Talk:Old Norse religion/Archive 1

pápiska
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:82.120.65.19 versus P . M a c U i d h i r
This article should not be called "Norse paganism," but Åsatru, the correct Norwegian/Icelandic name for the faith.

- anoymous user editing from IP: User:82.120.65.19


 * 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.


 * http://nn.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85satru
 *  P . Mac Uidhir  (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:82.120.65.19


 * 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 . Mac Uidhir  (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:82.120.65.19


 * 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 . Mac Uidhir  (t)  (c)  01:00, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

82.120.65.19, 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 (&#5839;) 09:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Merge 2006
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.

24.250.119.145 23:37, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup
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 (&#5839;) 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. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.250.119.145 (talk &bull; 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 (&#5839;) 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 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 . Mac Uidhir  (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 . Mac Uidhir  (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. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.250.119.145 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Sources?
"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?

Bill

June 18, 2007

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.98.127.84 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Recent Changes
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
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 Media copyright questions. --15:15, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Yule log
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 4.154.251.21 (talk) 02:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Days of the week
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 85.220.30.64 (talk) 00:30, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Norse polytheism or Norse paganism

 * 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 Naming conventions

Google: Google scholar Google books
 * about 10,700 English pages for "Norse paganism" -wikipedia
 * about 454 English pages for "Norse polytheism" -wikipedia
 * about 35 for "Norse paganism"
 * "Norse polytheism" - did not match any articles
 * 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. --PBS 09:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with your move as per my note at Talk:Germanic_paganism. 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 82.182.142.44 (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. 64.56.156.66 (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

shouldn' the title be Norse Mythology?
? -- 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 68.224.119.231 (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)

Move? 2013

 * 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. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 11:04, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Norse religion → Norse paganism – Harmonization with Germanic paganism, its superset. Article editor (talk) 03:44, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * But see the next section above (Talk:Norse religion): a discussed move the other way successful at 00:14, 21 February 2012. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:24, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose per, this should never have been a speedy request, considering the existing discussion, and this is the direct opposite of it; and there is no reasoning provided that overrides what was discussed previously -- 76.65.131.217 (talk) 03:56, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose NPOV. Is there a particular reason why the other article isn't at Germanic religion? Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 13:20, 11 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
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
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)


 * Hi. I don't know why, but your "poke" escaped my attention. And now it's two more years :) Anyway, I have addressed the problems about space and time further down below, because this religion has a real name, and that name is Asatru. It is also mentioned in the Sagas so the name is not a modern invention.
 * I am totally with you regarding the ancient origins of this particular religion, including the fact that the original practises and most of the ceremonies are lost because the ancient Norse didn't cared to write them down. And this can be a problem, if modern "practisioners" wants to authentisize their own way of practising Asatru (ie. Norse religion). However, I was mostly concerned with what came before the Vikings and the Viking Age. Archaeological evidence has shown us that Asatru was also practised in the Nordic Iron Age, prior to the Vikings. So stating the Asatru pertains specifically to the Viking Age is wrong. Some of the Gods of the Norse pantheon were even worshipped in the Nordic Bronze Age (click and read) as well! That was my main concern. And I think I am going to remove this piece from the lede now. RhinoMind (talk) 15:59, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * PS. I would like to drop a more detailed and personal comment as well. The Norse Gods are not of the "mind-controlling" type that we see from the Catholic and Islamic God for example. The Norse Gods are more like "powers of nature" or "powers within" that humans can choose to tap into when needed. This concept is also well-known from the animistic religions across the world. In this light we cannot say that Norse religion is this or that, if it is brutal, peaceful, good, evil, etc. Because it doesn't stick to such a one-dimensional framework. If you want or need to go to war, then yes you can emphasize Odin and Thor and the more brutal aspects, but in other circumstances you would like the fields to be plentiful, your hunt to be succesful, your family and friends to be healthy, have luck in love and so on. and then you focus your attention on other Gods. That's why there are so many. RhinoMind (talk) 16:34, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Always Getting Ahead of Myself
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)

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

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


 * Ibn Fadlan met a group of Rus that lived in modern day Russia or Ukraine. We don't know how much these people had changed their culture since leaving Sweden. After all they must have mixed with locals, so we cannot trust the details.
 * The Tollund Man died in the Bronze age, but according to many historians the Indoeuropeans didn't arrive until the iron age. In other words his killers didn't follow the Asatru
 * Some of the other sources are christian missionaries, so they may not be trustworthy
 * In comparison the Danish national museum focuses on a few sceletons found in Trelleborg. http://en.natmus.dk/historical-knowledge/denmark/prehistoric-period-until-1050-ad/the-viking-age/religion-magic-death-and-rituals/human-sacrifices/

(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)