Talk:Norse religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


As far as I know 'pápiska' just means "papery" and is (was) used as a denigrating post-reformation term for Catholicism. The Icelandic/Old Norse word for heathendom is 'heiðni' or 'heiðinn dómr'. Haukurth 00:56, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

IP User: versus P.MacUidhir[edit]

This article should not be called "Norse paganism," but Åsatru, the correct Norwegian/Icelandic name for the faith.

- anoymous user editing from IP: User:

Guess what? Åsatru is Germanic Neopaganism, not Norse paganism or Germanic paganism. There is a rather large difference between each of them.
Try going here if you want to make the sort of edits you have tried to make to Norse paganism.
P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 01:00, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

"Paganism" is a derogatory word invented by the victors writing history,

- anoymous user editing from IP: User:

You demonstrate an ignorant and 'Åsatru-centric' point of view with your edits here rather than a knowledgable and neutral POV. Your opinions are noted, but they are not factual, and thus have no place in the contents of the article here.
P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 01:00, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

and has no place in the main article describing a faith. It's like calling the article describing Christianity "Christian badandevilbeliefism."

- anoymous user editing from IP: User:

I think you might want to look up the word 'anachronism' before editing here again. Your POV is positively afire with anachronisms and a few logical fallacies that readily come to mind. Have a good day, sir or ma'am.
P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 01:00, 7 December 2005 (UTC), why do you insist on Norwegian "Åsatru" anyway? The coinage was 19th century Swedish Asetro, 1970s Icelandic Ásatrú. It is a neologism denoting a subset of Germanic Neopaganism. Try to read and absorb our careful explanations of terminology and etymology before you blunder all over it with your preconceptions. If you really want to avoid "paganism" or "heathen" (some Neopagans have positively demanded to be called "Heathens", earlier. Wth?), use "Forn Sed" and cognates, which is, however, likewise a retronym from a Christian perspective (before there was a "Ny Sidr", the "Forn Sidr" was simply the "Sidr". If any of this isn't clear to you, I suggest you do some more reading before editing. dab () 09:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


We should finally move the "worship" part of Norse mythology over here, or else make this a redirect after all. At present, the article isn't very good. Also, why does the "Texts" section discuss terminology rather than texts? dab () 09:56, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

This entry is just horrible. Compared to the Celtic mythology entry, it is just pitiful. Much of the content is factually incorrect, as if an elementary school student wrote it for a school report. Rather than totally gutting it, I tried to polish it up: corrected tenses throughout and went through and fixed broken links, corrected grammar, removed or rephrased assumptions for NPOV, etc. but it still is in really bad shape. A few things:
  • Weren't Irish slaves the first practitioners of Christianity in Scandinavia?
  • Who hypothesizes a connection with runes and "Turkish or Orkhon script"?
  • Isn't pagan a noun not a verb, therefore 'paganismus' incorrect usage?
If anyone has content disputes or contests the alterations I've made, knock yourself out - this entry is in bad shape, and the changes I've made are tentative until a real entry can be cobbled together. Maybe a re-direct or compilation of this and Norse Mythology isn't a bad idea.HroptR 08:05, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

This article seems to compete with norse mythology.

If norse paganism is a subset of Norse mythology and / or german paganism, then this article should be merged with the appropriate article. The norse mythology page is well written, if a little short in some sections, but the norse paganism and german paganism pages are badly written. Both note briefly where their respective subjects can be found who practiced them, and the sourcing. German paganism mentions how the religion changed over time (and indirectly what the religion was. The reference is by no means enough to merit an article). Neither article distinctly mentions what the religions actually entail (e.g. a summary of beliefs, major religious figures, etc.). That is a huge problem in an encyclopedia that tries to be all inclusive.

Paganism has gained a negative connotation, I don't think that point is arguable. Because of this, the article's name is derogatory towards that religion. Both norse paganism and german paganism should be renamed.The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) .

religion and mythology are difficult to untangle. This article is about Norse mythology qua cult, and could be a valid subarticle of Norse mythology (the "worship" section). I don't know why you think "paganism" has negative connotations, let alone why the point 'isn't arguable'. Obviously polytheism has 'negative connotations' to monotheists, but that isn't the term, it's the thing itself, no matter what you call it. If you don't like the term "paganism", this could be at Norse polytheism (like Celtic polytheism) dab () 17:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Norse polytheism... Now that's a good idea. We've argued about this usage of paganism before, and I think it has more to do with resentment of forced conversion and being identified by a foreign Roman /Latin paradigm. Much like the "Islamic Rajputs" some people feel very strongly about naming conventions. I was recently made aware that this disdain for the term pagan is also shared by practitioners of Ancient Greek religion in Greece [1] and is part of the reason why all of the entries dealing with Ancient Greek religion are being merged into Hellenic_Polytheism. It's not really that important of an issue to me, other than that paganism has become a byword for many modern connotations in the USA, including moral relativism, Joseph Campbell universalism, gay and transgendered political agendas, polyamory, sionism, drug use, etc. -- HroptR 21:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Good points. For myself, I prefer 'pagan/paganism' since 'polytheism' is a more specific form of paganism, to my POV. Same goes for 'polydeism', et cetera. 'Paganism' serves better as a catch-all term, and it is, according to my readings, far more commonly used in academic works to refer to this sort of thing. Negative connotations are something to be considered, but to make Wikipedia politically-correct at the price of less accuracy is not a good idea.
P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 22:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Are you aware of examples of pre-christian Norse or Germanic religion which are not polytheistic? I would be interested in them just out of curiosity. Only Heathenry will suffice in my opinion :D But naming conventions are not really an issue worth fighting over in this venue, as long as accuracy is striven for. Some people obviously see the term as pejorative and perhaps confusing, but I think that it's kind of late to change usage unless it is to polytheism which still doesn't quite encompass ancestor veneration and the animistic aspects of the pre-christian beliefs. -- HroptR 22:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Your last comments answer your first question for me. :) The ancestor veneration and apparent elements of animism are, to my thinking, more adequately covered by 'paganism' than 'polytheism', due to how those terms tend to be defined.
P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 22:52, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

If you're not in the US, you may not understand the bit about paganism as a negative term. That's understandable, but still. In the US, calling someone a pagan is a lot like calling them a heathen, infidel, etc.

Polytheism might work, though it's not as neutral as religion. It's certainly not as bad as pagan.

I think the article best belongs as a subsection of the Norse mythology article. Actually, as two subsections. One section discussing relics / archeological finds / etc. from norse mythology, the other discussing continued practices that could be considered cultist. Many articles include continued practice sections: see shakers for an article that handled the subject extremely well. I might add that the shaker belief system died out a while ago (and who could be shocked at that?).

P I don't know how you did that signature thing. Send me a message of some sort with methodology, or just edit in for me please.The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) .

Merge 2006[edit]

After consideration, I am now oposed to merging Norse_paganism with Norse_mythology. If no one has a problem with it, I'm going to pull the template. I'll try to make the time to help flesh this entry out. WeniWidiWiki 03:24, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

In the time between the last post and now, there have only been a few edits on this article. Furthermore, because 2 were a vandalism - repair group, there has been only 1 real edit to the article, and it has been only to rearrange some links. I'm still not clear on what this article means, but the subjects discussed in the article are only vaguely related so I'm going to give it a new tag. 23:37, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


"Problems with Asatru theology No systematic unified theology for the Norse gods seems to have ever been written down (and may not have ever existed). Most of what has survived was either stories (such as the Prose Edda, writen by Snorri Sturluson about 200 years after Iceland became Christianized) or accounts by Christian monks who came to Scandinavia.[citation needed] The monks wrote down accounts about the native religion which are unreliable at best. The result is while the Asatru know that the gods were worshiped at one time, they don't know why the gods were worshipped. In the stories that survive, the Aesir do very little that in directly beneficial for humans.

So the modern worship of the Aesir is mostly a matter of modern invention, much like Wiccan religion."

Is there sources for this statement?


June 18, 2007

Norse polytheism or Norse paganism[edit]

See the conversation above in the section Cleanup

"Generally, article naming should prefer what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." --Nutshell of Wikipedia:Naming conventions


  • about 10,700 English pages for "Norse paganism" -wikipedia
  • about 454 English pages for "Norse polytheism" -wikipedia

Google scholar

  • about 35 for "Norse paganism"
  • "Norse polytheism" - did not match any articles

Google books

  • 10 of 183 on "Norse paganism"
  • 6 on "Norse polytheism".
  • intitle:Norse intitle:paganism - did not match any documents
  • intitle:Norse intitle:polytheism - did not match any documents

Both common usage and scholarly usage are heavily biased to "Norse paganism". If the article is to be moved from that which the guidelines advise then the move should go through WP:RM so that the wider community can decide if the move can be justified on some other Wikipedia criteria. --Philip Baird Shearer 09:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your move as per my note at Talk:Germanic_paganism#Germanic_Polytheism. Haukur 09:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

A suggestion, please, if using the term at all, use the terms "pagan", "heathen" etc for any of the foreign religions, e.g. the zoroastrianism, the abrahamitic (judaisms, scientology, catholic, lutheran, orthodox, etc), Buddhism etc when speaking of the Norse Religion. The Norse Religion is only 'pagan' from an outsider's perspective; very much as christianity is an abomination in most of the non-christian world. I realize it is a an eternally sensitive topic, but please who are the christian pagans to deem? In fact, the saints worshiped by catholics' outnumber the humble number deities in the Norse Religion. What I do object to is the patronizing tone over polytheism; in fact most Hindus are polytheists and they outnumber most other religions. The solution is clear. Call the Norse Religion for what it is, a religion! Rename it Norse Religion. As for the Google argument: 24,300 hits for "Norse Religion"! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

From Paganism:

Paganism (from Latin paganus, meaning "country dweller, rustic")[1] is the blanket term given to describe religions and spiritual practises of pre-Christian Europe, and by extension a term for polytheistic traditions or folk religion worldwide seen from a Western or Christian viewpoint.

which doesn't seem to indicate NPV. (same is true if you search Google for define:paganism). Proper terms, IMHO, include "Norse Religion", "Norse Pantheon", "Norse Religious Practice" and similar NPV phrases. --TheBjorn (talk) 12:47, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

This name struck me immediately as a violation of NPoV. My immediate reaction was that it should be called "Old Norse Religion" or simply "Norse Religion". Google Scholar has 394 hits for "Norse Religion" while Google has 15,200 and Google Books has 712 -- all numbers greater than the biased (imho) name of this article. FWIW, i'm of Nordic extraction and find the title insulting. Dfoxvog (talk) 17:57, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree, while it may be more common, using the term paganism is hardly NPOV as sparks of a very Christian and Western bias. Norse Polytheism or simply Norse Religion would be a much more proper name for this article.Flygongengar (talk) 20:12, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I also agree that titling this Norse Paganism is not a neutral point of view and goes against Wikipedia conventions. (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Recent Changes[edit]

I am sure that massive recent changes and additions to this entry were all done in good faith. That said I'm not sure the way to go about expanding the entry is to add whole unreferenced sections into the entry and reorganizing it as if it is about a living religious tradition, which it is not. This line in the lead is a bit dubious for instance: "Despite this, enough knowledge has been gleamed for Norse paganism to be resurrected in the 20th century through the Neopagan religions of Asatru and Odinism." Is the scholarly opinion that reconstructionist efforts of that last few decades consists of a "resurrection" of the old religion? Not to my knowledge. By moving the sourcing sections out of the beginning the impression is given that the unsourced "theology" (really? Norse theology?) section fains facticity and cohesion in a way that I an unsure fits the historical record. I'm not a regular contributer here by any means but I think this change alters the entry in a detrimental fashion.PelleSmith (talk) 20:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I have reverted them. They added little or no new material, but attempted to impose an entirely different article structure. --dab (𒁳) 12:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Hey. I was the one responsible for the changes. I really think that we should keep them, because they make this article so much easier to understand for the layman than this current one. For instance, someone who goes onto this article will expect to learn something about the Norse gods, but there is hardly anything here about the beliefs of the Norse peoples. I understand that it might come across as a bit "neopagan", and well, it would really help for someone to add a more historical twist to the article, but I don't think deleting all the work and sections on belief is going to help make this a better article. We need to re-do this page together, both the layman like myself, and those who know more about the subject. (Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:13, 16 October 2008 (UTC))

Midnightblueowl, please stop discussing Neopaganism in our articles on historical polytheism. We have dedicated articles on Neopaganism for that. --dab (𒁳) 17:46, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Neopaganism must at least be mentioned, perhaps under either "Influence" or "History". After all, the neopagan faiths are essentially reconstructions, however accurate, or innacurate, they may be to the original. I am by no means advocating that Neopaganism should become dominant in these articles, in fact I very much oppose that, but it should at least have a mention. (Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC))
Actually they all have their own entries. No more discussion is needed of Neopanism in entries about historical religions than a brief mention and a link. From an academic standpoint the historical and the reconstructionist are two seperate entities and should be treated as such.PelleSmith (talk) 18:04, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Tollundman2.jpg[edit]

The image Image:Tollundman2.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --15:15, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Yule log[edit]

The photo of the yule log is compeletely inappopriate to the subject matter. It's a picture of a modernn 20th or 21st century Christmas decoration. It has about as much relevance to the yule log of the Norse pagans as a picture of a Caesar salad would have in an article about the ancient Roman triumvir. The cute holly berries and the red candles ... come on, please, can this photo be deleted? Maybe there's a picture of an actual Norse yule log, but this Wal-mart Xmas decor is completely out of place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Days of the week[edit]

Writing here as a man fluent in the Icelandic language and a native of the country, I'd just like to say that Laugar what be more appropriatly translated as pool/s of water. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:30, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

shouldn' the title be Norse Mythology?[edit]

? -- Elvenmuse (talk) 18:20, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Sure. Once you agree to call Christianity, 'Christian Mythology' and a page called 'Jewish Mythology' and 'Islam Mythology'. We already have a page for Norse mythology, this is for the religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:57, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Given that there is already an article on Norse mythology, I think the article should be renamed to something even more neutral such as "Norse religion." aprock (talk) 18:58, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
I think this issue was eventually settled, but I also wants to add, that there is a difference between mythology and religion. Religion encompass religious practises, whereas mythology does not. Just saying. RhinoMind (talk) 03:55, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Of course,like all religions it should be. Aditya lakhanpal (talk) 07:28, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

But Aditya lakhanpal (talk) 07:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. What post are you answering? Please use identation. And what is your point? Can you explain in more detail? And please present logic-based arguments for your standpoints. Statements are useless and a waste of other peoples time. RhinoMind (talk) 16:53, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 2012[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Norse religion. This seems to be a more neutral title, and more widely recognized than "Norse paganism", anyway. Aervanath (talk) 00:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Norse paganismAncient Norse religion – NPOV and style reasons. Pagan is historically a pejorative term, and most other articles about specific belief system use the word religion or mythology. For example see Religion in ancient Greece, Hungarian mythology, Religion in ancient Rome, Slavic mythology, Armenian mythology. As there is already a Norse mythology article, I propose moving this to Ancient Norse religion. The discussions above: [2], [3] indicate that there the current name is not ideal. Another option would be to move it to the current redirect Norse religion. relisting see below Andrewa (talk) 18:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC) aprock (talk) 19:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Support. The term "paganism" is centred on a Christian worldview that is inappropriate (and often derogatory) in a secular encyclopedia, especially where neutral alternatives are readily available. NoeticaTea? 02:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Comment I see the problem with the existing title, but the problem with the proposed new one is that we are not dealing with the ancient period here, but the early middle ages, maybe stretching into the high middle ages. Comparable articles on other forms of "paganism" redirect to Celtic polytheism, Slavic mythology and Baltic mythology. Maybe we should merge this with Norse mythology? PatGallacher (talk) 12:50, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

If you read the article, you'll see that it covers the period from 9000 B.C to about 1000 A.D. Additionally, Norse religion was offered as an alternative. aprock (talk) 15:51, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Comment: "Norse religion" could in one sense include Catholicism and Lutheranism.

I think there's a distinction between "religion" and "mythology" that is sometimes subtle and often ignored, e.g. the Last Supper is mythology, the Eucharist is religion. (There is an article Christian mythology separate from Christianity.) The word "mythology" itself tends to the pejorative, because "myths" are often recorded by people who don't follow the religion, and this is certainly true of many of the sources of Norse myths.

I don't see an enormous problem with "paganism" (although modern Asatruar tend to call themselves "heathens", going for the Anglo-Saxon root). Maybe Norse religion of the pre-Christian era?--Curtis Clark (talk) 18:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I suppose we could move Christianity to Western religion of post-Babylonian era too ;) Maybe we should consider Traditional Norse religion? aprock (talk) 02:37, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Traditional Norse religion works for me.--Curtis Clark (talk) 06:11, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Relisting. There seems consensus on a move, but not on what the new name should be. Andrewa (talk) 18:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Rather than relist, I think we can just go ahead and move to Traditional Norse religion. If someone objects, we can reopen the discussion. aprock (talk) 20:22, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
There are four editors involved; Two of them support this alternative proposal, including yourself as the nominator. The other two have not commented either way since this alternative was suggested, more than half-way through the discussion period. That is a consensus of sorts I agree, but it's hard to imagine a weaker one. On the other hand, if there's no opposition for another few days, that would make it a very reasonable consensus. Or that's my logic for relisting. Andrewa (talk) 01:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Merge to Norse mythology. Both articles appear to cover the same topic. The Norse mythology article appears to be older than Norse paganism. Although, the original emphasis of the latter article appears to have been on Nordic religious culture, it has since developed into an imitation of the former article. If sufficient divergent content arises (i.e. religion vs mythology, as described Curtis Clark above), then a separate article (Traditional Norse religion) can be reconsidered. In the meantime, though, there is too much overlap (or, to put it another way, the differences between the two articles' content is too unclear) to justify separation. ClaretAsh 01:16, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

This move should have considered what is the common name before a move was made. The whole point of article titles is to aid finding the article. If the name is not descriptive than we do not concern ourselves with whether the name is non NPOV (it is assumed that the name in common use is neutral as far as reliable secondary sources are concerned) if we did then names like the Boston Massacre would have to be moved to something else.

Google books

  • "Norse Paganism" returns about 2,320
  • "Ancient Norse religion" about 552
  • "Norse polytheism" 36

Google scholar:

  • "Norse Paganism" returns about 221
  • "Ancient Norse religion" about 21
  • "Norse polytheism" 7

This clearly shows that "Norse Paganism" is the common name for "Norse polytheism", but further assesment would need to be done on the quality of the books and articles returned. -- PBS (talk) 03:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

There are 198,000 hits for "Boston Massacre" in google books, and 6580 in google scholar. Searching for "Odinism" returns 5370/405 hits, making that term google's "preferred" name. This is why google searches are not a source. As noted above, there is a clear consensus to move it away from the POV term paganism. aprock (talk) 14:24, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Reopening comment I have reverted my close to reopen this discussion at the request of PBS. I will not involve myself in the discussion or subsequent close. --Mike Cline (talk) 22:16, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
    I do not intend to comment further, other than to say that editors should take into consideration the advise in the Article title policy and its guidelines (Naming conventions) when considering an appropriate article title. The links to the books and articles returned by the searches I presented above should be looked at to assess their quality, to make sure that simple Google searchs do not lead to an erroneous conclusion. If Additional relevant information from other sources is presented then it too should be included when making the final decision. -- PBS (talk) 05:05, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep/Oppose Absent any widespread self label for the practice of worshipping or revering elements of Norse mythology this title makes the most sense. Also, this is quite a distinct topic from Mythology which should properly cover stories and descriptions of the figures of the religion, while this article should cover its practice (primarily ancient but with reference to lingering or revived elements). This should match Anglo-Saxon paganism and Germanic paganism with, to my thinking, Anglo-Saxon mythology (and possibly English folk mythology) and Germanic mythology as subtopics, even if the mythology articles were larger. Also of concern is correspondence with and consitency among the relevant categories. Obotlig (talk) 00:41, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm fine with keeping it. If there were a self-label, it might be Norse heathenism, but that's only based on apparent modern preferences of individuals following the reconstructed religion.--Curtis Clark (talk) 06:02, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Allow me to suggest that both Anglo-Saxon paganism and Germanic paganism should also be renamed. aprock (talk) 14:24, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Rename None of the rationales offered to keep the name as it is address the POV problems with the name. It might be best to just rename it to use the same name as in the Danish article Norse religion. aprock (talk) 01:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
I agree with this except what name would Germanic paganism get? Or Anglo-Saxon paganism although in that case one might argue that by the time of Christianization it became English religion? To me consistency is the most important aspect of article naming, and the name matching what will directly receive the most searches - this affects google placement of the article if I'm not mistaken. Obotlig (talk) 02:04, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Consistency isn't much of an issue in this class of articles. See Religion in ancient Greece, Hungarian mythology, Religion in ancient Rome, Slavic mythology, Armenian mythology, etc. aprock (talk) 03:13, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Support Norse religion Well argued guys. I can agree with the simple label in this case. Consistency is a hobgoblin of my own mind. ;-) Obotlig (talk) 19:09, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

sigh, when you googled "Norse religion", you found all instances of "Old Norse religion". Seriously, can anyone really be so naive or google-unsavvy? The most widespread term seems to be "Old Norse religion". Followed by "Norse paganism". "Norse religion", as you will find if you google the term excluding "Old Norse religion" is used more rarely, and mostly in shoddy or dubious literature. In other words, this move was clearly ill-advised, and I presume explicitly motivated by an unstated agenda. The term "Old Norse religion" apparently suggest the Norse paganism of the Old Norse period (i.e. the Viking Age). --dab (𒁳) 17:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

What on earth are you talking about? aprock (talk) 18:33, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
thank you for your question.
I was talking about WP:UCS, which is how article names should be decided on Wikipedia.
only, these "discussions" and "talkpage consensuses" mostly seem to be entirely ignorant of the guidelines and just blindly follow random claims and false anologies.
I am saying that I consider it incompetence to google "Norse religion" and then conclude that the term is common while in fact you have found tons of references to the term "Old Norse religion".
there is no such term as "Norse religion" in serious literature. There is the term "Old Norse religion", and this is where the page should have moved, if at all.
Also, I do not know why I am explaining what I was "talking about", as I was perfectly lucid the first time around, so there is little hope you will get the point now if you did not get it before. --dab (𒁳) 14:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I'll go with equally lucid. If you want to move the page, go for it. While you missed the original discussion, you're certainly welcome to contribute now. aprock (talk) 17:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Move? 2013[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 11:04, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

On the time perspective[edit]

Norse religion and Norse Gods were also worshipped in the Nordic Iron Age and is not specifically tied to the Viking Age. Norse religion is even practised today, so I do not see why and how the current time and Age restrictions entered this page? It would help a lot if sources were given, but they are not.

As I see it Norse religion is not restricted in time, and the word Norse is just describing the space in which this particular religion was practised originally, ie. in Scandinavia. That is all.

Will someone please provide adequate sources to the speculative time-restrictions or perhaps change the page itself to reflect that there is no time-restrictions? Thank you.

RhinoMind (talk) 15:17, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Going on a Year[edit]

Does anyone care about this article anymore. It's still very unpolished.

It's been a year since the last comment. Hello RhinoMind (if you're still watching). I understand your concerns (seems many people these days are interested in revisiting Old Norse Religion as a modern religious practice), though I do not think they are relevant here. I'm no doctor of anything, but I landed here as an avid fan of The Viking Age. In my mind, this is the period of World History coinciding with the introduction of Christ to Scandinavian (Norse) Culture a la "13th Warrior" or The History Channel's "Vikings." If new media isn't creditworthy enough, consider the the time-honored legend of Beowulf as a summary and conclusion of this period. So yeah, we're talking Ancient Northern Europe here, not modern. It seems to me that as a global culture with a burgeoning emphasis on critical thought (I think the old standby "History is written by the victor" is starting to piss everyone off), that factual evidence regarding this wonderfully, brutal and imaginative culture of Vikings is lacking. It appears the Vikings were horrible at keeping written records, and Christian Scholars took advantage of this illiteracy when the Vikings started migrating west. From what I understand, that's why Beowulf, even though Anglo Saxon in origin, is of such importance. Aside from that, I've heard of something called Sagas recently, and I've also heard a few things about empirical evidence, but I don't know much about either of those sources yet.

If you're basing a new Religion on Old Norse Religion, you're probably basing your beliefs on Norse Mythology. Which is, in my opinion, fascinating, benign, and honorable. I don't know how our [world] knowledge of the mythology survived (perhaps archaeological finds), but what I find most interesting is that there seems to be, as with most religions, a lot of common symbolic and metaphorical ideologies between this and other religions. Perhaps it's not such mystery as I'd like it to be though. As human beings all living on the same world, we share all the aspects of life in common, and most of us are very fond of self-expression. So the idea of idun and eden being both phonetically and ideological similar isn't so mysterious, all things considered.

Nonetheless, is anyone still interested in this page? It'd be a nice pet project for me, and I think I could "hammer" out some of the inconsistencies.

Adding "Ancient" or "Old" back to the title would be a good start.

Soulgazer (talk) 06:02, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Always Getting Ahead of Myself[edit]

Sometimes I think I just like to watch myself think.

This looks like it could be cleaned up and moved to Vikings.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't see a section on the page that discusses religion.

Soulgazer (talk) 06:16, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


Herald Wartooth is not the only descendant of the Gods.--Superbowl555555555555555555 (talk) 15:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


Hi. I can see that it has been discussed above what exactly to call this page. But why use the unofficial and loose term of Norse Religion, while it has a real name? Asatru is what this religious practise is called. There are slight variations in the modern Scandinavian languages, in my native language of Danish, it is Asatro and with the correct phonetical signage it is Ásatrú. However, all this word means, is "belief in Æsir". The Æsir and Vanir are fundamental constituents of the Nordic patheon and belief system. So the name of "Norse religion" is Asatru. So shouldn't the name of this page be Asatru then?

For some unexplained and odd reason, Asatru redirects to modern Heathenry. But the name Asatru does not limit itself to this new phenomenon at all.

RhinoMind (talk) 04:33, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

In English Asatru is the modern derivative of Norse religion, not the original beliefs of the Norse people, and having a different meaning in Scandinavian languages doesn't matter, since this is the English language Wikipedia. So the article should not be moved. Thomas.W talk 08:21, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Can you document that it only applies to the modern derivative of Norse Religion? Most of the scholarly sources I have read uses the term Asatru. RhinoMind (talk) 17:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Historical sources describing Norse human sacrifice[edit]

It would be great to have a shhort discussion of the historical sources to human sacrifice

(Please sign your post here)

Hi. I agree that better sourcing is needed. References to somewhat fictional sources is not a great approach, especially not if they stand alone. There are however several archeological excavations revealing human sacrifices. It can be a bit hard work to track down the original scientific papers on-line however, but it would be great if it was done. Here are more solid info from the Viking Age specifically. Archaeological evidence for human sacrifice by Asatru practitioners (Norse Religion) from the Viking Age. Child sacrifice is also discussed. RhinoMind (talk) 15:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Here is another scholarly (but not original) source about archaeological evidence for sacrifice of slaves in the Viking Age: Viking Graves Yield Grisly Find: Sacrificed Slaves RhinoMind (talk) 15:42, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
I can only recommend to search for more info about the Iron Age bog bodies of Scandinavia. There are many and many shows clear signs of trauma and intentional murder and includes ceremonial practises as well. There is a (not complete) list of bog bodies on Wikipedia already, but I can't exactly remember the name of the article right now. Other specific bog bodies worth mentioning here is Grauballe Man, and Borremose bodies, the first from Iron Age Denmark the later from Bronze Age Denmark. RhinoMind (talk) 15:50, 11 June 2016 (UTC)