Honest question: how much of what modern heathens believe is actually accurate to what Viking age norsemen believed? I'm not as educated about this as I'd like to be, but doesn't most of the source material we use come from after the christianization of those countries? So how much can we really know about what an average farmer or warrior from that period really believed or practiced?
Easy and oversimplified answer:
First off, I’m not a practising neopagan, so I don’t want to put words in anyone’s mouth. But from what I’ve seen, modern heathenry is not any more “historically accurate” as religions in general, if such a thing can even be measured.
It’s a religion strongly based on literature studies and modern/romanticist interpretations. It’s based on several layers of modern influences: the European romantic esoteric rune-craze, other new age religions, centuries of literary history and interpretations of post-conversion text sources. The Eddas certainly are medieval, from the 1200s, and not contemporary Viking texts.
Nordic archaeology tries to study the actual pre-christian “everyday culture” and religious practices, basing its picture of viking religion, among other things, more on physical non-literature sources. The archaeological field of study was, too, long hindered by romanticism, race studies and poorly founded guesswork theories that are now proving untrue with new testing methods.
That’s science, it’s a constant progress and theories evolve and are proven untrue. But it takes time, because we’re all human, trying to solve the tangles in this mess we’ve created and call “history”.
A bit more in-depth thought excercise:
What would you say if you dug open a viking woman’s grave in Birka/Björkö and found as grave goods an amethyst ring with “God”, Allah, engraved on the stone in Arabic? One like this:
(Photo courtesy of Stockholm’s Historical Museum)
Is it a weird thing to find? Not really.
We know that the Viking Eastern trade route extended all the way to the Caspian Sea. Vikings and medieval muslim traders have told us this. Maybe the ring was simply jewelry she didn’t think much of, possibly bought somewhere in Karelia from a Slavic trader. Just a way to show off her wealth?
Then again, we know from Arabic sources that at the time such rings were common gifts from muslim merchant men to women. Maybe the Swedish Viking womanhad been to Bagdad herself. Perhaps she knew of Islam. Maybe she received the ring from someone, either for being a good business associate or as a token of personal admiration. And then she got back home?
This is all speculation. We don’t know who she was, how the ring got to Sweden, or who gave it to her and why. We only know that it was there and so was she, laid to the grave in Birka, somewhere between years 800-1000. And so even archaeology is biased by the very nature of us humans and our existence in time.
A bit more speculative and personal answer:
I just realised what bothers me with these questions. Not you, and not that someone asks, but just that the question itself skirts around the answer I feel is best. This is a quote from a pop history youtube series hosted by John Green. Bear with me, it’s a good summary of my following rambles:
When I was eleven - - my dad made my brother and I turn off the Cosby show and watch people climbing on the Berlin Wall so we could “see history”. But no one, like, woke up their kids in a Tuscan village in 1512 like “MARIO, LUIGI, come outside, the RENAISSANCE is here!” (The Renaissance: Was it a Thing? - Crash Course World History #22)
I don’t think there is a border between what was “authentically Viking” and what was “tainted by Christianity”. There’s no magical switch or event horizon we could find when the first Viking abandoned all of his vikingness and then everything around him was Not Viking anymore.
There were “true pagan Vikings” who practised their family pagan ways with fully pagan intentions, while their beliefs were already influenced by christianity. There were also centuries’ worth of baptised christian Nordic people, who definitely practised their religion in very very pagan ways. Can we say either were “untrue” in living their lives?
They were people. They liked having tidy hair. Here’s a comb from Birka just to break the wall of text:
I’m also 100% sure that American neopaganism in all its forms is very different from Nordic neopaganism. Religion in general is so much more visible in the US culture than it is in the Nordic countries.
I think it might sometimes make the US interpretation of neopaganism too… big? Too thorough?
I feel like some American people, no matter how much they like the idea of paganism, still see nature-bound gods through a biblical filter. That the gods are omniscient, deeply invested in you, and all-commanding in society and personal life.
Nature deities, in a sense of historical paganism, don’t require all people of the world to believe in them to exist. They’re natural phenomena. And they sure as hell wouldn’t be interested in whether you wank in the woods with a man or a woman or by yourself. Frankly, my dear, they don’t give a damn. (Your neighbours might care, though, if you wank in their woods.)
The thunder won’t stop even if you don’t really believe that Thor will walk through your door tomorrow. Gods didn’t really care for you specifically from all the people on the earth (apart from few saga-worthy exceptions). That’s why you’d offer and pray - so this once they might notice you from the crowd.
Thunder will come, whether you prayed or not. But it’s hard to say what that thunder really meant to a Viking lady in the South-Swedish town of Birka around year 900, with her amethyst ring that reads “Allah”.