentally
can sell you a quite cheap book containing millenia of
cosmic wisdom, that the culture to which this religion and
mythology belongs is still around, and has been evolving the
whole time?
It's a rather hard choice; tell them, cooperate, teach them,
and be appropriated. Tell them, and be dismissed and
ridiculed. Or shut up and leave them to it.
What would you do?

I'm a fan of information being freely available.
The alternative of 'keep it to yourself' is pointless.
Why do that? It's volunteering to be cut off from influencing the future.
That's my criticism of Rorik. He's not out here in the world amongst the morons
getting his hands dirty. As a result the world turns out not to his liking.
Who's to blame?

I'm inclined to agree. All the crap out there has grown up
to fill a need (heh), which no one else fed. I'm hoping that
more of nordic runology and history will get translated and
popularized in the future. Only way to the fight all the
politically tinted misinformation, which is much more
dangerous than a few kooks making a quick buck by being the
only ones on the market.
It's just that the quick and easy tends to spread much
further than the complicated but authentic. All you need to
do is look at the shit native american culture has had to
take - without further historical comparsions. We haven't
actually had to endure genocide...

Compromise is necessary - simple, fairly authentic in the main points, with most
of the detail omitted. As I discovered with the book I'm writing, a factual book
is defined by what is left out, not what is put in. You have to make it just
enough to do the intended job, and no more. Anything else is for intellectual
and academics (assuming there's a difference). Consider the meaning of the
saying "It's all academic".

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[bowman]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
As I discovered with the book I'm writing, a factual book
is defined by what is left out, not what is put in.

Historians discovered that centuries ago.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by Fwap
All the crap out there has grown up
to fill a need (heh), which no one else fed. I'm hoping that
more of nordic runology and history will get translated and
popularized in the future. Only way to the fight all the
politically tinted misinformation, which is much more
dangerous than a few kooks making a quick buck by being the
only ones on the market.
It's just that the quick and easy tends to spread much
further than the complicated but authentic. All you need to
do is look at the shit native american culture has had to
take - without further historical comparsions.

Object lesson in what happens if you decline to get involved -

Rites of Odin by Ed Fitch.

Ed is a well known Wiccan who saw a need for a book on Asatru.
Since he's a Wiccan not an Asatruar, he started asking around
to interview heathens. Since he's a well known Wiccan not an
Asatruar every single one he approached declined his offer.
Result, Ed made shit up and published his book. Golden
opportunity lost.

Fluffy and academic appears to be a binary number to Rorik.
It's floating point to me. If someone can shift something even a
bit from the fluffy end of the spectrum, they should. Whether
it's about runes or other topics.

[bowman]

Post by Doug Freyburger
Fluffy and academic appears to be a binary number to Rorik.
It's floating point to me. If someone can shift something even a
bit from the fluffy end of the spectrum, they should. Whether
it's about runes or other topics.

I've read my share of academic sources. iirc, a good deal of ink is devoted
to explaining why almost everyone else in the field is an utter moron who
wouldn't know the truth if it bit him on the ass. In polite terms, of
course.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[rorik]

Post by bowman

Post by Doug Freyburger
Fluffy and academic appears to be a binary number to Rorik.
It's floating point to me. If someone can shift something even a
bit from the fluffy end of the spectrum, they should. Whether
it's about runes or other topics.

I've read my share of academic sources. iirc, a good deal of ink is devoted
to explaining why almost everyone else in the field is an utter moron who
wouldn't know the truth if it bit him on the ass. In polite terms, of
course.

Plus, of course, making shit up is so much easier and more fun. How
many of the entries on the list I posted here have you actually read?

[bowman]

Post by rorik
Plus, of course, making shit up is so much easier and more fun. How
many of the entries on the list I posted here have you actually read?

I was speaking of academia in general. I've read one of Page's books, which
is as far as my interest in runes extends.

If two academics hold diametrically opposed views, it would seem one or both
are making shit up. I'm leaving out cases like the current furor at the
Rikshospitalet University Hospital or in Korea. Both of those cases involve
hard science where presumably the finding can be replicated by independent
researchers.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[rorik]

Post by bowman

Post by rorik
Plus, of course, making shit up is so much easier and more fun. How
many of the entries on the list I posted here have you actually read?

I was speaking of academia in general. I've read one of Page's books, which
is as far as my interest in runes extends.

So, in other words, like Dirk and Heidi, you have no idea what you're
talking about when it comes to the subject at hand. But while they
sing the praises of pulling chunks of dark matter out of their nether
regions and proclaiming it to be runic knowledge, you denigrate the
work of those who actually know something about the subject -- even
though you have no more direct knowledge of it than they do. Nice
one-two punch.

Post by bowman
If two academics hold diametrically opposed views, it would seem one or both
are making shit up.

Bernard Mees work on the origin of the runes arrives at conclusions
that are diametrically opposed to Bengt Odenstedt's. Which of the two
do you believe is making shit up?

[bowman]

Post by rorik
So, in other words, like Dirk and Heidi, you have no idea what you're
talking about when it comes to the subject at hand.

Correct. It is not my field, and not even something I am particularly
interested in.

Post by rorik
Bernard Mees work on the origin of the runes arrives at conclusions
that are diametrically opposed to Bengt Odenstedt's. Which of the two
do you believe is making shit up?

I haven't the slightest idea. You tell me. I assume the usual rules of logic
apply to the study of runes, so one of them is incorrect? With absolutely
no knowledge of either position, I'll flip a coin and say Mees is mistaken
despite decades of careful scholarship.

Now, tell me your answer, and explain why the probability of it being the
correct answer exceeds 50%. Then we can move on to solvingthe problem of
whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, or just the
Father. I think that has been a hot topic for about 1500 years and has an
equal chance of resolution.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[rorik]

Post by bowman

Post by rorik
Bernard Mees work on the origin of the runes arrives at conclusions
that are diametrically opposed to Bengt Odenstedt's. Which of the two
do you believe is making shit up?

I haven't the slightest idea. You tell me. I assume the usual rules of logic
apply to the study of runes, so one of them is incorrect? With absolutely
no knowledge of either position, I'll flip a coin and say Mees is mistaken
despite decades of careful scholarship.

If you read any of their material, it would be clear to you that
neither is making shit up in the sense of Dirk, Heidi, or Freyja
Aswynn. The question boils down to one of probabilities, and these
shift with new discoveries in a variety of fields. Mees has also added
a new factor into the analysis -- the historical grouping of particular
graphemes into pairs in the Latin, North Etruscan, and runic alphabets
-- that had not been considered by Odenstadt, Moltke, or previous
scholars. This is how scholarship advances, as opposed to wolfing down
a couple of cupcakes and proclaiming perthro to mean "birth."

Post by bowman
Now, tell me your answer, and explain why the probability of it being the
correct answer exceeds 50%.

It is the correct answer because it is an objective explanation of what
is happening in that dark, mysterious wonderland called "scholarship."

Post by bowman
Then we can move on to solvingthe problem of
whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, or just the
Father. I think that has been a hot topic for about 1500 years and has an
equal chance of resolution.

Your contempt for the human intellect is staggering.

[Doug Frisk]

Post by rorik

Post by bowman

Post by rorik
Bernard Mees work on the origin of the runes arrives at conclusions
that are diametrically opposed to Bengt Odenstedt's. Which of the two
do you believe is making shit up?

I haven't the slightest idea. You tell me. I assume the usual rules of logic
apply to the study of runes, so one of them is incorrect? With absolutely
no knowledge of either position, I'll flip a coin and say Mees is mistaken
despite decades of careful scholarship.

If you read any of their material, it would be clear to you that
neither is making shit up in the sense of Dirk, Heidi, or Freyja
Aswynn.

It's the difference between "Intelligent Design" and the various theories of
evolution. Many theories of how evolution has progressed are mutually
exclusive. That doesn't mean that they are non-scientific. It means that
the evidence supports multiple interpretations.

But just because there are multiple competing theories does not mean that ID
is a valid theory. ID is just "made up shit".

Post by rorik
The question boils down to one of probabilities, and these
shift with new discoveries in a variety of fields. Mees has also added
a new factor into the analysis -- the historical grouping of particular
graphemes into pairs in the Latin, North Etruscan, and runic alphabets
-- that had not been considered by Odenstadt, Moltke, or previous
scholars. This is how scholarship advances, as opposed to wolfing down
a couple of cupcakes and proclaiming perthro to mean "birth."

Hey! I like cupcakes!

Post by rorik

Post by bowman
Now, tell me your answer, and explain why the probability of it being the
correct answer exceeds 50%.

It is the correct answer because it is an objective explanation of what
is happening in that dark, mysterious wonderland called "scholarship."

Both theories are correct answers because they procede from the known facts
and do not posit meaning that is contradicted by those known facts.

Post by rorik

Post by bowman
Then we can move on to solvingthe problem of
whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, or just the
Father. I think that has been a hot topic for about 1500 years and has an
equal chance of resolution.

Your contempt for the human intellect is staggering.

Nah, just a normal layman's response to competing theories. This is you
being cranky.

[bowman]

Post by rorik
Your contempt for the human intellect is staggering.

It isn't contempt, but neither do I give the intellect primacy.



" It is as if, Malunkyaputta, a man had been wounded by an arrow thickly
smeared with poison, and his friends and companions, his relatives and
kinsfolk, were to procure for him a physician or surgeon; and the sick man
were to say, ‘I will not have this arrow taken out until I have learnt
whether the man who wounded me belonged to the warrior caste, or to the
Brahman caste, or to the agricultural caste, or to the menial caste.’

"Or again he were to say, ‘I will not have this arrow taken out until I have
learnt the name of the man who wounded me, and to what clan he belongs.’

"Or again he were to say, ‘I will not have this arrow taken out until I have
learnt whether the man who wounded me was tall, or short, or of the middle
height.’

........

"Or again he were to say, ‘I will not have this arrow taken out until I have
learnt whether the arrow which wounded me was an ordinary arrow, or a
claw-headed arrow, or a vekanda, or an iron arrow, or a calf-tooth arrow,
or a karavirapatta.’ That man would die, Malunkyaputta, without ever having
learnt this.

'Questions Which do not Lead to Edification' Majjhima-nikaya


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by rorik

Post by bowman

Post by rorik
Plus, of course, making shit up is so much easier and more fun. How
many of the entries on the list I posted here have you actually read?

I was speaking of academia in general. I've read one of Page's books, which
is as far as my interest in runes extends.

So, in other words, like Dirk and Heidi, you have no idea what you're
talking about when it comes to the subject at hand. But while they
sing the praises of pulling chunks of dark matter out of their nether
regions and proclaiming it to be runic knowledge, you denigrate the
work of those who actually know something about the subject -- even
though you have no more direct knowledge of it than they do. Nice
one-two punch.

If you read what I wrote, I only denegrate people like you who hoard their
information like some pot of gold never to be shared. The Runes are 'your
precious'. Where's your popular book on the Runes? Where's your webpage on the
Runes? Where is *anything* you have written on the Runes?

It certainly ain't here.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by rorik

Post by bowman

Post by Doug Freyburger
Fluffy and academic appears to be a binary number to Rorik.
It's floating point to me. If someone can shift something even a
bit from the fluffy end of the spectrum, they should. Whether
it's about runes or other topics.

I've read my share of academic sources. iirc, a good deal of ink is devoted
to explaining why almost everyone else in the field is an utter moron who
wouldn't know the truth if it bit him on the ass. In polite terms, of
course.

Plus, of course, making shit up is so much easier and more fun. How
many of the entries on the list I posted here have you actually read?

Rorik - I know this is news to you, but all of our myths and legends concerning
the Gods are 'made up shit'. It's just been gold plated by 1000+ years of
filtration. You thing the Venus de Milo would be a revered masterpiece if it was
discovered that someone knocked it out in their basement in 1819? I've seen
modern sculptors produce work as good as or better than anything from the
classical period. You think that means anything if it hasn't been buried for
2000 years?

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[bowman]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
I've seen
modern sculptors produce work as good as or better than anything from the
classical period. You think that means anything if it hasn't been buried
for 2000 years?

If you are really good, as James Macpherson was, you can suck in most of the
literati of your day. I believe the poems of Ossian generated more than one
scholarly dissertation.

It is much safer to hitch your brand new wagon to an elderly horse as the
Christians and Moslems did. That way if someone notices the ink isn't quite
dry, you say "Certainly! But it was mentioned in this really old document."
Bit of that going on, too, I think.

Things are different in our oh so modern world, though:

http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=27002006

The old gentleman might be a crank, but he does have the sense to know a
urinal is for pissing into, not being a £2m piss of art.





----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[rorik]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Rorik - I know this is news to you, but all of our myths and legends concerning
the Gods are 'made up shit'.

Bertie couldn't have put it any better. Is there any particular reason
you hang out on this group?

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by rorik

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Rorik - I know this is news to you, but all of our myths and legends concerning
the Gods are 'made up shit'.

Bertie couldn't have put it any better. Is there any particular reason
you hang out on this group?

I could ask you the same, since you contribute less than I do.
So, if out myths of the Gods is not 'made up shit', perhaps you can tell us
where they come from? or is that another precious secret of yours?

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by rorik

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Rorik - I know this is news to you, but all of our myths and legends concerning
the Gods are 'made up shit'.

Bertie couldn't have put it any better.

Actually it's a point beyond the grasp of such a lunatic. ALL
religions are made up shit at their sources. Every single one is
based on the spectrum of myhthic viosion and made up stories,
and then the people who hear those tales either pass them
down and filter their contents or they don't. Every bit as true
of the JCI faiths as of Asatru or Shinto.

Post by rorik
Is there any particular reason you hang out on this group?

Dirk and I discuss that topic with some regularlity. Your
commentary on why is conspicuously absent. Why do you
post here when you don't give much sign of your reasons?
I decided to follow the Aesir and the better man for having
done so. The decision has improved my long term decision
making. How about you? What are you here for other than
ranting that Blum (who isn't on ARA) got it wrong?

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by rorik

Post by bowman

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
I think the lore is still evolving.
Rorik seems to believe that it's fixed.

The part of the Lore that was originally written in Old Norse or
Latin is fixed. Sagas, Eddas, Saxo and so on.

Dirk wrote the word with a lower case "l" for a reason. There
is more to Asatru than the ancient lore. Folks do write new
material in this day. As usual with Sturgeon's Law that 90%
of everything is crud, we can easily say that my Ull Yule
Drool or Heidi's Nanna Goat stories don't hold a candle to
stuff that survived a thousand years worth of crud filtering,
but a thousand years ago there must have been a vast amount
of crude available. And a thousand years from now some
amount of material that's now new will then be ancient.

Post by rorik

Post by bowman
Fixed is like one of those insects embedded in amber -- it can be quite
beautiful but in the end it is dead.

More like one frame in a motion picture. Clickety clack flick
flick the frames go by one by one and each is a bit different
than the last. Whether the frames are per year or per
generation is a matter of tastes, but the ancient Lore is a
frame in a living tradition. Let's the film had an Intermission
for a while. A thousand year while. Huge for humans, not for
Aesir.

Post by rorik
This is, of course, the central point of contention in modern
heathenism.

The one you like to focus the most on anyways. There are a
list of contentions going on.

Post by rorik
The prevailing view is that there is no need to inquire
into historical pre-Xian knowledge and beliefs (if indeed one has even
heard that such things existed), because, predating U2, they are
useless and "dead." Much more fun to buy a Freyja Aswynn paperback and
a Ouija board, and make up "Norse heathenism" as we play.

Well, that's the prevailing view in Wicca maybe.

Post by rorik
The minority view holds that the actual, historical knowledge of such
things as the runes is all that exists.

Well, that's the prevailing view among PhD folks maybe.

Post by rorik
We can learn it, use it, and
build on it, or we can, as Scott says, make shit up.

Or we can be a part of a living religion within a current culture. Use
as much of the ancient sources as possible. Make up the missing
parts and keep looking for better ancient sources. Be open to
change but be conservative about actually implementing change.

Post by rorik
The part I don't
understand is, given that one commits to making shit up, why one would
want to call it "Norse heathenism."

The part I don't understand is, given that one commits to making
shit up, why would the Vatican want to call it "Christianity". After
all those guys in Judea were a long time ago and they were all
dead. Ever since there's been gradual and conservative change
through a progression of always conservative but not always
fossilized Popes.

Scott claimed that it's the big changes that are the killer. Maybe.
Hindu is a lot different for its exposure to the monotheists but it
wasn't killed. Now matter how conservative the kindred, does anyone
think an ancient pulled out of a statis box would say what we do
is what his family did? We hope he'd recognize what we do but
in the long run it isn't mandatory that he would.

Having a time based formula for relative value of material works.
90% of new material is crude that doesn't survive a century (except
I think UseNet postings will still be available in archives), but that
still leaves 10% to face the next century. The average material
in the Eddas was the top 0.1% of the tales of the previous thousand
years or more, but that doesn't make new material worthless. It
takes a lot of it to get past the 90%-is-crud rule so work well and
try.

[rorik]

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by rorik
This is, of course, the central point of contention in modern
heathenism.

The one you like to focus the most on anyways. There are a
list of contentions going on.

All of the others are secondary. The first dividing point is whether
one considers Norse heathenism to be based on a real, knowable,
historic tradition, or if it is something to be made up in the back of
the minivan on the way to Ren Faire.

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by rorik
The prevailing view is that there is no need to inquire
into historical pre-Xian knowledge and beliefs (if indeed one has even
heard that such things existed), because, predating U2, they are
useless and "dead." Much more fun to buy a Freyja Aswynn paperback and
a Ouija board, and make up "Norse heathenism" as we play.

Well, that's the prevailing view in Wicca maybe.

And roughly 95% of all existing "runic" websites, e-lists, and "study
groups."

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by rorik
The minority view holds that the actual, historical knowledge of such
things as the runes is all that exists.

Well, that's the prevailing view among PhD folks maybe.

I said it's a minority view. Not just among Ph.Ds, obviously, but
among those few who actually seek out the historical record and
scholarly interpretations thereof.

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by rorik
The part I don't
understand is, given that one commits to making shit up, why one would
want to call it "Norse heathenism."

The part I don't understand is, given that one commits to making
shit up, why would the Vatican want to call it "Christianity". After
all those guys in Judea were a long time ago and they were all
dead. Ever since there's been gradual and conservative change
through a progression of always conservative but not always
fossilized Popes.

Bear in mind, the specific context of this discussion is the runes.
Making shit up in this context means Ralph Blum deciding to publish the
all-time best selling book on the subject without even knowing that the
runes had any historical meaning whatsoever -- everything is 100%
invented out of thin air. Or Freyja Aswynn not having the remotest
clue how to tap into any genuine historical knowledge of the subject,
so deciding to share the understanding she gained of the runes by
eating them. There is no analogy at all to a historical tradition like
Xianity, that includes well-regulated institutional mechanisms for
extending a body of doctrine to meet what are perceived as modern
needs. Making shit up means making shit up.

regards,
rorik

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by rorik

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by rorik
The prevailing view is that there is no need to inquire
into historical pre-Xian knowledge and beliefs ...

Well, that's the prevailing view in Wicca maybe.

And roughly 95% of all existing "runic" websites, e-lists, and "study
groups."

On the sub-topic of runes, check. On the broader topic of
lore in general, not check.

Post by rorik

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by rorik
The minority view holds that the actual, historical knowledge of such
things as the runes is all that exists.

Well, that's the prevailing view among PhD folks maybe.

Bear in mind, the specific context of this discussion is the runes.

Okay. That's why I'm not going to go over runes one by one
any time soon. I can go over stanzas of a poem, be openly
non-scholarly, and have points that some consider worth
reading. The best I could do with runes is points I wouldn't
consider worth writing. I haven't done any worthwhile study of
the runes and their form of symbolism isn't the type I'm
practiced at exercising.

[Doug Frisk]

Post by rorik

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by rorik
This is, of course, the central point of contention in modern
heathenism.

The one you like to focus the most on anyways. There are a
list of contentions going on.

All of the others are secondary. The first dividing point is whether
one considers Norse heathenism to be based on a real, knowable,
historic tradition, or if it is something to be made up in the back of
the minivan on the way to Ren Faire.

I disagree. The dividing line is not the historic tradition. Even the
fluffiest bunny cops to there being some bit of historical tradition even if
they're more into moonbeams.

The real line is between those who see the gods as real and individual, and
those who try to cram the gods into some (typically pantheistic) bilge that
was invented out of whole cloth in some cheesy paperback.

There are parts of the documented historic tradition that we would refuse to
engage in today. While I have no problem at all with someone who wants to
engage in animal sacrifice, human sacrifice is also part of the documented
historic tradition and I draw a line there. Is omission better or worse
than addition?

Our times will reflect how we approach the gods. And while we can look back
to see what path we have been on, at some point we have to move forward.

[rorik]

Post by Doug Frisk

Post by rorik
The first dividing point is whether
one considers Norse heathenism to be based on a real, knowable,
historic tradition, or if it is something to be made up in the back of
the minivan on the way to Ren Faire.

I disagree. The dividing line is not the historic tradition. Even the
fluffiest bunny cops to there being some bit of historical tradition even if
they're more into moonbeams.

I am not talking about how people *describe* their beliefs. I agree,
that has no significance. The folks who put up the "Healing Rune
Astrology" pages and suchlike will be the first to tell you their
beliefs trace back to 5 million years BC. They still make them up in
the back of the minivan.

Post by Doug Frisk
The real line is between those who see the gods as real and individual, and
those who try to cram the gods into some (typically pantheistic) bilge that
was invented out of whole cloth in some cheesy paperback.

Both these categories are represented among the "dreamed it up on the
way to the Faire" crowd. Indeed, some folks who are convinced of the
individual reality of the gods have concocted their own personal
"heathenisms" that aren't even based on cheesy paperbacks.

Post by Doug Frisk
There are parts of the documented historic tradition that we would refuse to
engage in today. While I have no problem at all with someone who wants to
engage in animal sacrifice, human sacrifice is also part of the documented
historic tradition and I draw a line there. Is omission better or worse
than addition?

I don't plan to build a bridge and set up runestones at each end,
either. None of these practices was essential to pre-Xian Norse
heathenism, and they are not essential today. Knowledge of the past
informs the practice of a historically-rooted heathenism, but does not
dictate it. Omitting human sacrifice is better than adding incense,
magic circles, and tables of correspondences ("Heimdall's beverage is
pina colada, and his scent is desert rose").

Post by Doug Frisk
Our times will reflect how we approach the gods. And while we can look back
to see what path we have been on, at some point we have to move forward.

We are always moving forward; that's neither the question nor the
answer.

regards,
rorik

[Doug Frisk]

Post by rorik

Post by Doug Frisk
There are parts of the documented historic tradition that we would refuse to
engage in today. While I have no problem at all with someone who wants to
engage in animal sacrifice, human sacrifice is also part of the documented
historic tradition and I draw a line there. Is omission better or worse
than addition?

I don't plan to build a bridge and set up runestones at each end,
either. None of these practices was essential to pre-Xian Norse
heathenism, and they are not essential today. Knowledge of the past
informs the practice of a historically-rooted heathenism, but does not
dictate it.

Well put.

Post by rorik
Omitting human sacrifice is better than adding incense,
magic circles, and tables of correspondences ("Heimdall's beverage is
pina colada, and his scent is desert rose").

Hah, I'm going to agree with you on those specifics. Heimdall is more of a
bourbon kind of guy.

Many additions (Thor likes coffee) only serve to update practice and make it
more practical in today's society. While we should start from what's known
we can't restrict ourselves to just that. Nor should any of us pretend that
we have it 100% "authentic".

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by rorik
I don't plan to build a bridge and set up runestones at each end,
either. None of these practices was essential to pre-Xian Norse
heathenism, and they are not essential today. Knowledge of the past
informs the practice of a historically-rooted heathenism, but does not
dictate it. Omitting human sacrifice is better than adding incense,
magic circles, and tables of correspondences ("Heimdall's beverage is
pina colada, and his scent is desert rose").

Yet that kind of addition is quite valid.
Even moreso after a thousand yerars of filtration through the psyche of a people.

How do you think all those stories and historically attested correspondances
originally arose? Dictated personally by the Gods to their faithful scribes?

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[rorik]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik
I don't plan to build a bridge and set up runestones at each end,
either. None of these practices was essential to pre-Xian Norse
heathenism, and they are not essential today. Knowledge of the past
informs the practice of a historically-rooted heathenism, but does not
dictate it. Omitting human sacrifice is better than adding incense,
magic circles, and tables of correspondences ("Heimdall's beverage is
pina colada, and his scent is desert rose").

Yet that kind of addition is quite valid.
Even moreso after a thousand yerars of filtration through the psyche of a people.
How do you think all those stories and historically attested correspondances
originally arose? Dictated personally by the Gods to their faithful scribes?

What "historically attested correspondences" are you referring to? The
tables of correspondences you see in occult-shop paperbacks and
websites are imitations of the work of Christian occultists and
alchemists of the high middle ages. They have nothing whatsoever to do
with historical heathenism. I used that example because it's a classic
instance of making shit up in the back of the mini-van.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by rorik

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik
I don't plan to build a bridge and set up runestones at each end,
either. None of these practices was essential to pre-Xian Norse
heathenism, and they are not essential today. Knowledge of the past
informs the practice of a historically-rooted heathenism, but does not
dictate it. Omitting human sacrifice is better than adding incense,
magic circles, and tables of correspondences ("Heimdall's beverage is
pina colada, and his scent is desert rose").

Yet that kind of addition is quite valid.
Even moreso after a thousand yerars of filtration through the psyche of a people.
How do you think all those stories and historically attested correspondances
originally arose? Dictated personally by the Gods to their faithful scribes?

What "historically attested correspondences" are you referring to? The

Rune poems, for example.
All just NewAge crap, backdated 1000 years?

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[r***@gmail.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik
I don't plan to build a bridge and set up runestones at each end,
either. None of these practices was essential to pre-Xian Norse
heathenism, and they are not essential today. Knowledge of the past
informs the practice of a historically-rooted heathenism, but does not
dictate it. Omitting human sacrifice is better than adding incense,
magic circles, and tables of correspondences ("Heimdall's beverage is
pina colada, and his scent is desert rose").

Yet that kind of addition is quite valid.
Even moreso after a thousand yerars of filtration through the psyche of a people.
How do you think all those stories and historically attested correspondances
originally arose? Dictated personally by the Gods to their faithful scribes?

What "historically attested correspondences" are you referring to? The

Rune poems, for example.
All just NewAge crap, backdated 1000 years?

Sorry, I've missed the tables of correspondences that you've discovered
in the rune poems. Please give a reference, so I can fill that gap in
my education. I'm especially interested in finding some historical
documentation for Vali's favorite color. Some say it's teal, others
puce. I would like to pin this down in the rune poems, if possible.

regards,
rorik

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by r***@gmail.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik
I don't plan to build a bridge and set up runestones at each end,
either. None of these practices was essential to pre-Xian Norse
heathenism, and they are not essential today. Knowledge of the past
informs the practice of a historically-rooted heathenism, but does not
dictate it. Omitting human sacrifice is better than adding incense,
magic circles, and tables of correspondences ("Heimdall's beverage is
pina colada, and his scent is desert rose").

Yet that kind of addition is quite valid.
Even moreso after a thousand yerars of filtration through the psyche of a people.
How do you think all those stories and historically attested correspondances
originally arose? Dictated personally by the Gods to their faithful scribes?

What "historically attested correspondences" are you referring to? The

Rune poems, for example.
All just NewAge crap, backdated 1000 years?

Sorry, I've missed the tables of correspondences that you've discovered
in the rune poems. Please give a reference, so I can fill that gap in
my education. I'm especially interested in finding some historical
documentation for Vali's favorite color. Some say it's teal, others
puce. I would like to pin this down in the rune poems, if possible.

Well, one correspondance would appear to be that the Gods like mead.
Now, how do you suppose that bit of info arose?
Yet no doubt you sneer if someone tells you that Thor likes coffee.

Your attitude appears to be that any modern addition to Lore is shit, while any
addition to the Lore predating Xianity is to be deified.

I'm saying that the only difference is time and the psyche of the population
that tells the tales.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Well, one correspondance would appear to be that the Gods like mead.
Now, how do you suppose that bit of info arose?
Yet no doubt you sneer if someone tells you that Thor likes coffee.

You know, I hate to be the voice of reason here, but... there is a
distinction that people should really make. For those things made clear
in the historical accepted Lore, a statement such as:

"Thor likes mead"

is valid. For things post-dating the historical accepted Lore, a
statement like:

"Thor likes coffee"

is *not* *necessarily* valid. However what *would* be valid is:

"I believe Thor likes coffee."

There is a somewhat vague, yet terribly important line between
sentiments of "This is so" and "I believe that this is so." The latter
is undeniable, the former causes fights.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Well, one correspondance would appear to be that the Gods like mead.
Now, how do you suppose that bit of info arose?
Yet no doubt you sneer if someone tells you that Thor likes coffee.

You know, I hate to be the voice of reason here, but... there is a
distinction that people should really make. For those things made clear
"Thor likes mead"
is valid. For things post-dating the historical accepted Lore, a
"Thor likes coffee"
"I believe Thor likes coffee."
There is a somewhat vague, yet terribly important line between
sentiments of "This is so" and "I believe that this is so." The latter
is undeniable, the former causes fights.

You miss the point.
I suspect that if Rorik was transported forward 1000 yrs and all the then
extant, and much expanded, Lore said that Thor liked coffee, he would be ranting
about how it wasn't so and that it was just 20th century NewAge fluff bunnies
who had corrupted the 'true' Lore.

My claim is that there is no 'true' Lore in the sense that something was
dictated personally by the Gods. It's *all* 'made up' stuff, filtered through
and reflecting the psyche of the people over a good length of time.

Maybe the 'Thor likes coffee' will not survive in 1000yrs. However, if it does
then it is just as valid as 'Thor like mead'.

Ditto Rune colours.
What I do not appreciate about Rorik is:

a) His inability to recognise how Lore arises
b) His inability to recognise that lore is evolving *now* - and that includes
Blum et al as well as Thor's coffee preferences
c) His constant negative posturing while not apparently doing anything to
advance the Lore in what he considers the correct direction. It's not enough to
sit back and just drop the occasional sneering remark.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Well, one correspondance would appear to be that the Gods like mead.
Now, how do you suppose that bit of info arose?
Yet no doubt you sneer if someone tells you that Thor likes coffee.

You know, I hate to be the voice of reason here, but... there is a
distinction that people should really make. For those things made clear
"Thor likes mead"
is valid. For things post-dating the historical accepted Lore, a
"Thor likes coffee"
"I believe Thor likes coffee."
There is a somewhat vague, yet terribly important line between
sentiments of "This is so" and "I believe that this is so." The latter
is undeniable, the former causes fights.

While true, we're a religion not a science. It's *all* beliefs. Even
if I cite a line of the Volspa, it's still nothing but a belief. For
all
practical purposes you could insert "I believe" in front of every
sentence/paragraph/article ever posted to ARA and it wouldn't
actually change any of the meanings.

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
You miss the point.
I suspect that if Rorik was transported forward 1000 yrs and all the then
extant, and much expanded, Lore said that Thor liked coffee, he would be ranting
about how it wasn't so and that it was just 20th century NewAge fluff bunnies
who had corrupted the 'true' Lore.

"Thor likes coffee" is one of my favorite examples of modern
Lore. It is much repeated. No one ever seems to disagree with
it using anything but lack of mention in the ancient Lore. Plenty
of folks repeat it enough that I figure it will survive in assorted
tales across the generations.

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
My claim is that there is no 'true' Lore in the sense that something was
dictated personally by the Gods. It's *all* 'made up' stuff, filtered through
and reflecting the psyche of the people over a good length of time.
Maybe the 'Thor likes coffee' will not survive in 1000yrs. However, if it does
then it is just as valid as 'Thor like mead'.

And exactly how valid is "Thor likes mead"? I'd like to find a
reference to Thor drinking mead in the Lore. I know of reference
to Odin drinking mead and to Thor drinking beer, but not the
other way around.

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
a) His inability to recognise how Lore arises
b) His inability to recognise that lore is evolving *now* - and that includes
Blum et al as well as Thor's coffee preferences

I do get that it's his job in both cases. He works on ancient
Lore not modern lore. It's a professional requirement to act
like that.

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
c) His constant negative posturing while not apparently doing anything to
advance the Lore in what he considers the correct direction. It's not enough to
sit back and just drop the occasional sneering remark.

Rorik, Interested in posting non-nonsense about runes? It
would make for great counterpoint to my explicit nonsense about
stanzas of the Havamal.

[rorik]

Post by Doug Freyburger
Rorik, Interested in posting non-nonsense about runes? It
would make for great counterpoint to my explicit nonsense about
stanzas of the Havamal.

It's not a subject that lends itself to lecturing. Does anyone here
have an opinion on Moltke's refutation of Marstrander's thesis on the
origin of the runes? Or whether Mees successfully rehabilitated the
North Etruscan theory?

I recently posted the following recommended reading list on the only
serious runic e-group. I can provide copies of any of the papers for
anyone who lacks access to them.

BOOKS:

Antonsen, Elmer H., A Concise Grammar of the Older Runic
Inscriptions (1975).

Antonsen, Elmer H., Runes and Germanic Linguistics (2002).

Elliott, Ralph W. V., Runes: An Introduction (2d ed., 1989).

Flowers, Stephen E., Runes and Magic: Magical Formulaic Elements in
the Older Runic Tradition (1986).

Herschend, Frands, The Recasting of a Symbolic Value: Three Case
Studies on Rune-Stones (1993).

Jansson, Sven B. F., The Runes of Sweden (Peter G. Foote, trans.,
1962).

Looijenga, Jantina Helena, Runes Around the North Sea and on the
Continent AD 150-700: Texts and Contexts (1997).

MacLeod, Mindy, Bind-Runes: An Investigation of Ligatures in Runic
Epigraphy (Runrön 15, 2002).

Makaev, È.A., The Language of the Oldest Runic Inscriptions: A
Linguistic and Historical-Philological Analysis (1996).

McKinnell, John & Rudolf Simek, with Klaus Düwel, Runes, Magic. and
Religion: A Sourcebook (2004).

Moltke, Erik, Runes and Their Origin: Denmark and Elsewhere (Peter
G. Foote, trans., 1981).

Morris, Richard, Runic and Mediterranean Epigraphy (1988).

Nielsen, Hans Frede, The Early Runic Language of Scandinavia:
Studies in Germanic Dialect Geography (2000).

Odenstedt, Bengt, On the Origin and Early History of the Runic
Script (1990).

Old English Runes and Their Continental Background (Alfred
Bammesberger, ed., 1991).

Page, R. I., The Icelandic Rune-Poem (1999).

Page, R. I., Runes and Runic Inscriptions: Collected Essays on Anglo-
Saxon and Viking Runes (David Parsons, ed., 1995).

Parsons, David N., Recasting the Runes: The Reform of the Anglo-
Saxon Futhorc (Runrön 14: 1999).

Pollington, Stephen, Rudiments of Runelore (1995).

Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions (Claiborne W. Thompson, ed. Michigan Germanic Studies,
vol. 7 no. 1, 1981).

Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions (J. Knirk, ed., 1994).

Runeninschriften als Quellen interdisziplinärer Forschung:
Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Runes and
Runic Inscriptions in Göttingen, 4-9 August 1995 (Klaus Düwel,
ed.,1998).

Runor och ABC: Elva föreläsningar frDn ett symposium i Stockholm
varen 1995 (Staffan Nyström, red., 1997).

Runor och Runinskrifter: Second International Symposium on Runes and
Runic Inscriptions (1987).

Thompson, Claiborne W., Studies in Upplandic Runography (1975).

ARTICLES, ESSAYS, BOOK CHAPTERS, ETC.:

Andersen, Harry (1985). "Three Controversial Runes in the Older
Futhark," Pt. 1: 4 NOWELE 97-110 (1984); Pt. 2: 5 NOWELE 3-22.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1972). "The Runic Inscription from Opedal," in
Studies for Einar Haugen 46-52.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1975). "The Inscription on the Whetstone from
Strom," 9 Visible Language 123-32.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1978). "The Graphemic System of the Older Futhark,"
in Linguistic Method: Essays in Honor of Herbert Penzl 287-97 (I. Rauch
& G. Carr, eds.).

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1980). "Linguistics and Politics in the 19th
Century: The Case of the 15th Rune," 6 Michigan Germanic Studies 1-16.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1981). "On the Syntax of the Older Runic
Inscriptions," in Proceedings of the First International Symposium on
Runes and Runic Inscriptions, 50-60.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1983). "On Reading Runic Inscriptions," 2 NOWELE
23-40.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1987). "The Oldest Runic Inscriptions in the Light
of New Finds and Interpretations," in Runor och Runinskrifter 17-28.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1988). "On the Mythological Interpretation of the
Oldest Runic Inscriptions," in Languages and Cultures: Studies in Honor
of Edgar C. Polomé 43-54.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1989). "The Runes: The Earliest Germanic Writing
System," in The Origins of Writing 137-58.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1993). "The Wesser Runes: Magic or Message?," 21/22
NOWELE 1-20.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1996). "Runes and Romans on the Rhine," in
Proceedings of the International Symposium on Frisian Runes and
Neighbouring Traditions, Leeuwarden, Netherlands, 26-29 January 1994,
45 ABäG 5-13.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1998). "On Runological and Linguistic Evidence for
Dating Runic Inscriptions," in Runeninschriften als Quellen
interdisziplinärer Forschung 150-59.

Antonsen, Elmer H. (1999). "`Rengdhi thaer Vingi' (Am. 4.2) `Vingi
Distorted Them": `Omitted' Runes - A Question of Typology?," in
Language Change and Typological Variation (Edgar C. Polomé & Carol F.
Justus, eds.). JIES Monograph no. 30-31.

Bammesberger, Alfred (1991). "Ingvaeonic Sound Changes and the
Anglo-Frisian Runes," in Old English Runes and Their Continental
Background 389-408.

Bammesberger, Alfred (1994). "Notes on Medial and Final Vowels in the
Ruthwell Cross Runic Inscription," in Proceedings of the Third
International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 139-48.

Barnes, Michael P. (1991). "Norwegian, Norn, Icelandic, or West Norse?:
The Language of the Maeshowe Inscriptions," in Festskrift til Ottar
Grønvik 70-87 (J. Askedal, et al., eds.).

Barnes, Michael P. (1977). "On Elmer H. Antonsen's A Concise Grammar of
the Older Runic Inscriptions," 19 Saga-Book 447-57.

Barnes, Michael P. (1987). "The Origins of the Younger futhark: A
Reappraisal," in Runor och Runinskrifter 29-45.

Barnes, Michael P. (1992). "Review Article: New Runic Studies," 30
Scandinavica 223-32.

Barnes, Michael P. (1994). "On Types of Argumentation in Runic
Studies," in Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Runes
and Runic Inscriptions 11-29.

Barnes, Michael P. (1995). "Review Article: New Runological Research,"
24 Saga-Book 155-63.

Barnes, Michael P. (1997). "Native and Foreign in the Runes and Runic
Writing of Scandinavia," in Runor och ABC 9-21.

Barnes, Michael P. (1998). "The Transitional Inscriptions," in
Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 448-61.

Barnes, Michael (2005). "Language," in A Companion to Old
Norse-Icelandic Literature and Culture 173-89.

Beck, Heinrich (1981). "A Runological and Iconographical Interpretation
of North Sea Germanic Rune-Solidi," in Proceedings of the First
International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 69-87.

Bosman, A. V. A. J., and T. Loooijenga (1996). "A Runic Inscription
from Bergakker (Gelderland), the Netherlands," 46 ABäG 9-16.

Bremmer, Rolf H. Jr. (1991). "Hermes-Mercury and Woden-Odin as
Inventors of Alphabets: A Neglected Parallel," in Old English Runes and
Their Continental Background 409-19.

Buti, Gian Gabriella (1987). "The Eggja Inscription: A Functionalist
Approach," in Runor och Runinskrifter 47-53.

Christiensen, Aksel (1975). "The Jelling Monuments," 8 Med. Scand.
7-20.

Dahm, Murray (2001). "Re-examining Latin Cursive Elements in Fuþark
Development," 55 ABäG 15-20.

Derolez, René (1968). "A Runic Explicit Ascribed to Eskil, Archbishop
of Lund," 1 Med. Scand. 9-16.

Derolez, René (1981). "The Runic System and Its Cultural Context," in
Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 19-26.

Derolez, René (1987). "Some New Runes and the Problem of Runic Unity,"
in Runor och Runinskrifter 55-66.

Derolez, René (1991). "Runica Manuscripta Revisited," in Old English
Runes and Their Continental Background 85-106.

Derolez, René (1998). "On the `Otherness' of the Anglo-Saxon Runes and
the `Perfect Fit' of the Fuþark," in Proceedings of the Fourth
International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 103-16.

Düwel, Klaus (1981a). "The Meldorf Fibula and the Origin of Runic
Writing," in Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Runes
and Runic Inscriptions 8-14.

Düwel, Klaus (1981b). "Runes, Weapons, and Jewelry: A Survey of Some
of the Oldest Runic Inscriptions," 22 Mankind Quarterly 69-91.

Düwel, Klaus (1987). "Some Remarks on a New Inscription from
Schleswig," in Runor och Runinskrifter 73-89.

Düwel, Klaus (2004). "Runic," in Early Germanic Literature and Culture
120-47 (Brian Murdoch & Malcolm Read, eds.).

Ebel, Else (1981). "The Beginnings of Runic Studies in Germany: A
Survey," in Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Runes
and Runic Inscriptions 176-84.

Elliott, Ralph W. V. (1957). "Runes, Yews, and Magic," 32 Speculum
250-61.

Elliott, Ralph W. V. (1983). "Runic Mythology: The Legacy of the
Futhark," 15 Bamberger Beiträge zur englischen Sprachwissenschaft
37-50.

Elliott, Ralph W. V. (1998). "Runes in English Literature: From
Cynewulf to Tolkien," in Proceedings of the Fourth International
Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 660-66 (1998).

Fell, Christine (1987). "Old English Semantic Studies and Their Bearing
on Rune Names," in Runor och Runinskrifter 99-109.

Fell, Christine, "Runes and Semantics," in Old English Runes and Their
Continental Background 195-229.

Fell, Christine (1994). "Anglo-Saxon England: A Three-Script
Community?," in Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on
Runes and Runic Inscriptions 119-37.

Fell, Christine E. (2002a). "Wax Tablets of Stone," in Lastworda Betst
249-63.

Fell, Christine E. (2002b). "Runes and Riddles in Anglo-Saxon England,"
in Lastworda Betst 264-77.

Fjellhammer Seim, Karin (1994). "Var futharken en magisk formel i
middelalderen? Testing av en hypotese mot innskriffter fra Bryggen i
Bergen" [Eng. summ.], in Proceedings of the Third International
Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 279-300.

Fjellhammer Seim, Karin (1998). "Runes and Latin Script: Runic
Syllables," in Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on
Runes and Runic Inscriptions 508-12.

Forster, Leonard (1998). "Thoughts on the Mnemonic Function of Early
Systems of Writing," in Idee: Gestalt: Geschichte. Festschrift Klaus
von See 59-62.

Fuglesang, Signe Horn (1998). "Swedish Runestones of the Eleventh
Century: Ornament and Dating," in Proceedings of the Fourth
International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 197-218.

Gosling, Kevin (1991). "Recent Finds from London," in Old English Runes
and Their Continental Background 191-94.

Gustavson, Helmer, & Steven Jörsäter (1981). "Runes and the
Computer," in Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Runes
and Runic Inscriptions, 98-105.

Haastrup, Niels (1968). "Runa aettir: generationes notularum," 1 Med.
Scand. 82-84.

Hagland, Jan Ragnar (1998). "Runes as Sources for the Middle Ages," in
Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 619-28.

Halsall, Maureen (1989). "Runes and the Mortal Condition in Old English
Poetry," 88 JEGP 477-86.

Haugen, Einar (1973). "The Dotted Runes: From Parsimony to Plenitude,"
in Proceedings of the Seventh Viking Congress 83-92.

Haugen, Einar (1981). "The Youngest Runes: From Oppdal to Waukegan," in
Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 148-74.

Hines, John (1991). "Some Observations on the Runic Inscriptions of
Early Anglo-Saxon England," in Old English Runes and Their Continental
Background 61-83.

Hines, John (1998). "Grave Finds with Runic Inscriptions from Great
Britain," in Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Runes
and Runic Inscriptions 186-96.

Holman, Katherine (1998). "Scandinavian Runic Inscriptions as a Source
for the History of the British Isles: The St Paul's Rune-Stone," in
Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 629-38.

Insley, John (1991). "The Scandinavian Runic Inscriptions of the Older
Fuþark and Old English Personal Names," in Old English Runes and Their
Continental Background 309-34.

Jansson, Sven B. (1981). "Hunting Rune-Stones in Sweden," in
Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 199-213.

Jesch, Judith (1991). "Who Was Hulmkir?," 106 ANF 125-36.

Jesch, Judith (1994). "Runic Inscriptions and Social History: Some
Problems of Method," in Proceedings of the Third International
Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 149-62.

Jesch, Judith (1998). "Still Standing in Ågersta: Textuality and
Literacy in Late Viking-age Rune Stone Inscriptions," in Proceedings of
the Fourth International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions
462-75.

Johnsen, Ingred Sanness (1981). "Personal Names in Inscriptions from
Towns of Medieval Norway," in Proceedings of the First International
Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 119-127.

Johnston, Alan (1997). "All Runes to Me," in Runor och ABC 93-112.

Knirk, James E. (1987). "Recently Found Runestones from Toten and
Ringerike," in Proceedings of the Tenth Viking Congress 191-202.

Knirk, James E. (1994). "Runes from Trondheim and a Stanza by Egill
Skala-Grímsson," in Studien zum Altgermanischen. Festschrift Heinrich
Beck 411-20.

Knirk, James E. (1998). "Runic Inscriptions Containing Latin in
Norway," in Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Runes
and Runic Inscriptions 476-507.

Kratz, Henry (1978-79). "Was Vamoþ Still Alive? The Rök-stone as an
Initiation Memorial," 11 Med. Scand. 9-29.

Lager, Linn (2000). "Art as a Reflection of Religious Change: The
Process of Christianisation as Shown in the Ornamentation on
Runestoness," in Early Medieval Religion 117-32 (Archaeological Rev.
from Cambridge 17:2).

Lager, Linn (2003). "Runestones and the Conversion of Sweden," in The
Cross Goes North 497-508.

Larsson, Mats G. (1998). "Runic Inscriptions as a Source for the
History of Settlement," in Proceedings of the Fourth International
Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 639-46.

Larsson, Patrick (2005). "Runes," in A Companion to Old Norse-Icelandic
Literature and Culture 403-26.

Lehmann, Ruth P. M. (1987). "Ogam / Runes," in Studies in Honour of
René Derolez 293-98.

Liestøl, Aslak (1968). "Correspondence in Runes," 1 Med. Scand. 17-27.

Liestøl, Aslak (1970). "Runic Inscriptions," in Varangian Problems:
Scando-Slavica Supplementum I: The Eastern Connections of the Nordic
Peoples in the Viking Period and Early Middle Ages 121-31.

Liestøl, Aslak (1977). "`Will You Marry Me?' Under a Church Floor," 10
Med. Scand. 35 (1977).

Liestøl, Aslak (1978-81). "The Viking Runes: The Transition from the
Older to the Younger Futhark," 20 Saga-Book 247.

Liestøl, Aslak (1981). "The Emergence of the Viking Runes," in
Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 107-116.

Liestøl, Aslak (1983). "An Iona Rune Stone and the World of Man and
the Isles," in The Viking Age in the Isle of Man 85-94.

Lönnroth, Lars, "The Riddles of the Rök-Stone: A Structural
Approach," 92 ANF 1-57 (1977).

Looijenga, Tineke, "Yew Wood and Runic Inscriptions in the Frisian
Terp-Area," in Old English Runes and Their Continental Background
335-42 (1991).

Massengale, James, "A Test Study in Runic Dialectology," in Studies for
Einar Haugen 379-88 (1972).

MacLeod, Mindy, "Bandrúnar in Icelandic Sagas," 52 Scripta Islandica
35-51 (2001).
- also in Old Norse Myths, Literature and Society 252-63 (2000).

MacLeod, Mindy, "Bind-Runes in Numerological Rune-Magic," 56 ABäG
27-40 (2002).

Mees, Bernard, "The Bergakker Inscription and the Beginnings of Dutch,"
56 ABäG 23-26 (2002).

Mees, Bernard, "The North Etruscan Thesis of the Origin of the Runes,"
115 ANF 33-82 (2000).

Meijer, Jan, "Corrections in Viking Age Rune-Stone Inscriptions," 110
ANF 77-83 (1995).

Meijer, Jan, "Runic Terminology," 56 ABäG 41-67 (2002).

Meijer, Jan, "The s-Rune in the Viking Age and After," 115 ANF 23-31
(2000).

Melnikova, Elena A., "New Finds of Scandinavian Runic Inscriptions from
the USSR," in Runor och Runinskrifter 163-73 (1987).

Melnikova, Elena A., "Runic Inscriptions as a Source for the Relation
of Northern and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages," in Proceedings of
the Fourth International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions
647-59 (1998).

Metcalf, David Michael, "Runes and Literacy: Pondering the Evidence of
Anglo-Saxon Coins of the Eighth and Ninth Centuries," in Proceedings of
the Fourth International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions
434-38 (1998).

Moberg, Carl-Axel, "Old Runes and New Archaeologists," in Archaeology
and Environment 4: In Honorem Evert Baudou 229-34 (1985).

Moltke, Erik (1981a). "How to Investigate and Reproduce a Runic
Inscription," in Proceedings of the First International Symposium on
Runes and Runic Inscriptions 186-96.

Moltke, Erik (1981b). "The Origin of the Runes," in Proceedings of the
First International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 3-7.

Morris, Richard L., "The Lellinge Bracteate's Salusalu: A Woman's
Name," 99 ANF 6-13 (1984).

Nielsen, Hans Frede, "The Linguistic Status of the Early Runic
Inscriptions of Scandinavia," in Proceedings of the Fourth
International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 539-55 (1998).

Nielsen, Hans Frede, "The Undley Bracteate, `Continental Anglian,' and
the Early Germanic of Schleswig-Holstein," in Festskrift til Ottar
Grønvik 33-52 (1991).

Nielsen, Karl Martin (1987). "The Numerals in the Kensington
Inscription," in Runor och Runinskrifter 175-83.

Nielsen, Niels A. (1969). "Freyr, Ullr, and the Sparlosa Stone," 2
Med. Scand. 102-28.

Nielsen, Niels A. (1970). "Notes on Early Runic Poetry," 3 Med. Scand.
138-41.

Nilsson, Bruce E. (1975). "The Rune-Stone from Mörbylånga: A Complete
Interpretation," 90 ANF 123-26.

Nilsson, Bruce E. (1976). "The Runic `Fish-Amulet' From Öland: A
Solution," 9 Med. Scand. 236-45.

Odenstedt, Bengt (1991a). "A New Theory of the Origin of the Runic
Script: Richard L. Morris's Book, Runic and Mediterranean Epigraphy,"
in Old English Runes and Their Continental Background 359-87.

Odenstedt, Bengt (1991b). "On the Transliteration of the a-Rune in
Early English and Frisian Inscriptions," in Festskrift til Ottar
Grønvik 53-69.

Page, R. I. (1995a). "Anglo-Saxon Runes and Magic," in Runes and
Runic Inscriptions: Collected Essays on Anglo-Saxon and Viking Runes
105-25.

Page, R. I. (1995b). "Anglo-Saxon Texts in Early Modern Transcripts: 1.
The Anglo-Saxon Runic Poem," in Runes and Runic Inscriptions 197-206
(1995).

Page, R. I. (1983). "The Manx Rune Stones," in The Viking Age in the
Isle of Man 133-46.

Page, R. I., "More Thoughts on Manx Runes," in Proceedings of the First
International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 129-136 (1981).

Page, R. I., "New Runic Finds in England," in Runor och Runinskrifter
185-97 (1987).

Page, R. I. (1995c). "The Old English Rune Ear," in Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 71-85.

Page, R. I. (1995d). "The Old English Rune Eoh, Ih, `Yew-Tree'," in
Runes and Runic Inscriptions 133-144.

Page, R. I., "Runes in East Anglia," in Proceedings of the Third
International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 105-17 (1994).

Page, R. I., "Scandinavian Society, 800-1100: The Contribution of Runic
Studies," in Viking Revaluations 145-59 (1993).

Page, R. I., "A Sixteenth Century Runic Manuscript," in Studies in
Honour of René Derolez 384-90 (1987).

Page, R. I. (1995e). "The Use of Double Runes in Old English
Inscriptions," in Runes and Runic Inscriptions 95-104.

Page, Raymond I. (1997). "Runic Writing, Roman Script and the
Scriptorium," in Runor och ABC 119-40 (1997).

Pároli, Teresa, "History, Theology, and Symbolism in the Greater
Jelling Stone," in Studies in Honour of René Derolez 402-417 (1987).

Parsons, David, "Byrhtferth and the Runes of Oxford, St. John's
College, Manuscript 17," in Proceedings of the Fourth International
Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 439-47 (1998).

Peterson, Lena, "A Critical Survey of the Alleged East Germanic Runic
Inscriptions in Scandinavia," in Proceedings of the Fourth
International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 556-75 (1998).

Peterson, Lena, "The Graphemic System of the Staveless Runes," in
Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 223-52 (1994).

Pieper, Peter, "The Bones with Runic Inscriptions from the Lower Weser
River: New Results of Scientific Investigations Concerning the Problem:
Original(s) or Fake(s)," in Old English Runes and Their Continental
Background 343-58 (1991).

Polomé, Edgar, "Beer, Runes and Magic," 24 JIES 99-105 (1996).

Polomé, Edgar, "The Names of the Runes," in Old English Runes and
Their Continental Background 421-35 (1991).

Roth, Helmut, "New Chronological Aspects of Runic Inscriptions," in
Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 62-67 (1981).

Sawyer, Birgit, "Sigtuna: A Border Town," in Proceedings of the Third
International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 163-77 (1994).

Sawyer, Birgit, "Viking Age Rune-Stones as a Source for Legal History,"
in Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 766-77 (1998).

Schwab, Ute, "The Inscription of the Nordendorf Brooch I: A Double
Reading in Line III?," in Proceedings of the First International
Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions (1981).

Selinge, Klas-Göran, "The Rune Stones, Barrow, Village and Church at
Högby, Ostergötland," in Runor och Runinskrifter 255-80 (1987).

Spurkland, Terje, "K and B: One Grapheme or Two?," in Proceedings of
the Third International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions
269-78 (1994).

Spurkland, Terje, "Runic Inscriptions as Sources for the History of
Scandinavian Languages in the Middle Ages." in Proceedings of the
Fourth International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 592-600
(1998).

Stiles, Patrick V., "On the Interpretation of Older Runic Swestar on
the Opedal Stone," 3 NOWELE 3-48 (1984).

Stoklund, Marie, "Greenland Runic Inscriptions," in Proceedings of the
First International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 138-147
(1981).

Stoklund, Marie, "Malt-stenen--en revurdering" [Eng. summ.], in
Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 179-202 (1994).

Stoklund, Marie, "New Inscriptions from Illerup and Vimose," in Runor
och Runinskrifter 99-109 (1987).

Strid, Jan Paul, "Runic Swedish thegns and drengs," in Runor och
Runinskrifter 301-15 (1987).

Styles, Patrick V., "On the Interpretation of Older Runic Swestar On
the Opedal Stone," 3 NOWELE 3-48 (1984).

Talley, Jeannine E., "Runes, Mandrakes and Gallows," in Myth in
Indo-European Antiquity 157-68 (1974).

Thompson, Claiborne W. (1970). "A Swedish Runographer and a Headless
Bishop," 3 Med. Scand. 50-62.

Thompson, Claiborne W. (1972). "Nonsense Inscriptions in Swedish
Uppland," in Studies for Einar Haugen 522-33.

Thompson, Claiborne W. (1981). "On Transcribing Runic Inscriptions," in
Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 89-95.

Thrane, Henrik (1998). "An archaeologist's View of Runes," in
Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Runes and Runic
Inscriptions 219-27.

Troeng, John (2003). "A Semitic Origin of Some Runes: An Influential
Foreign Presence in Denmark c. AD 200," 98 Fornvännen 289-305.

Turville-Petre, E. O. G., & A. S. C. Ross (1936). "Agrell's
`Magico-Numerical' Theory of the Runes," 97 Folklore 203-13.

Wicker, Nancy L. (1994). "Bracteate Workshops and Runic Literacy:
Testimony from the Distribution of Incriptions," in Proceedings of the
Third International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 59-81.

Wicker, Nancy L. (1998). "Production Areas and Workshops for the
Manufacture of Bracteates," in Proceedings of the Fourth International
Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions 253-67 (1998).

Williams, Henrik (1994). "The Non-Representation of Nasals before
Obstruents: Spelling Convention or Phonetic Analysis?," in Proceedings
of the Third International Symposium on Runes and Runic Inscriptions
217-22.

Williams, Henrik (1996). "The Origin of the Runes," 45 ABäG 211-18.

Williams, Henrik (1997). "The Romans and the Runes - Uses of Writing in
Germania," in Runor och ABC 177-92.

Williams, Henrik (1998). "Runic Inscriptions as Sources of Personal
Names," in Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Runes
and Runic Inscriptions 601-10.

Woodhouse, Robert (2002). "Sequence in the Older Futhark," 117 ANF
73-83.

regards,
rorik

[bowman]

Post by rorik
Does anyone here
have an opinion on Moltke's refutation of Marstrander's thesis on the
origin of the runes?

A Danish Sequoyah? I think not.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from Doug Freyburger arrived, in which they said:

: And exactly how valid is "Thor likes mead"? I'd like to find a
: reference to Thor drinking mead in the Lore. I know of reference
: to Odin drinking mead and to Thor drinking beer, but not the
: other way around.

This is where I reveal my relative ignorance of Asatru Lore. Is there
a story in which Thor, rather than Odin, tries to complete a series of
fixed challenges to get something from a giant: one is to pick up a
cat, one is to wrestle an opponent and one is to empty a mead-horn.

The cat can encircle the world, and Thor lifts but one foot: the opponent
is in some way Time, and therefore always wins: and the mead-horn has
a link to the ocean, so Thor fails to drain it.

However, that would still imply he thought he was drinking mead...

There's three things I don't know: one, I'm not totally certain that it
was Thor not Odin, though I'm reasonably so. Two is that I'm not totally
certain it was a mead rather than ale horn, though I'm fairly sure the
version I heard was. The third is most significant: I'm not sure whether
that type of fairy-tale/mythology would count as Lore.

Any help with those three questions would be much appreciated.

~R

[bowman]

Romauld wrote:
Is anyone else seeing blank posts? Probably either my newsfeed or reader but
for the last couple of days I've been getting empty posts.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from bowman arrived, in which they said:

: Romauld wrote:
:
:>
:
: Is anyone else seeing blank posts? Probably either my newsfeed or reader but
: for the last couple of days I've been getting empty posts.

I'm pretty sure my posts have had content in them...

~R

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by bowman
Is anyone else seeing blank posts? Probably either my newsfeed or reader but
for the last couple of days I've been getting empty posts.

Google is infamous for presenting the headers, going out
for a cup of magtape, and then coming back with the body
of the post. You aren't using Google, but maybe it's
timing out in a similar fashion?

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Maybe the 'Thor likes coffee' will not survive in 1000yrs.

Quite possibly. Mention coffee, and likely the only people who will
know what you are talking about are the historian-bots hooked up to the
quantum hyperspatial databases. They will then launch into a long
dissertation about how coffee was introduced to the Europeans by way of
the Turks, and how it eventually fell into disfavor, disuse and
inevitable extinction after the Chavez regime and it's wars and purges
inexorably linked it to the deaths of hundreds of millions...

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Maybe the 'Thor likes coffee' will not survive in 1000yrs.

Quite possibly. Mention coffee, and likely the only people who will
know what you are talking about are the historian-bots hooked up to the
quantum hyperspatial databases. They will then launch into a long
dissertation about how coffee was introduced to the Europeans by way of
the Turks, and how it eventually fell into disfavor, disuse and
inevitable extinction after the Chavez regime and it's wars and purges
inexorably linked it to the deaths of hundreds of millions...

That would be some time after the US invades on the pretext that Chavez has WMDs
and the fact that UN inspectors cannot find them simply means he's really evil.
Nothing to do with the price of oil or coffee...

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Maybe the 'Thor likes coffee' will not survive in 1000yrs.

Quite possibly. Mention coffee, and likely the only people who will
know what you are talking about are the historian-bots hooked up to the
quantum hyperspatial databases. They will then launch into a long
dissertation about how coffee was introduced to the Europeans by way of
the Turks, and how it eventually fell into disfavor, disuse and
inevitable extinction after the Chavez regime and it's wars and purges
inexorably linked it to the deaths of hundreds of millions...

That would be some time after the US invades on the pretext that Chavez has WMDs
and the fact that UN inspectors cannot find them simply means he's really evil.

Nah. That'll be when the French nuke 'em for their coffee.

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Maybe the 'Thor likes coffee' will not survive in 1000yrs.

Quite possibly. Mention coffee, and likely the only people who will
know what you are talking about are the historian-bots hooked up to the
quantum hyperspatial databases. They will then launch into a long
dissertation about how coffee was introduced to the Europeans by way of
the Turks, and how it eventually fell into disfavor, disuse and
inevitable extinction after the Chavez regime and it's wars and purges
inexorably linked it to the deaths of hundreds of millions...

Encyclopedia Galacto-Wiki - Coffee -

An Old Earth plant grown because its seeds gave water a
flavor liked by many. Unfortunately efforts to get this plant
to grow on any of the colony worlds have failed. Nonetheless
heathens throughout the galaxy still say the Thor likes
coffee and try offering him flavored beverages made from
plants native to their own worlds. Reports are the Thor
likes several types particularly Tranya.

[Doug Frisk]

Post by Doug Freyburger
An Old Earth plant grown because its seeds gave water a
flavor liked by many. Unfortunately efforts to get this plant
to grow on any of the colony worlds have failed. Nonetheless
heathens throughout the galaxy still say the Thor likes
coffee and try offering him flavored beverages made from
plants native to their own worlds. Reports are the Thor
likes several types particularly Tranya.

Who doesn't relish Tranya?

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Doug Freyburger
Reports are the Thor
likes several types particularly Tranya.

Oh, no! I got that without even thinking! So... which of us is the
bigger geek?

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Reports are that Thor
likes several types, particularly Tranya.

Oh, no! I got that without even thinking! So... which of us is the
bigger geek?

We could compare heights and weights maybe. The guy with
the horses running around in his backyard isn't going to total
up high enough on the cultural parts. Horses in the back yard
count pretty high on the anti-geek scale.

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Reports are that Thor
likes several types, particularly Tranya.

Oh, no! I got that without even thinking! So... which of us is the
bigger geek?

We could compare heights and weights maybe.

I bet you I'd "win" there...

The guy with

Post by Doug Freyburger
the horses running around in his backyard isn't going to total
up high enough on the cultural parts. Horses in the back yard
count pretty high on the anti-geek scale.

Actually, the horses are now gone. On to greener pastures, as it were.

[rorik]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by r***@gmail.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik
I don't plan to build a bridge and set up runestones at each end,
either. None of these practices was essential to pre-Xian Norse
heathenism, and they are not essential today. Knowledge of the past
informs the practice of a historically-rooted heathenism, but does not
dictate it. Omitting human sacrifice is better than adding incense,
magic circles, and tables of correspondences ("Heimdall's beverage is
pina colada, and his scent is desert rose").

Yet that kind of addition is quite valid.
Even moreso after a thousand yerars of filtration through the psyche of a people.
How do you think all those stories and historically attested correspondances
originally arose? Dictated personally by the Gods to their faithful scribes?

What "historically attested correspondences" are you referring to? The

Rune poems, for example.
All just NewAge crap, backdated 1000 years?

Sorry, I've missed the tables of correspondences that you've discovered
in the rune poems. Please give a reference, so I can fill that gap in
my education. I'm especially interested in finding some historical
documentation for Vali's favorite color. Some say it's teal, others
puce. I would like to pin this down in the rune poems, if possible.

Well, one correspondance would appear to be that the Gods like mead.
Now, how do you suppose that bit of info arose?
Yet no doubt you sneer if someone tells you that Thor likes coffee.
Your attitude appears to be that any modern addition to Lore is shit, while any
addition to the Lore predating Xianity is to be deified.

Your opinion concerning my attitude is of no interest to me, nor
presumably to anyone else.

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
I'm saying that the only difference is time and the psyche of the population
that tells the tales.

No, you're simply spouting bullshit in a poor attempt to conceal your
ignorance of the historical basis of Norse heathenism. When I mention
the New Age "tables of correspondences" as an obvious import from
medieval alchemy, you snippily retort that they came from the rune
poems. When I ask for documentation of this remarkable claim, you
become self-righteous and attack me personally instead of admitting
that you have no remote idea of what you're talking about. The reason
for your "one person's opinion is as good as another's" attitude is
plain: Since you don't have the faintest idea what constituted
historical heathenism, and are either too dull, too lazy, or too
disinterested to find out, it all seems like a matter of opinion to
you. As I have pointed out previously, you are certainly in the
majority on this point. Sadly, however, I must also report that people
with a serious interest in, and knowledge of, historically-based
heathenism will continue building on it while you are busy burning your
incense, casting your circles, and insulting anyone you perceive to
know more about the subject than you.

regards,
rorik

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by rorik

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by r***@gmail.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by rorik
I don't plan to build a bridge and set up runestones at each end,
either. None of these practices was essential to pre-Xian Norse
heathenism, and they are not essential today. Knowledge of the past
informs the practice of a historically-rooted heathenism, but does not
dictate it. Omitting human sacrifice is better than adding incense,
magic circles, and tables of correspondences ("Heimdall's beverage is
pina colada, and his scent is desert rose").

Yet that kind of addition is quite valid.
Even moreso after a thousand yerars of filtration through the psyche of a people.
How do you think all those stories and historically attested correspondances
originally arose? Dictated personally by the Gods to their faithful scribes?

What "historically attested correspondences" are you referring to? The

Rune poems, for example.
All just NewAge crap, backdated 1000 years?

Sorry, I've missed the tables of correspondences that you've discovered
in the rune poems. Please give a reference, so I can fill that gap in
my education. I'm especially interested in finding some historical
documentation for Vali's favorite color. Some say it's teal, others
puce. I would like to pin this down in the rune poems, if possible.

Well, one correspondance would appear to be that the Gods like mead.
Now, how do you suppose that bit of info arose?
Yet no doubt you sneer if someone tells you that Thor likes coffee.
Your attitude appears to be that any modern addition to Lore is shit, while any
addition to the Lore predating Xianity is to be deified.

Your opinion concerning my attitude is of no interest to me, nor
presumably to anyone else.

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
I'm saying that the only difference is time and the psyche of the population
that tells the tales.

No, you're simply spouting bullshit in a poor attempt to conceal your
ignorance of the historical basis of Norse heathenism. When I mention
the New Age "tables of correspondences" as an obvious import from
medieval alchemy, you snippily retort that they came from the rune
poems. When I ask for documentation of this remarkable claim, you
become self-righteous and attack me personally instead of admitting

No, I was replying to 'correspondences' in general.
Not specific claims.

Post by rorik
that you have no remote idea of what you're talking about. The reason
for your "one person's opinion is as good as another's" attitude is
plain: Since you don't have the faintest idea what constituted
historical heathenism, and are either too dull, too lazy, or too
disinterested to find out, it all seems like a matter of opinion to
you. As I have pointed out previously, you are certainly in the
majority on this point. Sadly, however, I must also report that people
with a serious interest in, and knowledge of, historically-based
heathenism will continue building on it while you are busy burning your
incense, casting your circles, and insulting anyone you perceive to
know more about the subject than you.

Thanks for once again contributing nothing.
I'm sure that modern Asatru will accurately reflect your input.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Doug Freyburger]

... I must also report that people
with a serious interest in, and knowledge of, historically-based
heathenism will continue building on it ...

I look forward to reports of Blotar and other such activities
to that end. I look forward to books on improved ritual
structure that both work well and have authenitic roots.

Until then, lacking authentic we do what we can and
wonder what we can do to contribute to improved
authenticity.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by Doug Freyburger

... I must also report that people
with a serious interest in, and knowledge of, historically-based
heathenism will continue building on it ...

I look forward to reports of Blotar and other such activities
to that end. I look forward to books on improved ritual
structure that both work well and have authenitic roots.
Until then, lacking authentic we do what we can and
wonder what we can do to contribute to improved
authenticity.

Don't worry - Rorik will be on hand to disparage the work of just about anyone
while offering nothing himself.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Doug Frisk]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Doug Freyburger

... I must also report that people
with a serious interest in, and knowledge of, historically-based
heathenism will continue building on it ...

I look forward to reports of Blotar and other such activities
to that end. I look forward to books on improved ritual
structure that both work well and have authenitic roots.
Until then, lacking authentic we do what we can and
wonder what we can do to contribute to improved
authenticity.

Don't worry - Rorik will be on hand to disparage the work of just about
anyone while offering nothing himself.

Bitter doesn't suit you.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by Doug Frisk

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Doug Freyburger

... I must also report that people
with a serious interest in, and knowledge of, historically-based
heathenism will continue building on it ...

I look forward to reports of Blotar and other such activities
to that end. I look forward to books on improved ritual
structure that both work well and have authenitic roots.
Until then, lacking authentic we do what we can and
wonder what we can do to contribute to improved
authenticity.

Don't worry - Rorik will be on hand to disparage the work of just about
anyone while offering nothing himself.

Bitter doesn't suit you.

Realistic.
Compare Rorik's disparagement-to-useful-info ratio on ARA.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Doug Frisk]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Doug Frisk

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Don't worry - Rorik will be on hand to disparage the work of just about
anyone while offering nothing himself.

Bitter doesn't suit you.

Realistic.
Compare Rorik's disparagement-to-useful-info ratio on ARA.

The thing is, when Rorik posts anything lore related it's 100% backed up by
scholarship.

He's cranky. He does not suffer fools. But what he does contribute is
golden.

I also consider his "but that's just a 20th century rehash of 19th century
fantasy" comments to be very useful.

Yes, I'd like to see him refer to more books that are still in print as
resources, but it's not his fault that the valid stuff doesn't sell as well
as "Norse erotic runecasting for wiccans".

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by Doug Frisk

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Doug Frisk

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Don't worry - Rorik will be on hand to disparage the work of just about
anyone while offering nothing himself.

Bitter doesn't suit you.

Realistic.
Compare Rorik's disparagement-to-useful-info ratio on ARA.

The thing is, when Rorik posts anything lore related it's 100% backed up by
scholarship.

A rare event.

Post by Doug Frisk
He's cranky. He does not suffer fools. But what he does contribute is
golden.

He should get out a bit more.

Post by Doug Frisk
I also consider his "but that's just a 20th century rehash of 19th century
fantasy" comments to be very useful.

Perhaps so.
But as I said, the lore is evolving in the way it did in pre-Xian times - by
people telling/adding/subtracting made-up stuff. If Rorik wants to influence the
Lore of the future then he better get his hands dirty.

Post by Doug Frisk
Yes, I'd like to see him refer to more books that are still in print as
resources, but it's not his fault that the valid stuff doesn't sell as well
as "Norse erotic runecasting for wiccans".

Then perhaps he should write a book or two. As I mentioned in another thread,
it's easy to publish these days.
If that's too much work, then the lore of the future will be about erotic
runecasting for Wiccans. And rightly so.

The evolution of lore is not in the hands of scholars but of the common folk,
now as in the past. The scholars generally merely record and complain. As it was
so shall it be.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
But as I said, the lore is evolving in the way it did in pre-Xian times - by
people telling/adding/subtracting made-up stuff. If Rorik wants to influence the
Lore of the future then he better get his hands dirty.

Lore does not evolve simply be people adding to it whatever the hell
they like, but also by people shooting down nonsensical additions.

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Doug Frisk
Yes, I'd like to see him refer to more books that are still in print as
resources, but it's not his fault that the valid stuff doesn't sell as well
as "Norse erotic runecasting for wiccans".

Then perhaps he should write a book or two. As I mentioned in another thread,
it's easy to publish these days.

And just how hard is it to *write* a book? I've got about four in
works. And they've been in works for *years*.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
But as I said, the lore is evolving in the way it did in pre-Xian times - by
people telling/adding/subtracting made-up stuff. If Rorik wants to influence the
Lore of the future then he better get his hands dirty.

Lore does not evolve simply be people adding to it whatever the hell
they like, but also by people shooting down nonsensical additions.

That's more than shouting 'crap' from the sidelines.

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by Doug Frisk
Yes, I'd like to see him refer to more books that are still in print as
resources, but it's not his fault that the valid stuff doesn't sell as well
as "Norse erotic runecasting for wiccans".

Then perhaps he should write a book or two. As I mentioned in another thread,
it's easy to publish these days.

And just how hard is it to *write* a book? I've got about four in
works. And they've been in works for *years*.

I would say, from my experience, that it takes between one and two years. But
that's not fulltime. The bottom line is that if you care enough you do it.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com
And just how hard is it to *write* a book? I've got about four in
works. And they've been in works for *years*.

I would say, from my experience, that it takes between one and two years. But
that's not fulltime. The bottom line is that if you care enough you do it.

And if you care enough, you do it *right*. And that can take decades,
especially if research is involved... and not just Making Shit Up.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com
And just how hard is it to *write* a book? I've got about four in
works. And they've been in works for *years*.

I would say, from my experience, that it takes between one and two years. But
that's not fulltime. The bottom line is that if you care enough you do it.

And if you care enough, you do it *right*. And that can take decades,
especially if research is involved... and not just Making Shit Up.

Depends.
How long would it take to create a populist yet accurate book on the Runes?
And I don't mean with vast numbers of footnotes and entire dictionaries of ON
added. That is, something with about 100 pages condensing the basic information,
not a 2000 page academic blockbuster. Communist Manifesto v Das Kapital.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com
And just how hard is it to *write* a book? I've got about four in
works. And they've been in works for *years*.

I would say, from my experience, that it takes between one and two years. But
that's not fulltime. The bottom line is that if you care enough you do it.

And if you care enough, you do it *right*. And that can take decades,
especially if research is involved... and not just Making Shit Up.

Depends.
How long would it take to create a populist yet accurate book on the Runes?
And I don't mean with vast numbers of footnotes and entire dictionaries of ON
added. That is, something with about 100 pages condensing the basic information,
not a 2000 page academic blockbuster.

Well, someone might be more interested in writing the academic
blockbuster than the populist-yet-accurate. People not only like to
read different stuff, peopel like to write different stuff.

Hell, the one book project I'm involved with that really stands a
chance is "US Bomber Projects Since WWII." Annoyingly, Tony Buttler, a
Brit author of some note, is writing almost the exact same thing. We've
been in touch and are comparing notes so that we *don't* produce the
exact same thing. But he will most assuredly finish before I do. His
book will go into depth on a few topics; my book will go into less
depth on a broader range of topics (he's not covering designs of manned
bombers designed to go exoatmospheric, for example). I've been working
away at it since October 2003, and will continue to work at it likely
for another 2-4 years (he started well after I did). And I will
probably want to produce an updated edition some years after that. He
will be including lots of artwork and drawings straight from the
manufacturer; I am re-drawing *everything.*

Same topic, same title, very different results, very different
schedules.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com
And just how hard is it to *write* a book? I've got about four in
works. And they've been in works for *years*.

I would say, from my experience, that it takes between one and two years. But
that's not fulltime. The bottom line is that if you care enough you do it.

And if you care enough, you do it *right*. And that can take decades,
especially if research is involved... and not just Making Shit Up.

Depends.
How long would it take to create a populist yet accurate book on the Runes?
And I don't mean with vast numbers of footnotes and entire dictionaries of ON
added. That is, something with about 100 pages condensing the basic information,
not a 2000 page academic blockbuster.

Well, someone might be more interested in writing the academic
blockbuster than the populist-yet-accurate. People not only like to
read different stuff, peopel like to write different stuff.

Let's take Blum as a typical example of something Rorik hates.
On the minus side, his work is inaccurate to say the least.
On the plus side, he sells very large numbers of books.

Now, I'm fairly sure that Rorik could do better. Problem is, he hasn't. The
winner is the one who turns up on the field of battle, not the guy who stays
home. I'm pretty sure a few verses from the Havamal are relevant here, and we
can probably all name them.

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com
Hell, the one book project I'm involved with that really stands a
chance is "US Bomber Projects Since WWII." Annoyingly, Tony Buttler, a
Brit author of some note, is writing almost the exact same thing. We've
been in touch and are comparing notes so that we *don't* produce the
exact same thing. But he will most assuredly finish before I do. His
book will go into depth on a few topics; my book will go into less
depth on a broader range of topics (he's not covering designs of manned
bombers designed to go exoatmospheric, for example). I've been working
away at it since October 2003, and will continue to work at it likely
for another 2-4 years (he started well after I did). And I will
probably want to produce an updated edition some years after that. He
will be including lots of artwork and drawings straight from the
manufacturer; I am re-drawing *everything.*
Same topic, same title, very different results, very different
schedules.

In my case it's a book on technology and magick ie "Any sufficiently advanced
magick is indistinguishable from technology". There's a lot of very interesting
stuff about that very little is known about, outside of rather esoteric (often
military) circles. So far I have about 120,000 words and it is a *very* dense
information content - no waffle at all. For example, 12,000 words alone on the
basics of hypnosis, theory and induction types before I even get to its
applicability in ritual magick.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Let's take Blum as a typical example of something Rorik hates.
On the minus side, his work is inaccurate to say the least.
On the plus side, he sells very large numbers of books.
Now, I'm fairly sure that Rorik could do better. Problem is, he hasn't. The
winner is the one who turns up on the field of battle, not the guy who stays
home. I'm pretty sure a few verses from the Havamal are relevant here, and we
can probably all name them.

Patience. One stanza at a time from me. We'll get there.

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
In my case it's a book on technology and magick ie "Any sufficiently advanced
magick is indistinguishable from technology". There's a lot of very interesting
stuff about that very little is known about, outside of rather esoteric (often
military) circles. So far I have about 120,000 words and it is a *very* dense
information content - no waffle at all. For example, 12,000 words alone on the
basics of hypnosis, theory and induction types before I even get to its
applicability in ritual magick.

In my case there's a book on conducting your career within IT.
There's plenty of material on more specific stuff so I want to go
more general. And a book on the how-and-why of low carb
diets. A few folks have asked me to write that one since at
this point I know more about the hormones and metabolism
than Dr Atkins ever appears to have figured out and I seem to
have better data than what he ended up with.

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by Doug Freyburger

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Let's take Blum as a typical example of something Rorik hates.
On the minus side, his work is inaccurate to say the least.
On the plus side, he sells very large numbers of books.
Now, I'm fairly sure that Rorik could do better. Problem is, he hasn't. The
winner is the one who turns up on the field of battle, not the guy who stays
home. I'm pretty sure a few verses from the Havamal are relevant here, and we
can probably all name them.

Patience. One stanza at a time from me. We'll get there.

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
In my case it's a book on technology and magick ie "Any sufficiently advanced
magick is indistinguishable from technology". There's a lot of very interesting
stuff about that very little is known about, outside of rather esoteric (often
military) circles. So far I have about 120,000 words and it is a *very* dense
information content - no waffle at all. For example, 12,000 words alone on the
basics of hypnosis, theory and induction types before I even get to its
applicability in ritual magick.

In my case there's a book on conducting your career within IT.
There's plenty of material on more specific stuff so I want to go
more general. And a book on the how-and-why of low carb
diets. A few folks have asked me to write that one since at
this point I know more about the hormones and metabolism
than Dr Atkins ever appears to have figured out and I seem to
have better data than what he ended up with.

Well, that latter book could be a big seller if you pitch it right.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
Then perhaps he should write a book or two. As I mentioned in another thread,
it's easy to publish these days.

And just how hard is it to *write* a book? I've got about four in
works. And they've been in works for *years*.

Starting to write a book is one thing. Finishing it and submitting
it for publication is another. Actually getting the thing in print
is the test that makes all the difference.

I've had a couple books in the works for a while. One has made
it to rough outline form, the other I have several outlines and a
few fleshed out pages, neither on Asatru. Neither is anywhere
near finished and the chances aren't good. Bluntly, neither
counts beyond idle chat level.

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
I would say, from my experience, that it takes between one and two years. But
that's not fulltime. The bottom line is that if you care enough you do it.

This brings up an old topic -

In Asatru as in much else the amount of commitment shown by
a group can be seen in the number of books published by
them. The correlation is so-so but a group with zero books
published will have trouble matching a group that has 20 when
trying to objectively measure dedication.

So, I've read plenty of books by practicing religious heathens,
by non-heathen scholars and some of the Wiccan stuff. From
folkish authors so far i've only read MacNallen's excellent
booklets for beginners.

Have any Folkish heathens gotten any books published? I
asked this several years ago and Rorik pointed me to McVan.
Ever since as I've moved from state to state I've looked in the
library catalogs to no avail. I finally looked him up in Amazon
and found out why. Published by 14 Words Press. No way
will a reasonable library purchase books from such a group
and as far as I know they've gone out of business. I am
quite hesitant to call anyone who would go through such a
publication house a heathen and I'm not going to purchase
used books from them either.

If anyone knows of a Folkish author who's published anything
through any publisher even Llewelynn please let me know.
If anyone has a McVan book that they think is on an Asatru
topic that they'd be willing to loan to me please let me know.
I must have asked Rorik about it 3-4 years ago and I've been
looking ever since.

Hail Asgard!
Doug Freyburger

[Scott Lowther]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by bowman

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
"...two crucial facts: (1) the runes had
specific uses and meanings to the pre-Xian northern Europeans who
inscribed and read them; and (2) we can know what those uses and
meanings were. "
Maybe he should tell us.

I'm all ears. I tend to agree with R.I. Page. Years ago I noticed that a
friend who went to a different school would write JMJ at the top of his
homework pages. Rather opaque without the social context, I think, much
like ALU.

I think the lore is still evolving.
Rorik seems to believe that it's fixed.
Lore evolves because tales that continue to be told do not die out,
and they mutate with telling. New tales are invented and those that
seize the collective imagination live on. That obviously happens in
pre-literate societies. It also happens in post-literate societies
like ours is becoming, but for different reasons.

There's a difference between adding to the lore, and just making shit up
about runes. Adding to the lore by way of new tales and such, that's
useful. But adding New Age gibberish to the runes is freakin' annoying.

[bowman]

Post by Scott Lowther
There's a difference between adding to the lore, and just making shit up
about runes. Adding to the lore by way of new tales and such, that's
useful. But adding New Age gibberish to the runes is freakin' annoying.

ᛣᚱᛁᛋᛏ ᚹᚫᛋ ᚩᚾ ᚱᚩᛞᛁ ᚻᚹᛖᚦᚱᚨ
ᚦᛖᚱ ᚠᚳᛋᚨ ᚠᛠᚱᚱᚪᚾ ᛣᚹᚩᛗᚳ
ᚨᚦᚦᛁᛚᚨ ᛏᛁᚱ ᚪᚾᚳᛗ


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by bowman

Post by Scott Lowther
There's a difference between adding to the lore, and just making shit up
about runes. Adding to the lore by way of new tales and such, that's
useful. But adding New Age gibberish to the runes is freakin' annoying.

ᛣᚱᛁᛋᛏ ᚹᚫᛋ ᚩᚾ ᚱᚩᛞᛁ ᚻᚹᛖᚦᚱᚨ
ᚦᛖᚱ ᚠᚳᛋᚨ ᚠᛠᚱᚱᚪᚾ ᛣᚹᚩᛗᚳ
ᚨᚦᚦᛁᛚᚨ ᛏᛁᚱ ᚪᚾᚳᛗ

A

[Doug Freyburger]

Post by bowman

... But adding New Age gibberish to the runes is freakin' annoying.

ᛣᚱᛁᛋᛏ ᚹᚫᛋ ᚩᚾ ᚱᚩᛞᛁ ᚻᚹᛖᚦᚱᚨ
ᚦᛖᚱ ᚠᚳᛋᚨ ᚠᛠᚱᚱᚪᚾ ᛣᚹᚩᛗᚳ
ᚨᚦᚦᛁᛚᚨ ᛏᛁᚱ ᚪᚾᚳᛗ

A bunch of boxes?

With th econtext being annoying gibberish, I figured if my secret
agent decoder ring was workign

[bowman]

Post by Doug Freyburger
With th econtext being annoying gibberish, I figured if my secret
agent decoder ring was workign I'd be able to read it. Ogham,
Morse or Braille?

Anglo Saxon Futhark, in my fontlist. It is part of the runic inscription on
the Ruthwell Cross, usually dated to the 7th century. The inscription is
part of The Dream of the Rood.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Scott Lowther]

Post by bowman

Post by Doug Freyburger
With th econtext being annoying gibberish, I figured if my secret
agent decoder ring was workign I'd be able to read it. Ogham,
Morse or Braille?

Anglo Saxon Futhark, in my fontlist.

It comes across as a series of boxes on Google and as a series of
question marks on my regualr service. It's not even gibberish. :(

[bowman]

Post by Scott Lowther
It comes across as a series of boxes on Google and as a series of
question marks on my regualr service. It's not even gibberish. :(

Try http://www.georgetown.edu/labyrinth/library/oe/texts/ruthwell.html

The runes are at the bottom of the page, but are not an image. They still
may be boxes if you don't have the font. I never installed a specific runic
font, It Just Works in SuSE 9.1, as Gatres would say.

In any case, the runes are used for a Christian inscription, probably in the
600's. This implies someone was expected to be able to read it, like the
memorial stones, and also suggests to me that they at least had a context
that wasn't intimately associated with Heathen occult usage.

Years before Flowers wrote his first book, I had encountered a breakdown of
the Hebrew alphabet, starting with Aleph, its pictorial representation to
the horns of a bull, its numerical value, and so forth. I don't even recall
where I read it, but I was struck by the thought and alphabet could have
any significance other that writing. I was in high school at the time, so
what do you expect. Not many New Age works around in the early 60s.

Years later, when I did read Flowers first book, I thought the parallel to
be a little too close for comfort.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by bowman

Post by Scott Lowther
It comes across as a series of boxes on Google and as a series of
question marks on my regualr service. It's not even gibberish. :(

Try http://www.georgetown.edu/labyrinth/library/oe/texts/ruthwell.html
The runes are at the bottom of the page, but are not an image. They still
may be boxes if you don't have the font.

The Red X Of Death, and a lot of 'em.

[Fwap]

Post by l***@ix.netcom.com

Post by bowman

Post by Scott Lowther
It comes across as a series of boxes on Google and as a series of
question marks on my regualr service. It's not even gibberish. :(

Try http://www.georgetown.edu/labyrinth/library/oe/texts/ruthwell.html
The runes are at the bottom of the page, but are not an image. They still
may be boxes if you don't have the font.

The Red X Of Death, and a lot of 'em.

I get runes, but they're little *.xbm tiles, not a font.

...

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by Scott Lowther

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax

Post by bowman

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
"...two crucial facts: (1) the runes had
specific uses and meanings to the pre-Xian northern Europeans who
inscribed and read them; and (2) we can know what those uses and
meanings were. "
Maybe he should tell us.

I'm all ears. I tend to agree with R.I. Page. Years ago I noticed that a
friend who went to a different school would write JMJ at the top of his
homework pages. Rather opaque without the social context, I think, much
like ALU.

I think the lore is still evolving.
Rorik seems to believe that it's fixed.
Lore evolves because tales that continue to be told do not die out,
and they mutate with telling. New tales are invented and those that
seize the collective imagination live on. That obviously happens in
pre-literate societies. It also happens in post-literate societies
like ours is becoming, but for different reasons.

There's a difference between adding to the lore, and just making shit up
about runes. Adding to the lore by way of new tales and such, that's
useful. But adding New Age gibberish to the runes is freakin' annoying.

"Treason doth never prosper... "

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
"Treason doth never prosper... "

Oh, I dunno... John Kerry built a quite successful political career.

(ducks)

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from ***@ix.netcom.com arrived, in which they said:

:> "Treason doth never prosper... "
:
:
: Oh, I dunno... John Kerry built a quite successful political career.
:
: (ducks)

*heh*

Anyone know if the final scene in Stone's /JFK/ is derived in any way
from the court records? Jim Garrison's putative use of the quotation,
after his conversation in Washington with "Mr. X", was a beautiful
piece of drama and given the Jolly Green Giant's education might even
be plausible.

~R

[rorik]

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
In which case, this is the era when Runes are given their meanings.

Only for one who is wholly committed to epistemological relativism. An
army of Nazis, proto-Nazis, "neo-pagan" fluff bunnies, and
general-purpose airheads can publish all the bilge they want about the
runes, without affecting either of two crucial facts: (1) the runes had
specific uses and meanings to the pre-Xian northern Europeans who
inscribed and read them; and (2) we can know what those uses and
meanings were.

regards,
rorik

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Post by rorik

Post by Dirk Bruere at Neopax
In which case, this is the era when Runes are given their meanings.

Only for one who is wholly committed to epistemological relativism. An
army of Nazis, proto-Nazis, "neo-pagan" fluff bunnies, and
general-purpose airheads can publish all the bilge they want about the
runes, without affecting either of two crucial facts: (1) the runes had
specific uses and meanings to the pre-Xian northern Europeans who
inscribed and read them; and (2) we can know what those uses and
meanings were.

If we know what those meanings were, that's fine.
If we do not, then 'filling in the gaps' via a refining process through modern
mythology-in-the-making is IMO quite legitimate. After all, it's where the lore
comes from originally.

Unless, of course, you believe the Havamal for example really was dictated by Odin.

FFF
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

[Ceddie]

Post by Doug Freyburger
Over a quarter way through as of yesterday's stanza 42. Any
suggestions on what to cover next? Under a year to go. ;^)

What about the Western mysteries? Runic astrology? Magick in the
northern tradition? Grímnismál and astronomy .... the list is
endless. We wait for your decision. C.

[l***@ix.netcom.com]

Post by Ceddie

Post by Doug Freyburger
Over a quarter way through as of yesterday's stanza 42. Any
suggestions on what to cover next? Under a year to go. ;^)

What about the Western mysteries? Runic astrology? Magick in the
northern tradition? Grímnismál and astronomy .... the list is
endless.

I have this sudden urge to puke.

[Ceddie]

Post by Doug Freyburger
Over a quarter way through as of yesterday's stanza 42. Any
suggestions on what to cover next? Under a year to go. ;^)
43. To his friend a man should be a friend,
to him and to his friend;
but of his foe no man shall
the friend's friend be.

Every good teacher deserves enthusiastic students. These are my
thoughts on DF´s commentary.

Our fathers didn´t have the social service we have today. They were
heavily dependent on relatives and friends and friends of friends.
Also, they had to discern enemies and friends of their enemies. They
had to be caring and they had to be wary. A mere survival in those days
was a major feat in itself. The advice given in stanza 43 is
remarkable. If you are a Republican, you should be careful to befriend
Democrats. Sooner or later they might turn against you. Choose friends
among Republicans. I realize that political differences are probably
not so clear cut in America as in Europe, but the message is clear.
Don´t mix with the enemy. Stick to your own. In Europe we still have
an extreme left and often we can observe this rule to be valid.

C