Talk:Barnstokkr

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Barnstokkr has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
WikiProject Norse history and culture (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the Norse people, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Barnstokkr/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA, and should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 20:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Everything looks good, so I am passing this article to GA status. Another great article, very nice work! Dana boomer (talk) 20:35, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again, glad you liked it! :bloodofox: (talk) 01:46, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Clasping of tree during birth[edit]

I found this while looking through an issue of Maal og Minne (1916:6). I was wondering where Davidson and the other scholars got the record of women clasping the farm tree from, I have not seen them sourcing it. Maybe I have not looked good enough. Anyway, I suppose I've found at least a fragment of it here:

Om vård-trädet meddeler Hyltén-Cavallius (I, s. 357) den interessante oplysning, at «det har . . . varit folksed i Wärend, att barnsängsqvinnor i sin nöd omfamnat Vård-trädet, for att få lindrig barnsbörd». Slegtens liv var saaledes nøie knyttet til det hellige træ paa gaarden — paa en maate, som let bringer en til at tænke paa det omstridte Barnstokkr d. e. barnestok, barne-stamme, i kong Volsungs hal (Völs. saga, kap. 2), hvorpaa Volsunge-ættens trivsel synes at ha beroet.

That is:

Hyltén-Cavallius ([Wärend och Wirdarne, volume] I, p. 357) tells some interesting information about the guardian tree, that "it has . . . been a custom in Värend, that birth-giving women in their dispair embraced the guardian tree, to have relief in their childbirth." The life of the kin was thus tightly connected to the sacred tree at the farm, in a way that makes you think about the controversial Barnstokkr, i.e. child-log, child-trunk, in king Volsung's hall. (Völs. saga, kap. 2), which the prosperity of the Völsung kin seems to have depended on.

Perhaps not the best translation, so if someone who understands the original text sees a mistake in the translation, please correct it. –Holt TC 22:13, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Very interesting. This is definitely an area we could expand upon in this article. Good work! :bloodofox: (talk) 21:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

"Branstokkr" or "Brandstokkr"?[edit]

Brandr being an Old Norse term meaning "sword blade" among other things, I've seen renderings of the name switching the r and n order, which of course is pertinent to the story. But are they based on actual texts or extrapolations, or even typos? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.29.68 (talk) 15:02, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Have a look at Jesse Byock's commentary on the "theories" section, I believe it addresses this. :bloodofox: (talk) 17:01, 27 December 2011 (UTC)