8. Snorra Edda as a Source of Mythology

Edith Marold 2017, ‘Snorra Edda as a Source of Mythology’ in Kari Ellen Gade and Edith Marold (eds), Poetry from Treatises on Poetics. Skaldic Poetry of the Scandinavian Middle Ages 3. Turnhout: Brepols [check printed volume for citation].

Snorra Edda (SnE) is one of the most important sources of information about the pagan mythology of Scandinavia. However, a qualification must be introduced immediately because SnE is not a religious compendium. It is a compilation which was written to serve a particular purpose, namely, a systematic presentation of pagan mythology to facilitate the comprehension and composition of skaldic poetry. It was written by a Christian author aware of the learned tradition of medieval Christianity at a time when the pre-Christian religion and its attendant mythology had been abandoned for about two hundred years.

The first three parts of SnE (Prologue, Gylf, Skm) differ in terms of the mythological themes they contain. The Prologue does not offer a great deal of information about Scandinavian mythology, but is written as an introduction to the following part, Gylfaginning (Gylf). The Prologue is linked to Gylf by two themes that address the question of the origin of pagan religions; first by the use of humans’ natural reasoning which led them to believe that the earth was animate and that a controller (stjórnari) of the whole cosmos existed somewhere according to the medieval theory of natural theology that it is possible to gain a certain level of knowledge of God based on reason and experience of nature. This theory goes back to antiquity; the concept originated with Marcus Terentius Varro (in a work now lost, but transmitted by Augustine, De civitate Dei and by the Christian apologetics). The second theme is the immigration of the Æsir (gods) from Asia/Troy, arising from folk-etymological speculation about the connection between Asia and the Æsir. This corresponds to the learned medieval theory about the foundation of European nations by migrants from Troy and Rome (cf. Heusler 1908) and is based on the ideas of Euhemerism, likewise a philosophical theory of late antiquity, that gods were once mighty kings who were worshipped by the people after their death.

Gylf retains and elaborates on these themes, on the one hand with the concept of a highest god called Alfǫðr, who is apparently equated with Óðinn at the very beginning of the dialogue in this part of SnE (SnE 2005, 8-9). On the other hand, the participants in the ensuing dialogue are three of the euhemerised Æsir or Asiamenn ‘men from Asia’ and Gylfi, the Swedish king who wants to discover the source of their power. The dialogue presents pagan mythology from the creation of the world until ragnarǫk, the end of the world, and the rise of a new earth. At the end of Gylf the Æsir identify themselves as the protagonists of the fables they have told Gylfi, and Gylfi spreads the stories he has been told throughout his northern kingdom (SnE 2005, 54).

The dialogue between the three Æsir (Hár ‘High’, Jafnhár ‘Equally High’ and Þriði ‘Third’) and Gylfi, who has assumed the fictive name Gangleri ‘Walk-weary’, follows a characteristic structure. After Gangleri’s initial question about the highest god there follows the description of the origin of the world, which is characterised by a certain dualism first of fire and ice, the world being the product of the interaction of the frost of Niflheimr and the heat of Muspellsheimr (SnE 2005, 9-10), then of the hrímþursar ‘frost-giants’, who are described as illr ‘malicious’ (ibid., 10) and of the sons of Borr who create the earth (ibid., 11). They fashion the physical world from the body parts and the blood of the primeval giant Ymir whom the gods (Borr’s sons) have killed. In contrast, in the eddic poem Vǫluspá (Vsp) the sons of Borr raise the earth from the sea. That poem was well known to Snorri, who cites it extensively in his narrative about the end of the world (SnE 2005, 51-3). He must have chosen his version of the creation myth, rather than the one described in Vsp, because this myth is used as a framework for such cosmological kennings as ‘blood of Ymir [SEA]’ and ‘skull of Ymir [SKY/HEAVEN]’. Another reason could be that the myth also fits well with the dualism between gods and giants which is characteristic of the whole narrative in Gylf. This dualism continues with the theme of threats to the world by other monsters and giants, and it is noteworthy that all attempts by the gods to defend the world are futile. The gods’ fettering of the monstrous wolf Fenrir (SnE 2005, 27-9), for example, is only a temporary measure to halt the precipitation of the final destruction; in the end the fetters will not prevent Fenrir from escaping and running free (ibid., 50-1). The same is true of Loki; even if he is bound to a rock, he will be the leader of the giants attacking the gods at the end of the world (ibid., 48-50).

It is striking that, of Þórr’s many adventures, Snorri only includes two in Gylf, and those are adventures in which Þórr has no success in his fight against monsters. The first is his fishing for Miðgarðsormr ‘the World Serpent’, which escapes because the giant Hymir cuts the fishing line, and when Þórr throws his hammer, Mjǫllnir, after it, the serpent is not hurt (ibid., 44-5). This version is at odds with other variants of this myth, e.g. the one told in Úlfr Uggason’s Húsdrápa (ÚlfrU Húsdr), according to which Þórr is successful in killing his adversary. The other myth about Þórr included in Gylf is his journey to the giant Útgarðaloki (ibid., 37-43). Unlike Þórr’s other journeys to the land of the giants (e.g. his adventures with Geirrøðr, Hrungnir, Þrymr and Hymir), which end with his slaying of these giants, this journey portrays Þórr as inferior to the giant with regard to size and power. It appears that Snorri chose these myths about Þórr’s unsuccessful adventures to highlight the major theme of Gylf, namely, the failure of the gods to avert the monsters’ threat to the world. At the cataclysmic end of the world each god dies in a battle against the monster he once tried to eliminate: Óðinn is devoured by the wolf Fenrir, while Þórr dies in the fight against Miðgarðsormr. Snorri’s source here is evidently the eddic poem Vsp which he cites in extenso (ibid., 51-3).

Although Snorri normally cites only eddic poetry in Gylf, he includes one skaldic stanza by Bragi Boddason (Bragi Frag 1) relating the myth of the goddess Gefjun. It is cited at the beginning of Gylf (SnE 2005, 7; cf. also Ynglinga saga, ch. 5, ÍF 26, 14-15) and describes how Gefjun, with a team of mighty oxen, ploughs the island of Sjælland away from Sweden, the territory of Gylfi. The mention of Gylfi, who is later one of the partners in the frame dialogue in Gylf, is likely to be the reason why the stanza is cited here. The stanza demonstrates how Gylfi is overcome by the cunning of one of the Æsir and therefore wants to gain knowledge of their religion which he thinks is the source of their power. There is no other evidence for this myth in Scandinavia, but it can be compared with other myths of foundation by deception such as Dido’s foundation of Carthage, Hengest’s foundation of the fortress Thancastre and the foundation of York by Ívarr, one of the sons of Ragnarr loðbrók (see Clunies Ross 1978a; Marold 1986b, 438-40).

When considering Gylf as a source for pagan mythology, it must be emphasised that the choice and presentation of the myths, which undoubtedly have their roots in a long-lasting narrative tradition, are governed by the aim of the author, Snorri, to present a worldview which from the beginning is characterised by the dualism of the gods and the menacing giants and monsters leading up to the end of this world. And Gylf, ‘the Delusion of Gylfi’, shows a Gylfi who is so fascinated by these failing gods that he spreads stories about them across the northern lands. This sceptical view of pagan religion is echoed in the famous warning against belief in heathen religion found at the beginning of Skáldskaparmál (Skm; SnE 1998, I, 5). Any use of Gylf as a source of pagan mythology or religion must take into account that Snorri possibly modified the tradition to accommodate it to his ideas and aims of presentation (see Faulkes in SnE 2005, xxvi-xvii).

The role of pagan mythology and religion in Skm is totally different and not structured by a major theme as in Gylf. The structure of Skm is characterised by a systematisation of kennings and heiti according to special concepts such as ‘poetry’, ‘gods’, ‘cosmos’ and ‘humans’. Mythology appears here as a collection of kennings for gods or cosmological concepts, and is manifested in different ways: 1) as coherent citations of poems or parts of poems dealing with mythology combined with narratives of the myth; 2) as citations of stanzas dealing with mythological scenes or events; 3) as short narratives used to explain certain kennings.

1. Citations of poetry usually connected with narrative prose accounts

Such citations of poems or parts of poems are in most cases connected with prose accounts of the myths, which provide more details and can include the prehistory of an event and a continuation which is not found in the poems. In two cases (Þórr’s fights with the giants Hrungnir and Geirrøðr) the prose account directly precedes the poem (SnE 1998, I, 20-30). The myth about the giant Þjazi and his dealings with the Æsir, on the other hand, is told at the very beginning of the conversation between Bragi and the sea-giant Ægir (ibid., 1-2), but the stanzas are cited later on in connection with the enumeration of kennings for the goddess Iðunn (ibid., 30-3). The Hrungnir and Geirrøðr and Þjazi myths are not told to explain kennings.

As far as the myth of Þórr’s battle with the giant Hrungnir is concerned, the stanzas from Haustlǫng (Þjóð Haustl) cited in Skm (SnE 1998, I, 22-4; Haustl 14-20) only describe this battle ending with the killing of Hrungnir and Þórr’s head wound from a piece of Hrungnir’s whetstone being healed by the sorceress Gróa. The prose account in Skm provides the background for that battle and gives more details. As the story goes, Óðinn rides to Jǫtunheimar, meets the giant Hrungnir and challenges him to a horse race, at the end of which Hrungnir enters the hall of the Æsir. During their subsequent drinking a quarrel arises between Hrungnir and the Æsir, and the gods summon Þórr. He comes at once and threatens the giant, but he is eventually persuaded to meet Hrungnir for a duel in Grjótún, the home of this giant. Unlike in the poem, Þórr is accompanied by his servant Þjálfi, who warns Hrungnir that Þórr might attempt to attack him from below by disappearing into the ground and emerging beneath him. This causes Hrungnir to put his shield under his feet rather than using it to protect himself in the battle, which leads to his defeat. In the stanzas Þjálfi is not mentioned; it is merely said that the bǫnd ‘gods’ and the dísir ‘goddesses’ caused the shield to fly under Hrungnir’s footsoles (Haustl 17/2, 4). Also different from the poem is the figure of Mǫkkurkálfi, a giant made of clay, not mentioned in Haustl, who is defeated by Þjálfi. The prose recounts what happened after the fall of the giant, namely, that Hrungnir’s leg fell across Þórr’s neck and only Þórr’s three-year old son Móði was able to remove the giant’s foot. A further difference between prose and poetry is that in the stanzas Gróa heals Þórr (she enchants the whetstone out of his head; Haustl 20/1-4), whereas in the prose narrative the whetstone remains stuck in Þórr’s head because Gróa forgets her spells upon hearing that her husband, Aurvandill, had been brought back by Þórr from the land of the giants. It is unlikely that all these details provided by the prose were once contained in the poem, which only concentrates on the high points, Þórr’s journey to Grjótún, the ensuing battle, and the subsequent healing of Þórr by Gróa. The question is whether the prose account reflects the myth as a whole or whether it is made up of several traditional narratives.

The prose account of Þórr’s visit to the giant Geirrøðr (SnE 1998, I, 24-5) also precedes the citation of almost the entire poem Þórsdrápa by Eilífr Goðrúnarson (Eil Þdr), or what is preserved of that poem, cited as a block (SnE 1998, I, 25-30). Two additional stanzas, also ascribed to Eilífr, are cited elsewhere in Skm as single stanzas, one relating the fight with red-hot iron (Þdr 17; Skm st. 53), while the second (Þdr 22; Skm st. 44) is a stef that praises the courage of Þórr and Þjálfi during their fight against the giants. The poem relates Þórr’s journey into the realm of the giants to meet Geirrøðr, and the difficult crossing of a powerful river, stirred up by female mythical beings who later try to crush Þórr inside a cave. It ends with a fierce fight between Þórr and Geirrøðr, both using red-hot pieces of iron as weapons, during which Geirrøðr and other giants are killed (for a detailed discussion of the content of this poem, see Introduction to Eil Þdr in the present volume).

The prose account that precedes the poem (SnE 1998, I, 24-5) gives the reason for Þórr’s journey; Loki had been taken prisoner by Geirrøðr and obliged to bring Þórr into the giant’s territory without his usual weapons, the hammer Mjǫllnir and his girdle of strength. As a replacement for these weapons, a sorceress called Gríðr provides Þórr with several magic objects: a staff, a girdle of strength and iron gloves. Accompanied by Loki, Þórr crosses the river Vimur which is swollen with fluids from the urinating giantess Gjálp, one of Geirrøðr’s daughters. Here Snorri cites a stanza in ljóðaháttr (Skm st. 72), possibly from an eddic version of the myth, in which Þórr threatens the river Vimur. In the realm of Geirrøðr Þórr’s next encounter with the daughters of Geirrøðr takes place in a goat house where Þórr, sitting on a stool, is pressed up against the roof by the giantesses. With the help of Gríðr’s staff he breaks their backs. The end of the prose narrative describes the fight between Þórr and Geirrøðr and the latter’s death.

There are considerable discrepancies between the prose account and the story related in Þdr. In the poem Þórr’s companion is his servant Þjálfi (Loki is only enticing him into undertaking the dangerous journey), but in the prose it seems to be Loki who is crossing the river with Þórr; in the prose there is only one giantess, Gjálp, who causes the river to swell, whereas, in the poem, there seem to be two or more giantesses. The prose describes how Þórr stems the river by throwing a stone at the giantess; in the poem it is not clear how he defeats the river. According to Þdr, the encounter with the two giantesses does not take place in the goat house, as in the prose, but in a cave, and, moreover, Þórr does not use the staff against the giantesses; rather, the god of thunder defends himself with bolts of lightning that cause a rockslide and breaks the giantesses’ backs. Snorri’s prose version in Skm differs so much from that of Þdr that it must have been based on an additional source or sources. Judging from the ljóðaháttr stanza cited in Skm about Þórr’s crossing of the river Vimur, the source in question could have been an eddic poem.

The first myth that Bragi tells at the beginning of his conversation with Ægir in Skm is about the giant Þjazi (SnE 1998, I, 1-2), and the content of the prose narrative and the stanzas, which are cited later (sts 1-13 of Þjóð Haustl; SnE 1998, I, 30-3), is very similar. The story is about a meeting of the three gods Óðinn, Loki and Hœnir and the giant Þjazi transformed into an eagle (for this story, see Introduction to Þjóð Haustl and Notes to the individual stanzas). The Æsir are attempting to cook an ox, and the giant, perched in eagle-shape on a branch of a tall tree nearby, demands to share their meal. Loki gets angry and hits the eagle with a rod which sticks to the eagle and to Loki’s hands. The eagle flies off dragging Loki across the ground; he only gets free by promising to bring Iðunn to the realm of the giants. The Æsir – turning old and grey because of the loss of Iðunn and her rejuvenating apples – force Loki to bring her back, and Loki succeeds, flying in the shape of a falcon and carrying Iðunn back to Ásgarðr. Þjazi pursues him in eagle-shape, but his feathers are ignited by a fire set by the Æsir and he burns up and dies as he enters Ásgarðr. The poetic account ends at this point, but the prose narrative continues with Þjazi’s daughter, Skaði, demanding compensation for the death of her father, her choice of the wrong god as husband owing to mistaken identity, and a crude but hilarious trick played by Loki to make her laugh. Unlike the myths of Hrungnir and Geirrøðr in which the stanzas from Haustl and Þdr follow directly after the prose accounts, the stanzas from Haustl about Þjazi are cited later in Skm to explain kennings for the goddess Iðunn.

2. Citations of single stanzas dealing with mythological scenes and events

While the name of the poem is always given in Skm when a whole poem or parts of it are cited, this is very seldom the case with single stanzas (aside from Anon Eirm 1^I; Skm st. 20 and Sveinn Norðrdr 2; Skm st. 137); normally only the name of the poet is given, or no name at all. As with the poems or parts of poems, single stanzas referring to myths about Þórr predominate. The myths commemorated in single stanzas are summarised below.

The most popular myth is the story about Þórr’s fishing for Miðgarðsormr. Fifteen single stanzas and fragments referring to this myth are handed down in Skm. All of them are cited in various places in Skm, and eleven of them are cited to illustrate kennings for Þórr. They all appear to be fragments of longer poems about Þórr’s fishing, a myth which is also very often attested on picture stones (Altuna, Uppland, eleventh century; Ardre VIII, Gotland, eighth century; Hørdum, Jutland, eight-eleventh century; Gosforth, Cumbria c. 1000; for an overview see Brøndsted 1955; Fuglesang 2007). Fragments consisting of more than one stanza are ascribed to the following poets: Bragi Boddason (Bragi Þórr 1-6; Skm sts 24, 42, 48, 51, 153, 366; in earlier editions edited as part of Rdr, see Introduction to Bragi Þórr); Úlfr Uggason (ÚlfrU Húsdr 3-6; Skm sts 54-6, 316); Eysteinn Valdason (EVald Þórr 1-3; Skm sts 45-7); Ǫlvir hnúfa (Ǫlv Þórr 1; Skm st. 43); Gamli gnævaðarskáld (Ggnæv Þórr 1; Skm st. 49). On the whole there are no differences in the depiction of the myth. A central motif seems to be that Þórr and Miðgarðsormr are staring at one another (Bragi, Úlfr Uggason, Eysteinn Valdason). The cutting of the fishing line is only mentioned in Bragi’s stanzas, but in Húsdr it can be inferred from the context – the giant’s fear and his punishment by Þórr’s powerful blow. In Gylf the fictive narrator, Hár, explains that some people believe that Þórr killed Miðgarðsormr on this occasion, but he tells Gylfi that the monstrous serpent is still alive and lies in the sea. There is no stanza in Skm relating that the serpent survived. Two stanzas explicitly depict the killing of Miðgarðsormr by a blow from Þórr’s hammer (Húsdr, Ggnæv Þórr), and in Bragi’s and Eysteinn Valdason’s stanzas the end of the myth is not extant.

Two stanzas by Þorbjǫrn dísarskáld (Þdís Þórr 2; Skm st. 58) and Vetrliði Sumarliðason (Vetrl Lv; Skm st. 57) are of special interest. They take the form of hymns, addressing Þórr directly in the second person and praising his successful fights with giants and giantesses. A single stanza by Bragi (Bragi Frag 3; Skm st. 52) also addresses Þórr in the second person as ‘cleaver asunder of the nine heads of Þrívaldi <giant> [= Þórr]’.

Single stanzas about Óðinn present him inter alia as the procurer of the mead of poetry. Although there is a multitude of kennings referring to the myth related at the beginning of Skm about how Óðinn brought the mead of poetry back to Ásgarðr (SnE 1998, I, 3-5), single stanzas narrating this myth are very rare, and there is only one stanza (Eyv Hál 1^I; Skm st. 23) about Óðinn’s flight, in the shape of an eagle, out of the giants’ realm with the mead of poetry. Another aspect of this myth is the conferment of poetic skill on men, and this is illustrated by two stanzas from Egill Skallagrímsson’s Sonatorrek (Egill St 23-4^V (Eg 94-5); Skm sts 15-16).

Some stanzas deal with the relation between Óðinn and the dead. Two citations from Hákonarmál and Eiríksmál (Eyv Hák 14^I, Anon Eirm 1^I; Skm sts 11, 20) testify to the glorious receptions that the dead kings, Hákon góði and Eiríkr blóðøx, receive in Valhǫll after they have fallen in battle. A stanza by Þorbjǫrn hornklofi (Þhorn Harkv 12^I, Skm st. 9) is more menacing: ‘The slain lay there on the sand, dedicated to the one-eyed embrace-occupier of Frigg <goddess> [= Óðinn]’. The role of the valkyries in choosing which warriors should go to Óðinn and live in Valhǫll is attested by the first stanza of Eyvindr skáldaspillir’s Hákonarmál (Eyv Hák 1^I; Skm st. 7). Although the names of many valkyries are used in kennings, e.g. for ‘battle’ or ‘weapon’, there are few stanzas that describe their mythological functions. In Úlfr Uggason’s Húsdrápa 10 (ÚlfrU Húsdr 10; Skm st. 14) they accompany Óðinn on their way to the sylgs heilags tafns ‘the drink of the holy sacrifice’ at Baldr’s funeral. Stanzas 7-11 of Húsdrápa (Skm sts 24, 8, 19, 63) about Baldr’s funeral also depict a procession of the gods characterised by their attributes. Only one stanza about the funeral ritual itself is extant (see Notes to ÚlfrU Húsdr 11).

Although the content of some stanzas of Kormákr Ǫgmundarson’s Sigurðardrápa (KormǪ Sigdr 3-7) is not mythological, they use the verse-form hjástælt ‘abutted’ (see SnSt Ht 13 and Notes there) which makes it possible to juxtapose the human, historical level with mythological scenes (see Introduction to KormǪ Sigdr). In ll. 4 and 8 metrical positions 2-6 are occupied by an independent clause (stál ‘insertion’) which contains a short mythological saying. Some of these sayings refer to mythical events that are not attested in other stanzas of Skm, such as Yggr (Óðinn) winning the giantess Rindr through sorcery (KormǪ Sigdr 3; Skm sts 12, 308), Þórr sitting in his chariot (KormǪ Sigdr 5; Skm st. 301), Urðr, one of the norns, going to the well (KormǪ Sigdr 4; Skm st. 241), and Hroptr (Óðinn) advancing with the spear Gungnir. In comparison, the saying ‘the gods deceived Þjazi’ (KormǪ Sigdr 6/4; the stanza is not preserved in Skm) is well known from the narrative at the beginning of Skm (SnE 1998, I, 1-2) and the citation of the corresponding part of Haustl.

A last small group of stanzas concerns natural phenomena such as the sea, waves or storms represented as mythic personifications. The nine daughters of Ægir, the waves, stir up the sea, hostile to men, at the edge of the earth (Snæbj Lv 1; Skm st. 133) and Rán, wife of Ægir, appears as a ship-devouring monster (Refr Ferðv 2-3; Skm sts 126-7).

Finally, the stanzas from Hfr Hákdr 5-8 (Skm sts 10, 121, 118, 291, 119) depict the conquest of Norway by Hákon jarl using metaphorical imagery which could derive from ideas based on what has been called hieros gamos ‘holy marriage’ between a ruler and his land. Some researchers have speculated that these metaphors are rooted in an ancient ritual (Ström 1981; 1983; Steinsland 1991; Maier 1999; Sundqvist 2005a), but these theories are much disputed (see Introduction to Hfr Hákdr).

3. Mythological narratives used to explain certain kennings

There are some shorter accounts of myths which are given to explain certain kennings. In the context of kennings for Heimdallr, for example, an obscure myth is told about this god; Snorri (SnE 1998, I, 19) says that he was lostinn manns hǫfði í gǫgnum ‘he was hit (or pierced) by a man’s head’ to explain the kenning ‘Heimdallr’s head [SWORD]’, but it is unclear whether this refers to a now lost myth, or whether it represents Snorri’s own attempt to explain a kenning that was no longer understood (for an interpretative attempt see Cöllen 2007, 264-5).

The kenning ‘fire of Ægir [GOLD]’ gives rise to an account of the gods’ invitation to a feast by the sea-giant Ægir and a description of his hall, where gold was used for lighting instead of fire (SnE 1998, I, 41; Clunies Ross 1987, 143-50). Snorri completes this story with a short comment likely derived from the eddic poem Lokasenna (Lok), to the effect that during this visit Loki quarrelled with all the gods and killed one of Ægir’s servants. Yet Snorri does not mention that, in the end, Þórr arrives and chases him away, threatening him with his hammer. Missing is also the end of this story, related in a prose epilogue to Lok, according to which Loki is captured by the gods as he tries to hide in the shape of a salmon and is subsequently fettered; in Gylf this story is linked to Loki’s punishment for his role in the killing of Baldr. The reduction of the story in Skm to a brief mention of Ægir’s feast must have been caused by Snorri’s intention to explain the gold-kenning eldr Ægis ‘fire of Ægir’. Otherwise, there is little evidence that the story of Loki’s disruption of the gods’ feast can be regarded as a myth (for its possible derivation from an Indo-European myth about the drink of immortality, see Dumézil 1924, 56-8).

The kenning ‘hair of Sif [GOLD]’ leads to an account about the various attributes of the gods (SnE 1998, I, 41-2). Initially it is told that Loki had all the hair of the goddess Sif cut off, but was forced by Þórr, Sif’s husband’, to compensate her for this loss. Loki induces the dwarf Brokkr to make a wig of gold with hair that grew like human hair, and he also makes other things for the gods, such as Freyr’s magic ship Skíðblaðnir and Óðinn’s spear Gungnir. This narrative is extended to an account of a competition between Brokkr and his brother Eitri, arranged by Loki, as a result of which Eitri makes Óðinn’s magic ring Draupnir, the boar Gullinbursti, which was given to Freyr, and Þórr’s hammer Mjǫllnir.

The third part of SnE, Háttatal (Ht), is a praise poem of 102 stanzas by Snorri honouring the Norwegian king Hákon Hákonarson and Skúli jarl Bárðarson. The prose commentary accompanying that poem in SnE is devoted to metrics alone; there are no explanations of any mythological material. With three exceptions all stanzas in this part of SnE were composed by Snorri himself (see Introduction to SnSt Ht). These three stanzas do not contain any mythological material, and Ht does not contain any stanzas relating mythological events, but Snorri does employ mythological kennings in this poem. These kennings mostly follow conventional kenning patterns, such as ‘wife of Óðinn [= Jǫrð (jǫrð ‘land’)]’ (Ht 3) or warrior- or man-kennings with the name of a god as the base-word, such as ‘helmet-Týr [WARRIOR]’ (Ht 35), ‘wealth-Týr [MAN]’ (Ht 48), ‘battle-Nirðir [WARRIORS]’ (Ht 55) and ‘Gautr <= Óðinn> of the shower of swords [BATTLE > WARRIOR]’ (ibid.). The myth of the mead of poetry is used in the kennings of Ht 3 and Þórr’s fight with the giant Hrungnir is the basis for a shield-kenning in Ht 30. Ht 7 contains the only known occurrence of the kenning type ‘Heimdallr’s head [SWORD]’ in a poetic context; otherwise this kenning pattern is only mentioned in the prose of Skm (SnE 1998, I, 19; see above).

To sum up: SnE is a unique source of information about the pagan mythology of Scandinavia. Its source value, however, has been evaluated variously by scholars. A rather negative opinion can be found in the works of Mogk (1923; 1932) and his followers, the so-called Mythographenschule ‘school of mythographers’, who considered everything not documented in the stanzas and poems themselves as inventions based on Wandersagen ‘migratory tales’ and folktales. At the other end of the scale there is e.g. Dumézil (1948; 1959) who was convinced of the authenticity of the myths told in SnE and adduced Indo-European parallels. This view has also elicited criticism (e.g. Harris 1976; Haugen 1967). More balanced views can be found e.g. in Faulkes (1983 and SnE 2005, xxvii-xxviii); Weber (1986a, 408-11).

An assessment of the source value of SnE must first of all acknowledge the different character and function of the main parts of this work. Ht is a thirteenth-century praise poem with a purely metrical commentary, and this poem’s use of traditional mythical kennings does not contribute much to our knowledge of pagan myth and religion. The Prologue and Gylf present the origin of pagan religion based on medieval theories, but these two parts of SnE also contain an abundance of pagan myths. Yet Snorri must have selected these myths with a special intention in mind, and he may also have adjusted them to fit his purposes. Used with these caveats in mind, both the Prologue and Gylf are important sources of information about pagan myth and religion, in particular about pagan cosmology.

Skm, with its wealth of stanzas with mythological content and its collection and systematisation of kennings and heiti for mythological persons or things, is extremely important as a source in this respect. However, a look at the prose narratives connected with poems or parts of poems or kennings cited, reveals that there are sometimes clear discrepancies between poetry and prose. Differences in terms of content show that Snorri must have used other sources than the poems cited (cf. Eil Þdr), that he deliberately altered a narrative and that he combined motifs according to traditional story-patterns (cf. Clunies Ross and Martin 1986). If the prose narrative contains information that goes far beyond the content of the stanzas, the question arises whether Snorri related a myth which at an earlier point in the transmission had combined several motifs or whether he himself was responsible for the hybrid version found in the prose of Skm. The reason for these differences in length and content could also be that the poems concentrated on the narrative high points of a myth. That the combination of two or more myths was possible is shown by the eddic poem Hymiskviða (Hym) which combined the myth of the acquisition of a large vessel for a feast of the gods with Þórr’s fishing for Miðgarðsormr, while at the same time alluding to the resuscitation of Þórr’s goats. However, the lack of other sources for these mythological narratives makes it impossible to decide whether a long narrative in Skm reflects actual mythical tradition or whether it was a new version created by Snorri himself from several mythical stories known to him (on the possible sources for the prose narratives, see SnE 1998, I, xxii-xxv). Another factor that could have distorted the myths as they are told in the prose of Skm could be that Snorri, or someone before him, misunderstood mythological kennings and created new mythical environments for them (see Frank 1981).

To conclude: SnE is a unique and valuable source of information about pagan myth and religion, but one must take into account that it is not an immediate source; rather, this work presents pagan religion as interpreted and organised by a learned thirteenth-century Icelander whose aim it was to preserve this knowledge for further generations of poets. In the words of Snorri himself (SnE 1998, I, 5): En þetta er nú at segja ungum skáldum þeim er girnask at nema mál skáldskapar ok heyja sér orðfjǫlða með fornum heitum eða girnask þeir at kunna skilja þat er hulið er kveðit: þá skili hann þessa bók til fróðleiks ok skemtunar ‘And now I say this to those young poets who are eager to learn the diction of poetry and increase their vocabulary with ancient heiti or are eager to be able to understand that which is composed obscurely: let him then take this book for his knowledge and entertainment’.

References

7. Poetic Diction

9. Normalisation and Dates of Composition

Cookies on our website

8. Snorra Edda as a Source of Mythology

References

Log in