Forum

Members I came acrros a good Blog about Norse Mythology and Nazi. NOTE: This is shared cause we want to make members understand that Norse Mythology have nothing to do with Nazi! Link to Blog: https://jasondarensburg.wordpress.com/2015/07/10/norse-mythology-and-the-nazis/ Introduction After the carnage of World War II, Norse mythology became closely associated with Nazism: misinterpreted as malignant and rendered taboo for decades to come. Nazi Germany’s strong connection to Norse mythology is largely responsible for its negative reputation. The horrible atrocities committed by the Nazi regime forever tarnished the study of the Norse myths, causing them to become disregarded, even up to the present day. As a result, those who might have otherwise been interested in the incredible Viking myths and sagas avoided them for fear of being labeled a Nazi sympathizer. This is a tragedy, since Norse mythology does not in any way espouse or encourage Nazi ideology. Because of its misuse by some factions within the party hierarchy, Norse myths have been unfairly maligned as an integral part of Nazi ideology. Part I Narratives played a pivotal role in Viking society, as they do in every culture. Myths about the Norse Gods helped the disparate tribes shape the legends about their history. This is particularly true in regards to their heroes. The various competing templates presented in the myths allowed the Norse people to relate the Gods’ own conflicted personalities to the struggles encountered in their everyday lives. Norse mythology offered these rugged individuals a way to reflect on the nature of reality and provided them with examples of how to deal with life’s problems. With the advent of Christianity in Europe, Norse mythology largely faded into obscurity. The practice of paganism had several disadvantages in the face of Christian teachings. For one thing, paganism wasn’t an organized religion as such; it was more a conduit for transmitting traditions and moral lessons from one generation to the next. Another compelling reason for the Vikings’ reluctant conversion to Christianity was for economic and political gain. The raids on the Frankish kingdoms and the British Isles brought increased contact with Christianity. Although the Vikings maintained their beliefs throughout their raiding period, there was considerable pressure on them to convert if they sought more peaceful relations with the Christians. With the monotheistic focus of Christianity, there suddenly was no more room for the Norse Gods in the everyday lives of most people. Eventually, the myths became a relic of the past; a simple set of folktales once believed by uncivilized heathens. Following Germany’s humiliating defeat in World War I and with the signing of the Versailles Treaty, Norse mythology once again became a topic of interest for the country’s disinherited youth. Patriotic Germans sought to revitalize their culture by re-exploring their mythic “roots” in order to boost nationalism. Adolf Hitler was swept into power in 1933 on a wave of nationalistic fervor. The symbol for the National Socialist Party was the swastika. The swastika is an ancient symbol, dating back 3,000 years. The symbol can be found in many cultures around the world, including in China, Japan, India, Europe, and native North American cultures. The word “swastika” comes from the Sanskrit “svastika.” Until the Nazis stole it, the swastika was used to represent life, sun, power, strength, and good luck. In Norse mythology, the Swastika represented Thor’s hammer spinning. The ‘Black Sun’ (sonnenschwartz) is also derived from this symbol. Part II To counter the feelings of impotence and the stigma of defeat in the war, German nationalists began using the swastika as the party’s symbol because it had ancient Aryan/Indian origins which represented a long Germanic history. Soon, the swastika could be found on nationalist German ‘volkisch’ periodicals such as Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels’ anti-semitic publication Ostara and a multitude of other places, including the emblem for the German youth movement Wandervogel; on various Freikorps units; and as an emblem of the esoteric Thule Society. In 1920, Adolf Hitler adopted the swastika as the official symbol of the Nazi Party. Hitler’s Deputy Heinrich Himmler was a chief proponent of the Aryan myths. Many of Himmler’s attempts at revival were deeply entrenched in some form of Norse mythology. Wewelsburg Castle, the S.S. (Schutzstaffel), and the Ahnenerbe are three especially prolific examples of the way in which Himmler wove Norse mythology into mainstream Nazism. Himmler envisioned that his knightly order, the S.S., would need an appropriate base of operations like the Knights of the Round Table from Arthurian legends, Beowulf, and King Hrolf’s Champions. Karl Maria Wiligut, an S.S. member known as “Himmler’s Rasputin,” brought Wewelsburg Castle to Himmler’s attention. The four-hundred-year-old fortress was located on the site where the battle of Teutoburg Forest had supposedly taken place. This was symbolically important to Himmler because it was where the German chieftain Hermann led his forces to victory against a far greater Roman army in 9 AD. The victory had a far-reaching effect on the nation’s psyche, because it marked the final advance of the Roman Empire onto German soil. After an investment of almost 300 million Reich-marks and the utilization of slave labor to remodel the facility, Wewelsburg Castle was converted into a ritual space with specially designed rooms for the practice of paganism. The basement was remodeled to commemorate deceased S.S. heroes, and it was here that Himmler planned to be interred. The area was dedicated to Heinrich I, a Germanic king from the Viking age whom Himmler believed himself to be the reincarnation of. On the ground floor were twelve rooms for each member of the Inner Twelve, which Himmler had decorated according to different ancient Norse figures. The Black Sun symbol decorated the floor of the main room, and the dining hall held a large table where rituals could be performed. This is reminiscent of Hrothgar’s Heorot. The activities in the castle included weddings and christenings of Lebensborn for elite S.S. members. Some scholars have even claimed that men were beheaded and their blood drunk as part of rituals. True or not, this correlates with the enduring Nordic motif of drinking blood and eating body parts to gain preternatural wisdom. Part III Heinrich Himmler had the power to create government bureaucracies, and one of the departments he devised was the Ahnenerbe, also known as the “Ancestral Heritage Research and Teaching Organization.”It started out in 1935 as a small organization with the purpose of examining the heritage of the German people and educating them about the superiority of the Aryan race. Over time, the Ahnenerbe evolved to encompass several departments with an annual budget of more than a million Reich-marks. The organization allowed Himmler to pursue his mystical obsessions in a scholarly manner while the Nazis took control of German academia. Although the Ahnenerbe did conduct some legitimate research, it had a poor scholarly reputation. Many of the so-called scholars derived their conclusions from occultist beliefs. Ernst Schafer, the famous Nazi explorer, led three expeditions to Tibet, believing that the region had been home to the Aryan race. According to influential occult groups such as the Thule Society, the Aryans were descended from the survivors of Atlantis who lived in an underground world ruled by priests. Particular attention was paid to the runes of Germanic lore, which the Ahnenerbe believed held special significance if they could be interpreted correctly. Runes found in the Middle East convinced the Nazis that the Vikings had been in the region at some point, advancing their theory that the Aryans were the master race. In addition to the power of runes, they also believed that ancient artifacts like the Holy Lance and the Crown Jewels possessed mystical powers. The Nazis’ interest in the mystical powers of runes was encouraged by influential social elites such as Guido von List, known among occult circles as a ‘runic revivalist.’ Later, Karl Willigut was responsible for their proliferation during the Third Reich. Willigut traced his own ancestry back to the ancient god, Wotan, the Germanic counterpart to Odin. Himmler believed that knowledge of runes would give him Odin’s wisdom. The Ahnenerbe also believed that by measuring ancient monuments, they could uncover sacred geometry. In the ancient world, certain numbers and shapes had symbolic meaning, so a religious significance was applied to the figures. The Ahnenerbe scholars believed that by researching their mythical heritage and uncovering its secrets, it would be possible to re-energize modern society with the völkische of old. Norse paganism was so firmly entrenched in the Ahnenerbe that it arguably became the embodiment of a Nazi religion, called the “German-Christian movement” by historians. Some scholars claim that the activities of the Ahnenerbe serve as the best evidence that the Nazis should be considered a full-blown religious cult. The Ahnenerbe was not the only branch of government to be intimately linked with Norse paganism, however. The infamous S.S., also headed by Himmler, embraced many pagan influences. Himmler wanted the S.S. to resemble a Nordic knightly order, so he made the thunderbolt its symbol, inspired by the Norse God, Thor. At official gatherings, the swastika was often flanked by the Norse ‘Leben’ rune, the symbol of life. When turned upside down it implied death, and it was often used on the graves of fallen S.S. troops, replacing the cross as S.S. ideology rejected the Christian religion. Himmler actively endeavored to make the S.S. pagan and even based the structure of the group on the Order of Jesuits, albeit with Nordic elements. He encouraged his men to break ties with the Christian church and subscribe to pagan rituals instead. Even though most of the Nazi hierarchy claimed to be Roman Catholic, there is ample evidence to support the theory that this was simply a public front used to hide the fact that they were practicing pagans. Conclusion Norse mythology suffered an enormous blow to its reputation because of its close association with Nazism. After the fall of Nazi Germany, Norse mythology became a taboo subject and was avoided in academia for many years. Due to the fear of being labeled a Nazi sympathizer, scholarly research stagnated; Norse archeological expeditions were de-funded, and Viking mythology gained a negative reputation that it still has not completely overcome. The public’s perception of Norse mythology has also suffered greatly. Even though the Norse myths are totally harmless and simply had the misfortune of being bastardized by the Nazis, most people still associated Viking mythology with Nazism and racism, and while its reputation has improved over the years, the association still stubbornly remains. The bad reputation is certainly not helped any by present-day neo-Nazis. Although most followers of Norse mythology are well-intentioned, there are some who practice pagan religions with anti-Semitic overtones who identify themselves with neo-Nazi or Satanist groups. Norse mythology’s erroneous connection to White Supremacists and Nazism is further encouraged by those who flaunt the Nazis’ association to the myths by gathering at sites of neo-pagan importance to pay respect to Hitler and his minions. A large percentage of Wewelsburg Castle’s visitors are actually Neo-Nazis, visiting to honor Hitler and to perform religious rites at what was meant to be a pagan utopia. All things considered, it is only natural that Norse mythology ended up with the reputation that it did. Considering Himmler’s obsession with the myths, the heroic sagas were naturally intertwined with many prominent aspects of Nazi society. Norse mythology’s influence on academics in the Ahnenerbe meant it severely distorted legitimate research, earning the scorn of academics later. Additionally, its connection to the notorious S.S. meant that the reputation of Norse mythology was forever tainted in the eyes of the general public. Even after the fall of the Third Reich, undeniable proof of a connection to Norse mythology still lived on in the form of Wewelsburg Castle: a timeless memorial, and a monument to Nazi ideology. Wewlsburg Castle, the Ahnenerbe, and the Schutzstaffel cemented the connection between Norse mythology and Nazism in the public’s mind. It stands to reason that Viking mythology would become a taboo subject as a result, with those who might have otherwise been interested in the myths avoiding them for fear of being labeled a Neo-Nazi. This is a truly lamentable state of affairs. Works Cited Arvidsson, Stefan. Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as Ideology and Science. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 2006. Epstein, Fritz. “War-Time Activities of the SS-Ahnenerbe.” On the Track of Terror: Essays Presented by the Weiner Society to Leonard G. Montefiore. 1960. 77-96. Garson, Paul. New Images of Nazi Germany: A photographic Collection. McFarland & Company: North Carolina, 2012. Kirkpatrick, Sidney. Hitler’s Holy Relics: A True Story of Nazi Plunder and the Race to Recover the Crown Jewels of the Holy Roman Empire. Simon & Schuster: New York, 2010. Levenda, Peter. Unholy Alliance: a History of Nazi Involvement with the Occult. Continuum International Publishing Group: New York, 1995. Mees, Bernard. The Science of the Swastika. CEU Press: Budapest, 2008. Sklar, Holly. The Nazis and the Occult. Dorset Press: New York, 1977. Strmiska, Michael. Modern paganism in World Cultures: Comparative Perspective. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2005.

Hnefnatafl –The Viking Board Game This Viking Game must rank as one of history’s great board games. It was at its most popular during the Dark Ages in Northern Europe. This was a period when very few records were kept and when populations were always moving. Like so much of the history of the Dark Ages our knowledge of the Viking Game is patchy. The mystery of the game is now half solved as a result of archaeological research. The game was popular in the Viking homelands in Scandinavia as early as 400 AD and was carried by the Vikings to the lands they conquered. Over the centuries the game developed and different versions of the board have been found by archaeologists in sites from Ireland to the Ukraine. Occasionally referred to in manuscripts the game was known as Hnefatafl which means literally “king’s table”. Its decline began in the 11th century as chess grew in popularity. It soon lingered on only in remote country districts. Hnefatafl was last recorded as being played in Wales in 1587 and in Lappland in 1723.

VIKING KING! OLAV TRYGGVASON Olaf Tryggvason (960s – 9 September 1000) was King of Norway from 995 to 1000. He was the son of Tryggvi Olafsson, king of Viken (Vingulmark, and Rånrike), and, according to later sagas, the great-grandson of Harald Fairhair, first King of Norway. Olaf played an important part in the conversion of the Norse to Christianity, often by forcible means.[2][3][4] He is said to have built the first church in Norway (in 995) and to have founded the city of Trondheim (in 997). A statue of Olaf Tryggvason is located in the city's central plaza. Historical information about Olaf is sparse. He is mentioned in some contemporary English sources,[5]and some skaldic poems. The oldest narrative source mentioning him briefly is Adam of Bremen's Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificum (c. 1070). In the 1190s, two sagas of Olaf Tryggvason were written in Iceland, by Oddr Snorrason and Gunnlaugr Leifsson. Snorri Sturluson gives an extensive account of Olaf in the Heimskringla saga, (c. 1230), using Oddr Snorrason's saga as his main source. The accuracy of these late sources is not taken at face value by modern historians and their validity is a topic of some debate.[6] The following account is mainly based on the late saga sources. Birth and early life[edit] upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Trondheim_-_monument_01.jpg/330px-Trondheim_-_monument_01.jpg 1.5x, //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Trondheim_-_monument_01.jpg/440px-Trondheim_-_monument_01.jpg 2x" alt="" width="220" height="407" /> Statue of Olaf in the city plaza of Trondheim. Between the king's legs lies the head of the slave Kark, Haakon jarl's murderer. There is uncertainty about both the date and the place of Olaf's birth. The earliest Norwegian written source, the late 12th century Historia Norwegiæ, states that Olaf was born in the Orkney Islands after his mother fled there to escape the killers of Olaf's father. Another late 12th-century source, Ágrip af Nóregskonungasögum, says Olaf's mother fled to Orkney with Olaf when he was three years old, for the same reason. All the sagas agree that Olaf eventually ended up in Kievan Rus', at the court of King Valdemar.[7] The version in Heimskringla is the most elaborate, but also the latest, and introduces elements to the story that are not found in earlier sources. It states that Olaf was born shortly after the murder of his father in 963, while other sources suggest a date between 964 and 969. The later dates cast doubt over Olaf's claim to be of Harald Fairhair's kin, and the legitimacy of his claim to the throne. Snorri Sturluson claims in Olaf Tryggvson's saga that Olaf was born on an islet in Fjærlandsvatnet, where his mother Astrid Eiriksdottir, daughter of Eirik Bjodaskalle, was hiding from her husband's killers, led by Harald Greycloak, the son of Eirik Bloodaxe. Greycloak and his brothers had seized the throne from Haakon the Good. Astrid fled to her father's home in Oppland, then went on to Sweden where she thought she and Olaf would be safe. Harald sent emissaries to the king of Sweden, and asked for permission to take the boy back to Norway, where he would be raised by Greycloak's mother Gunhild. The Swedish king gave them men to help them claim the young boy, but to no avail. After a short scuffle Astrid (with her son) fled again. This time their destination was Gardarike (Kiev), where Astrid's brother Sigurd was in the service of King Valdemar (Vladimir I). Olaf was three years old when they set sail on a merchant ship for Novgorod. The journey was not successful: in the Baltic Sea they were captured by Estonian vikings, and the people aboard were either killed or taken as slaves. Olaf became the possession of a man named Klerkon, together with his foster father Thorolf and his son Thorgils. Klerkon considered Thorolf too old to be useful as a slave and killed him, and then sold the two boys to a man named Klerk for a ram. Olaf was then sold to a man called Reas for a fine cloak.[8] Six years later, Sigurd Eirikson traveled to Estonia to collect taxes for King Valdemar. He saw a boy who did not appear to be a native. He asked the boy about his family, and the boy told him he was Olaf, son of Tryggve Olafson and Astrid Eiriksdattir. Sigurd then went to Reas and bought Olaf and Thorgils out from slavery, and took the boys with him to Novgorod to live under the protection of Valdemar. Still according to Heimskringla, one day in the Novgorod marketplace Olaf encountered Klerkon, his enslaver and the murderer of his foster father. Olaf killed Klerkon with an axe blow to the head. A mob followed the young boy as he fled to his protector Queen Allogia, with the intent of killing him for his misdeed. Only after Allogia had paid blood money for Olaf did the mob calm down. As Olaf grew older, Vladimir made him chief over his men-at-arms, but after a couple years the king became wary of Olaf and his popularity with his soldiers. Fearing he might be a threat to the safety of his reign, Vladimir stopped treating Olaf as a friend. Olaf decided that it was better for him to seek his fortune elsewhere, and set out for the Baltic.

CHESS LESSON: SCANDINAVIAN DEFENSE! ICELANDIC GAMBIT I really love this aggressive opening: The Icelandic Gambit is a very aggressive opening from black in the Scandinavian Defense. Black gives up a pawn in material for a big lead in development. White spends the game looking for a way to defend his king while black looks to employ many traps and swarm his opponent. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEeXLjHztJo Top

Hello all Vikings, shieldmaidens, Valkyries, gods, goddesses, (etc.) of Valhalla! I am Brunnhilde, Valhalla's Vote Chess admin, and this is the Vote Chess guidelines forum. If new rules or recommendations for Vote Chess are suggested and they are good I shall update this forum and add them. If you are new, you may be asking: What is Vote Chess and how do I play it? Vote Chess is a type of chess in which two groups/teams play a single game against each other. When it is one team's move, that team discusses ideas in the comments and they vote for moves they like (usually ones they all agree on). For more info on what it is and how it works, click here. Now that the basics have been covered, I shall move on to the overall "mentality" of Valhalla Vote Chess: While we are competitive, we do this to learn and have fun. We don't battle each other - we come together and battle the other group! Vote Chess is thus generally about teamwork. All players participating are equal, though if one person comes up with good moves/a good plan, then the rest of the players can follow his/her lead if they wish. As Vote Chess admin, the only thing that makes me different from the other participants is that I moderate the games. Vote Chess is also about learning. Thus it is recommended that you join our Vote Chess games; you can gain plenty of experience from other players. Don't be afraid to post your insights/ask questions/suggest moves. The more discussion, the better. No matter what sort of player you are, you are welcome here! Like on the rest of this website, cheating and abuse are not allowed. Sources that you base your candidate moves on can include books, Chess.com's databases, chess videos, your own experience, and more - just make sure they do not involve engines. The standard time control for Vote Chess games in this group is 3 days for each side. The 24 hour time control wouldn't give us enough time to analyze the positions thoroughly and the 7 day time control (or greater) would be too slow. IMPORTANT: During gameplay, the first 1 1/2 to 2 days (sometimes longer if the position is critical and/or complex) are spent discussing moves while the rest of the time is spent voting. Exceptions to this are when the next move is obvious or forced or when the whole team is very quick to agree on one move (even if it isn't all that obvious, often the discussion ends where everyone agrees on one or two certain moves). You may only vote for candidate moves. Candidate moves are moves suggested by players in the comments; if a candidate move is refuted or proven to be inferior than another candidate move then it is removed from the list of candidates. This means that before you vote, you must read the comments/analysis (and/or make comments of your own). If you like/are interested in a certain move but you do not see it in the comments, then make a post suggesting it. A common problem I see a lot in Vote Chess is that one player briefly examines the position and then votes for a move that is not among the candidates and never posts a comment/analysis. Thus it is recommended that you tick the "Notify me of new comments" box (in V3 this is the "Follow" box) so you can track the comments and read the analysis in the Vote Chess games you participate in with ease. I hope this forum has been informative and helpful and I hope to see you in our Vote Chess games! Good luck with your raiding, Valhallans!

Its time for a History update: This Time Eric Bloodaxe From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia For the hacker Chris Goggans, see Erik Bloodaxe (hacker). Eric Bloodaxe Coin of Eirik Bloodaxe. The legend reads "ERIC REX" (King Eric) (at British Museum) King of Norway Reign 931–933 Predecessor Harald I Successor Haakon I King of Northumbria Reign 947–948952–954 Predecessor Edmund IAmlaíb Cuarán Successor Amlaíb CuaránEadred Died 954 Britain or Spain Spouse Gunnhild, Mother of Kings Issue GamleGuttormHarald II of NorwayRagnfrødErlingGudrødSigurd SlevaRagnhild Dynasty Fairhair dynasty Father Harold Fairhair Mother Ragnhild, daughter of Eric of Jutland Religion Norse paganism Eric Haraldsson (Old Norse: Eiríkr Haraldsson, Norwegian: Eirik Haraldsson; c. 885 – 954), nicknamed Eric Bloodaxe (Old Norse: Eiríkr blóðøx, Norwegian: Eirik Blodøks), was a 10th-century Norwegian ruler. He is thought to have had short-lived terms as King of Norway and twice as King of Northumbria (c. 947–948 and 952–954). Contents [hide] 1Sources 2Epithet 3Family background 4Early career (sagas) 5Marriage 6King of Norway (sagas) 7Eric and the jarls of Orkney (sagas) 8King of Northumbria 9Eric's death 10Reputation in the sagas 11Eric in modern culture 12Ancestors from the sagas 13Notes 14Sources 15External links Sources[edit] Historians have reconstructed a narrative of Eric's life and career from the scant available historical data. There is a distinction between contemporary or near contemporary sources for Eric's period as ruler of Northumbria, and the entirely saga-based sources that detail the life of Eric of Norway, a chieftain who ruled the Norwegian Westland in the 930s.[1] Norse sources have identified the two as the same since the late 12th century, and while the subject was controversial among early modern historians, most historians have identified the two figures as the same since W. G. Collingwood's article in 1901.[2] This identification has been rejected recently by the historian Claire Downham, who argued that later Norse writers synthesized the two Erics, possibly using English sources.[3] This argument, though respected by other historians in the area, has not produced consensus.[4] Contemporary or near-contemporary sources include different recensions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Eric's coinage, the Life of St Cathróe, and possibly skaldic poetry.[5] Such sources reproduce only a hazy image of Eric's activities in Anglo-Saxon England. Strikingly, Eric's historical obscurity stands in sharp contrast to the wealth of legendary depictions in the kings' sagas, where he takes part in the sagas of his father Harald Fairhair and his younger half-brother Haakon the Good. These include the late 12th-century Norwegian synoptics – Historia Norwegiæ (perhaps c. 1170), Theodoricus monachus' Historia de antiquitate regum Norwagiensium (c. 1180), and Ágrip af Nóregskonungasögum (c. 1190) – and the later Icelandic kings' sagas Orkneyinga saga(c. 1200), Fagrskinna (c. 1225), the Heimskringla ascribed to Snorri Sturluson (c. 1230), Egils saga(1220 - 1240), and Óláfs saga Tryggvasonar en mesta (c. 1300). Exactly in what sense the Eric of the sagas may have been based on the historical Eric of Northumbria, and conversely, to what extent later evidence might be called upon to shed light on the historical figure, are matters which have inspired a variety of approaches and suggestions among generations of historians. Current opinion veers towards a more critical attitude towards the use of sagas as historical sources for the period before the 11th century, but conclusive answers cannot be offered.[6] Epithet[edit] Eric's soubriquet blóðøx, ‘Bloodaxe’ or 'Bloody-axe', is of uncertain origin and context. It is arguable whether its preservation in two lausavísurby Egill Skallagrímsson and a contemporary skald genuinely dates to the 10th century or had been inserted at some stage when Eric was becoming the focus of legend.[7] There is no guarantee that it significantly predates the 12th-century narrative tradition, where it is first attached to him in Ágrip and in Latin translation as sanguinea securis in the Historia Norwegiæ.[8]The sagas usually explain it as referring to Eric's slaying of his half-brothers in a ruthless struggle to monopolise his rule over Norway; Theodoricus gives the similar nickname fratrum interfector (killer of brothers).[9]Fagrskinna, on the other hand, ascribes it to Eric's violent reputation as a Viking raider.[10] Family background[edit] Father[edit] The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (MS E) describes Eric laconically as ‘Harold’s son’ (Haroldes sunu),[11] perhaps assuming some familiarity on the reader's part. In the early part of the 12th century, John of Worcester had reason to believe that Eric (Yrcus) was of royal Scandinavian stock (Danica stirpe progenitum, a phrase used earlier for the Hiberno-Norse ruler of Northumbria, Sihtric Cáech).[12] This appears to match with independent tradition from Norwegian synoptic histories and Icelandic sagas, which are explicit in identifying Eric of Northumbria as a son of the Norwegian king Harald (I) Fairhair.[13] The skaldic poems ascribed to Egill Skallagrímsson may offer further reassurance that the sagas are on the right track, although doubts have been expressed about the date and integrity of the verses in the form in which they have survived. One of Egill's lausavísur speaks of an encounter in England with a man of “Harald's line” (Haralds áttar), while the Arinbjarnarkviðaenvisages a ruler at York (Jórvik) who is a descendant of Halfdán (Halfdanar) and of the Yngling dynasty (ynglings burar).[14] If genuine, the latter identification would form the only direct clue in the contemporary record which might link Eric with the Norwegian dynasty. Another Haraldr known from this period is Aralt mac Sitric (d. 940), king of Limerick,[15]the probable father of Maccus and Gofraid. This may be relevant, since both these brothers and a certain Eric have been described as rulers of 'the Isles' (Hebrides) (see below). In a letter addressed to Pope Boniface VIII, King Edward I (r. 1272–1307) remembered a certain Eric (Yricius) as having been a king of Scotland subject to the English king.[16] In the 19th century, a case had also been made for Harald Bluetooth King of Denmark (d. 983) as being Eric's true father. J.M. Lappenbergand Charles Plummer, for instance, identified Eric with Harald's son Hiring.[17] The only authority for this son's existence is Adam of Bremen, who in his Gesta (c. 1070) claims to cite the otherwise unknown Gesta Anglorum for a remarkable anecdote about Hiring's foreign adventures: "Harald sent his son Hiring to England with an army. When the latter had subjugated the island, he was in the end betrayed and killed by the Northumbrians."[18] Even if Eric's rise and fall had been the inspiration for the story, the names are not identical and Harald Bluetooth's floruit does not sit well with Eric's. A brother?[edit] In the account cited in full below, Roger of Wendover says that Eric was killed by a certain Maccus – elsewhere a son of Olaf – together with his son Haeric (Henricus or Haericus) and brother Ragnald (Reginaldus). Historians have been struck by the correspondence with names in Fagrskinna, which says that two of the kings who died with Erik in his final battle against Olaf were called Harékr and Ragnvald, although they are not identified as relatives.[19] Mother and half-brothers (sagas)[edit] Further details on his family background are provided solely by the Icelandic and Norwegian sources of the 12th and 13th centuries, which are of limited and uncertain historical value and should therefore be treated with due circumspection.[20] Harald 'Fairhair' is usually portrayed as a polygamous and fertile king, the number of his sons varying between 16[21] and 20.[22] While Eirik's mother remains anonymous in the synoptic histories (Ágrip) and most of the Icelandic sagas,[23] the Heimskringla (c. 1230) claims that she was Ragnhildr, daughter of Eric, king of (South) Jutland.[24] The possibility that Harald had married a Danish princess may find some support in a skaldic stanza which is usually assigned to Þorbjörn Hornklofi's Hrafnsmál, a eulogy on Harald's deeds in the form of a conversation between a raven and valkyrie. It tells that Harald “chose the lady from Denmark [konu danska] / broke with his Rogaland loves / and his lemans of Horthaland, / the maidens of Hálogaland / and of Hathaland eke.”[25]In the Flateyjarbók, it is preceded by another stanza which refers to the “handmaidens of Ragnhildr” (ambáttir Ragnhildar) as witnesses of the event. However, it is uncertain whether her name was already in the original composition, as another manuscript reading has the metrically regular ambáttir Danskar.[26] The account of Heimskringla, which claims that Harald had enjoyed the company of eleven consorts before Ragnhildr, and that of Egils saga[27] are at variance with the suggestion elsewhere that Eric was one of the oldest (Fagrskinna), if not the eldest son of Harald (Historia Norwegiæ, Ágrip).[28] Whatever one makes of the discrepancy, the sagas – including Heimskringla – are unanimous in making Haakon Eric's younger half-brother and successor. Early career (sagas)[edit] According to Heimskringla and Egils saga, Eric spent much of his childhood in fosterage with the hersir Thórir son of Hróald.[29] Of his adolescent years, a remarkable picture is painted in Heimskringla, which recounts that Eric, aged twelve and seemingly possessed of prodigious valour and strength, embarked on a career of international piracy: four years were spent harrying the Baltic coasts and those of Denmark, Frisia and Germany ('Saxland'); another four years those of Scotland, Wales, Ireland and France; and lastly, Lappland and Bjarmaland (in what is now northern Russia).[30]Describing the last trip, Egils saga notes that Eric sailed up the Dvina River into the Russian hinterland of Permia, where he sacked the small trading port of Permina.[31] Marriage[edit] The Life of St Cathróe of Metz, written c. 1000 at the latest and therefore of near contemporary value, has information about Eric and his wife. It relates that "after keeping him for some time", the King of the Cumbrians conducted Cathróe to Loidam Civitatem, the boundary between the Normanni ("Scandinavians") and the Cumbri("Britons"): And there he was received by a certain nobleman, Gunderic, by whom he was led to king Erichius in the town of York, because this king had as wife a relative of the godly Cathróe"[32] Given what is known of Cathróe's own background, this probably means that she was of British ("Cumbrian") or Scottish descent.[33] This contradicts to some extent later saga tradition. According to the early 13th century Egils saga, Eric's consort at York was Gunnhild, the famous "mother of kings".[34] This account was constructed by the author of Egils saga using an earlier poem called Arinbjarnarkviða "Lay of Arinbjörn", and this poem does not mention Gunnhild by name, implying therefore that the name was introduced by the author of Egils saga.[35] Saga tradition is though unanimous that Eric did cohabit with a woman named Gunnhild. Her name occurs in a handful of Egill's lausavísur.[36]The earliest saga Historia Norwegiæ describes her as the daughter of Gorm inn Gamli (‘the Old’), king of Denmark (and hence a sister of Harald Bluetooth). Most subsequent accounts[37] name her father Ozur, nicknamed either Toti “teat” (Egils saga, Fagrskinna, Heimskringla) or lafskegg “dangling beard” (Ágrip, Fagrskinna), a man who hailed from the northern province of Hålogaland (Egils saga, Heimskringla).[38]Icelandic hostility towards Gunnhild has been cited as being a possible source for her dissociation from the Danish royal house.[39] There is no consensus on how to solve this problem. An early suggestion is that the name for the king in York in the Life of Cathróe has been erroneously supplanted for Eric's predecessor Amlaíb Cuarán (Olaf Sihtricsson), whose (second) wife Dúnflaith was an Irishwoman.[40]Recently, Clare Downham has suggested that Erichius, Eric of Northumbria, is not the same Eric as Eirik Bloodaxe.[41] And there remains the possibility that Eirik was not strictly monogamous, and the existence of two wives need not be mutually exclusive.[42] King of Norway (sagas)[edit] The dominant theme of the sagas about Harald's numerous sons is the struggle for the Norwegian throne, in particular the way it manifests itself in the careers of Haakon and his foil Eric. According to Heimskringla, Harald had appointed his sons as client kings over the various districts of the kingdom, and intended Eric, his favourite son, to inherit the throne after his death.[43] At strife with his half-brothers, Eric brutally killed Ragnvald (Rögnvaldr), ruler of Hadeland, and Bjørn Farmann, ruler of Vestfold.[44] Some texts maintain that towards the end of his life, Harald allowed Eric to reign together with him (Heimskringla, Ágrip, Fagrskinna). When Harald died, Eric succeeded to the realm, slaughtered the combined forces of his half-brothers Olaf and Sigrød, and gained full control of Norway.[45] At the time, however, Eric's younger and most famous half-brother Haakon, often nicknamed Aðalsteinsfóstri, had been staying at the West-Saxon court, having been sent there to be reared as fosterson to King Æthelstan (r. 924–939).[46] Eric's rule was reputedly harsh and despotic and so he fell rapidly out of favour with the Norwegian nobility. At this propitious time, Haakon returned to Norway, found a nobility eager to accept him as king instead and ousted Eric, who fled to Britain.[47]Heimskringla specifies that Haakon owed his success in large part to Sigurd, earl of Lade. Determining the date and length of Eric's reign (before and after his father's death) is a challenging and perhaps impossible task based on the confused chronology of our late sources.[48] It is also unfortunate that no contemporary or even near contemporary record survives for Eric’s short-lived rule in Norway, if it is historical at all. Eric and the jarls of Orkney (sagas)[edit] The Norse sagas differ in the way they treat the manner and route by which first Eric came to Britain after he was forced out of Norway. The synoptic histories offer the most concise accounts. Theodoricus goes straight for Eirik's arrival in England, his welcome there by King Æthelstan, his brief rule and his death soon afterwards. Similarly, the Historia Norwegiæ makes him flee directly to England, where he was received by his half-brother Haakon, baptised and given charge of Northumbria by Æthelstan. When Eirik's rule became intolerable, he was driven out and slain on an expedition in Spain. Ágrip tells that Eirik came to Denmark first. According to Historia Norwegiæ, it would have been his wife’s native country and hence a power base where he might have expected to muster some support, but the text makes no such claims.[49] However, later sagas greatly expand upon Eirik's activities in the interim between his reigns in Norway and Northumbria, claiming that Eirik initially adopted a predatory lifestyle of raiding, whether or not he was aiming for a more political line of business in the longer run. The jarldom of Orkney, the former Viking base subjected and annexed by Eirik's father, came to loom large in these stages of the literary development. Fagrskinna (c. 1220) mentions Eirik's daughter Ragnhild and her marriage to an Orkney earl, here Hávard, but never describes Eirik as actually stepping ashore.[50] The Orkneyinga saga, written c. 1200, does speak of Eirik’s presence in Orkney and his alliance with the joint jarls Arnkel and Erland, sons of Torf-Einarr, but not until his rule in Northumbria was challenged by Olaf (Amlaíb Cuarán).[51] However, a number of later sagas such as the Separate Saga of St. Olaf (c. 1225), Heimskringla, Egils saga and Óláfs saga Tryggvasonar en mestaassert that Eirik sailed directly to Orkney, where he took the joint jarls into vassalage, collected forces and so set up a base which enabled him to organise several expeditions on overseas territory. Named targets include Ireland, the Hebrides, Scotland and England. Eirik sealed the alliance by giving his daughter Ragnhild in marriage to the future earl of Orkney, Arnfinn, son of Thorfinn Turf-Einarsson.[52] King of Northumbria[edit] It is when Eirik gains the kingship in Northumbria that he finally appears more firmly into the historical limelight, even though the sources provide only scanty detail and present notorious problems of their own. The historical sources – e.g. versions A-F of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Historia regum and Roger of Wendover's Historia Anglorum – tend to be reticent and the chronology is confused. However, the best chronological guideline appears to be that offered by the Worcester Chronicle, i.e. the D-text of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.[53] The Northumbria on which Eirik set foot was one which had been bitterly fought over between the West-Saxon kings and the Hiberno-Norse line of descendants from Ímair, kings of Dublin. The Northumbrians' own position in the middle of the struggle may have been complex and the outcome was variable, leading an unsympathetic historian like Henry of Huntingdon to judge harshly on “their usual faithlessness” (solita infidelitas).[54] Historical background[edit] Æthelstan[edit] In 927, having ejected Gofraid ua Ímair from York, King Æthelstan brought Northumbria under English control. His victory in the Battle of Brunanburh in 937, in which he and his half-brother Edmund defeated Gofraid's son King Olaf (III) Guthfrithson of Dublin, seems to have had the effect of consolidating his power. This impression is borne out by royal charters issued towards the end of his reign, between 937 and 939, which style Æthelstan ruler over all Britain (e.g. totius rex Brittanniae or Albionis).[55] Edmund and the two Olafs[edit] The Five Boroughs and the English Midlands in the earlier part of the 10th century[56] However, Æthelstan died in 939 and his successor Edmund, only 18 years of age,[57]was unable to retain control of Northumbria. In 939 or 940, almost as soon as Edmund had come to power, a new ruler of the Uí Ímair dynasty had made York his seat. From Irish annals it is known that Edmund's old rival Olaf Guthfrithson left Dublin in 939 (Annals of the Four Masters), that in 940 his cousin, known in Ireland as Amlaíb Cuaránand in England as Olaf Sihtricsson, joined him in York (Annals of the Four Masters, Annals of Clonmacnoise) and that Olaf Guthfrithson died in 941 (Annals of Clonmacnoise, Chronicon Scotorum), while the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (MS E) dates his death – incorrectly it seems – to 942.[58] Amlaíb Cuarán succeeded him and did so with popular support, as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (MS D) reports that in 941, “the Northumbrians belied their pledges, and chose Olaf [i.e. Amlaíb Cuarán] from Ireland as their king.”[59] Amlaíb shared the throne with his nephew Ragnald(Rögnvaldr), son of Gofraid. There are indications that Wulfstan, Archbishop of York and a leading statesman in Northumbrian politics, played a key role in Amlaíb's support, although he would later change his mind (see below). In 942 Edmund struck back with a recapture of Mercia and the Five Boroughs of Danelaw, which so impressed contemporaries that a poem was written in honour of the achievement and included in the Chronicle.[60] In response, Amlaíb launched a successful raid on Tamworth (Mercia), probably sometime later that year.[61] However, in 943, when Amlaíb had marched on to Leicester, one of the Boroughs, he and Wulfstan were besieged by Edmund and managed to escape only by a hair's breadth. Peace negotiations followed later that year to that effect that Edmund accepted Amlaíb as an ally and as two northern sources add, ceded to him Northumbria as far south as Watling Street. Later, Edmund stood sponsor to him at baptism and to Ragnall at confirmation. In 944, however, Northumbria passed into West-Saxon hands again as Edmund drove out both Viking rulers.[62] The chronicler Æthelweard is clearer on the point of agency, writing that it was Wulfstan and the ealdorman (dux) of the Mercians who deposed these 'deserters' – perhaps born again pagans – and forced them to submit to Edmund.[63] The same year, Edmund raided Cumbria and entrusted it to Malcolm (I) of Scotland in exchange for support “both on sea and on land”. The Irish annals report that in 945, Amlaíb was back in Dublin and an anonymous ruler at York, possibly Ragnald (Rögnvaldr), died. Edmund was described as rex totiusque Albionis primicerius in one of his charters, but did not live long to enjoy his renewed hold on the northern zone. He was killed in 946. Eadred and Eirik's first reign (947/8–948)[edit] When Eadred succeeded to the throne in 946, Northumbrian as well as Scottish loyalties had proved unstable, though nothing is known for certain of the ambitions of rival rulers at this stage. Eadred “reduced all the land of Northumbria to his control; and the Scots granted him oaths that they would do all that he wanted.”[64] Moreover, in 947 he convened Archbishop Wulfstan and the Northumbrian witan at Tanshelf(now in Pontefract, West Yorkshire), on the boundary of the Humber (near an old Roman road), where they pledged their obedience to him. What perceived threat was being countered remains unclear, but English rule does not seem to have been very warmly received. In any event, the Chronicle (MS D) notes that the Northumbrians soon violated their pledges and oaths (947)[65] and records a definite outcome of their disloyalty in 948, by which time “they had taken Eirik [Yryc] for their king”.[66] That year, King Eadred harshly punished the northern defectors by launching a destructive raid on Northumbria, which notably included burning the Ripon minster founded by St Wilfrid. Although Eadred's forces had to sustain heavy losses in the Battle of Castleford (Ceaster forda) – near Tanshelf – as they returned southwards, Eadred managed to check his rival by promising the latter’s supporters even greater havoc if they did not desert Eirik. The Northumbrians preferred to appease the English king, renounced Eirik and paid compensation.[67] The Chronicle of the Kings of Alba records that shortly thereafter, in '948 or 949, Malcolm (I) of Scotland and Cumbria, at Constantine's instigation, raided Northumbria as far south as the River Tees and returned with many cattle and captives.[68] Marios Costambeys suggests that it “may have been directed against, or mounted in favour of, Eirik, though the protagonist could just as easily have been Óláf Sihtricson.”[69] Eadred and Eirik's second reign (952–954)[edit] Eirik's removal cleared the way for Amlaíb [Anlaf Cwiran], who having suffered defeat at Slane (Co. Meath, Ireland) in 947, returned to Northumbria and took the kingship, supposedly in 949, if the E-text is to be trusted.[70] Eadred does not appear to have undertaken any significant action and may even have turned a blind eye on his brother's godson, or so at least the silence of the sources appears to suggest. The E-text reports, however, that in 952, “the Northumbrians drove out King Olaf and accepted Eric, son of Harold.”[71] The Annals of Ulster for the same year report a victory of the 'foreigners', i.e. the Northmen or the Norse-Gaels, over “the men of Scotland and the Welsh [Bretnu, i.e. Britons of Strathclyde] and the Saxons.”[72] Exactly what this succinct account may tell us of Eirik's second rise to power, if at all, is frustratingly unclear. He may have led the Viking forces in a second bid for the throne, or only returned from the sideline to exploit the ravages of defeat.[69] Eirik's reign proved once again of a short duration, since in 954 (a date on which MSS D and E agree), the Northumbrians expelled him, too.[73] Clare Downham notes the existence of an otherwise unrecorded Eltangerht, whose coins were minted at York and date from about the same time, but nothing is known of him from other records.[74] Eirik, Wulfstan (I), archbishop of York and the charters[edit] The nature of Eirik's relationship with Archbishop Wulfstan, the leading Northumbrian churchman who played such a decisive role in Amlaíb's career in the early 940's, remains tantalisingly unclear. One might assume that Wulfstan, given his political eminence, headed the Northumbrian party which elected Eirik. It has likewise been suggested that Eadred's punitive attack on the ancient minster of Ripon, which carried little military weight, was targeted at Wulfstan in particular.[75] In what sense Eirik's deposition in 948 may have affected the relationship in later years is more open to speculation. The witness lists of Anglo-Saxon charters, which reveal when or not Wulfstan attended Eadred's court, in his own right or as a diplomat intermediating between two kings, have been used to provide a chronological framework for Wulfstan's swerving loyalties. Between 938 and 941, that is roughly between the Battle of Brunanburh (937) and the recovery of the Five Boroughs (942), the archbishop did not attest any royal charters, but he began to do so during or after the negotiations of 942.[76] What the charters reveal for Eirik's first reign is less clear-cut, but intermittent absence may explain gaps in the record for Wulfstan's attestations in the turbulent years 947–948.[77]Unfortunately, the critical period between 950 and 954 has produced comparatively few charters (owing perhaps to Eadred's deteriorating health), but what little there is may be instructive. Wulfstan is still seen at court in 950, but of the five charters which were issued in 951, not one was attested by him,[78] which once again may imply his backing of Amlaíb. Eirik's reign (952–954) is more obscure. We do know, however, that in 952, the same year that Eirik began his second term at York, Wulfstan was arrested and stood on trial in Iudanbyrig (unknown)[79] on account of several unspecified allegations which had been repeatedly brought before Eadred.[80] Of the few charters surviving for 953, Wulfstan attests one[81] and by 955, after Eirik's death, he was restored to office, but now with Dorchester rather than York as his episcopal seat.[82]Clare Downham suggests that during this period, Wulfstan may have been pressurized by King Eadred into relinquishing his support of Eirik.[74] Coinage[edit] Coin minted at York, type N550, ECM 2007.0059.[83] Obverse: ERIC RE[X] (King Eric). Reverse: [R]ADVLF MON[] (moneyer Radulf). Eirik's Northumbrian rule is also corroborated by numismatic evidence. As of 3 February 2009, 31 coins minted at York had been found which bear the inscription of Eirik's name. These can be divided into two distinct types of issue: N549, in which the moneyer's name (reverse) is written horizontally and broken up in two, and N550, in which his name is inscribed around the edges and Eirik's name (obverse) accompanied by a sword symbol (image above on the right). The two principal moneyers, Ingalger and Radulf, who had also m

Viking Warrior Womans! Did they Exist? Viking Warrior Women: Did ‘Shieldmaidens’ Like Lagertha Really Exist? Viking Warrior Women: Did ‘Shieldmaidens’ Like Lagertha Really Exist? Kathleen O'Neal Gear and Michael Gear As archaeologists, we’ve spent over thirty years studying warrior women from a variety of cultures around the world, and, we have to tell you, shieldmaidens pose a problem. Stories of Viking warrior women are found in a number of historical documents, but several come from factually unreliable heroic sagas, fornaldarsogur. A good example is Hervor’s and Heidrek’s Saga. After the hero, Angantyr, falls in battle his daughter Hervor takes her father’s sword and uses it to avenge his death by killing his enemies. There are similar stories of Brynhilde and Freydis, in Sigurd’s Saga and the Saga of the Greenlanders. But in each case the story is more about myth-making than fact. As well, these are tales of individual women who are highly skilled with swords and fight in battles, but give no evidence for a ‘community’ of women warriors, which the shieldmaidens are supposed to have been. There are, however, more reliable historical resources. In the 1070s, for example, Adam of Bremen (chronicling the Hamburg-Bremen archdiocese) wrote that a northern region of Sweden near lake Malaren was inhabited by war-like women. But he doesn’t say how many women, nor does he clarify what “war-like” means. Were these women just zealously patriotic, bad-tempered, aggressive, or maybe even too independent for his Medieval Christian tastes? It’s hard to say. Then we have the splendid references to ‘communities’ of shieldmaidens found in the works of 12th century Danish historian, Saxo Grammaticus, whose writing is sure to make every modern woman livid. Keep in mind, Saxo was likely the secretary of the Archbishop of Lund, and had specific Christian notions about appropriate female behavior. He wrote: “There were once women in Denmark who dressed themselves to look like men and spent almost every minute cultivating soldiers’ skills. …They courted military celebrity so earnestly that you would have guessed they had unsexed themselves. Those especially who had forceful personalities or were tall and elegant embarked on this way of life. As if they were forgetful of their true selves they put toughness before allure, aimed at conflicts instead of kisses, tasted blood, not lips, sought the clash of arms rather than the arm’s embrace, fitted to weapons hands which should have been weaving, desired not the couch but the kill…” (Fisher 1979, p. 212). Okay. Saxo says there were ‘communities’ of shieldmaidens. Apparently, he means more than one community. How many? Ten? Fifty? Five thousand? In his The Danish History, Books I-IX, he names Alfhild, Sela, and Rusila as shieldmaidens, and also names three she-captains, Wigibiorg, who fell on the field at Bravalla, Hetha, who became queen of Zealand, and Wisna, whose hand was cut off by Starcad at Bravalla. He also writes about Lathgertha and Stikla. So…eight women? They might make up one community, but ‘communities?’ Historical problems like these have caused many scholars conclude that shieldmaidens were little more than a literary motif, perhaps devised to counter the influences of invading Christians and their notions of proper submissive female behavior. There are good arguments for this position (Lewis-Simpson, 2000, pp. 295-304). However, historically most cultures had women warriors, and where there were more than a few women warriors, they formed communities. If the shieldmaidens existed, we should find the evidence in the archaeological record. For example, do we see them represented in Viking material culture, like artwork? Oh, yes. There are a number of iconographic representations of what may be female warriors. Women carrying spears, swords, shields, and wearing helmets, are found on textiles and brooches, and depicted as metallic figurines, to name a few. One of the most intriguing recent finds is a silver figurine discovered in Harby, Denmark, in 2012. The figurine appears to be a woman holding an upright sword in her right hand and a shield in her left. Now, here’s the problem: These female warrior images may actually be depictions of valkyries, ‘choosers of the slain.’ Norse literature says that the war god, Odin, sent armed valkyries into battle to select the warriors worthy of entering the Hall of the Slain, Valhalla. Therefore, these images might represent real warrior women, but they could also be mythic warrior women. And where are the burials of Viking warrior women? Are there any? This is tricky. What would the burial of a shieldmaiden look like? How would archaeologists know if they found one? Well, archaeologists recognize the burials of warriors in two primary ways: 1) Bioarchaeology. If you spend your days swinging a sword with your right hand, the bones in that arm are larger, and you probably have arthritis in your shoulder, elbow and wrist. In other words, you have bone pathologies from repetitive stress injuries. At this point in time, we are aware of no Viking female burials that unequivocally document warrior pathologies. But here’s the problem: If a Viking woman spent every morning using an axe to chop wood for her breakfast fire or swinging a scythe to cut her hay field—and we know Viking women did both—the bone pathologies would be very similar to swinging a sword or practicing with her war axe. Are archaeologists simply misidentifying warrior women pathologies? Are we attributing them to household activities because, well, they’re women. Surely they weren’t swinging a war axe. See? The psychological legacy of living in a male dominated culture can have subtle effects, though archaeologists work very hard not to fall prey to such prejudices. 2) Artifacts. Sometimes warriors wear uniforms, or are buried with the severed heads of their enemies, but they almost always have weapons: swords, shields, bows, arrows, stilettos, spears, helmets, or mail-coats. A good example is the Kaupang burial. There are many Viking “female weapons burials,” as archaeologists call them. Let us give you just a few examples. At the Gerdrup site in Denmark the woman was buried with a spear at her feet. This is a really interesting site for another reason: The woman’s grave contains three large boulders, two that rest directly on top of her body, which was an ancient method of keeping souls in graves—but that’s a discussion for another article. In Sweden, three graves of women (at Nennesmo and Klinta) contained arrowheads. The most common weapon included in female weapons burials are axes, like those in the burials at the BB site from Bogovej in Langeland (Denmark), and the cemetery at Marem (Norway). The Kaupang female weapons burials also contained axeheads, as well as spears, and in two instances the burial contained a shield boss. There are many other examples of female weapons burials. For those interested in the details please take a look at the Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia, Vol. 8, pages 273-340. So did the shieldmaidens exist? When taken as a whole, the literary, historical, and archaeological evidence suggests that there were individual Viking women who cultivated warriors’ skills and, if the sagas can be believed, some achieved great renown in battle. Were there communities of Viking women warriors, as Saxo claims? There may have been, but there just isn’t enough proof to definitively say so…yet. However, Lagertha, you personally are still on solid ground. You go, girl. From Wikipedia: Shieldmaiden From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Hervor dying after the Battle of the Goths and Huns. A painting by Peter Nicolai Arbo A shieldmaiden (Old Norse: skjaldmær, Danish: skjoldmø, Norwegian: skjoldmøy,Swedish:sköldmö, German:Schildmaid) in Scandinavian folklore and mythology was a woman who had chosen to fight as a warrior. They are often mentioned in sagas such asHervarar saga ok Heiðreks and in Gesta Danorum. Shieldmaidens also appear in stories of other Germanic peoples: Goths, Cimbri, and Marcomanni.[1] The mythical valkyries may have been based on the shieldmaidens.[1] The historical existence of shieldmaidens is heavily debated, but scholars including Lars Magnar Enoksen,[2]Neil Price,[3] and scholar Britt-Mari Näsström[4]argue evidence for their existence, while scholar Judith Jesch disagrees, citing lack of hard evidence.[5] Contents [hide] 1Historical accounts 2Legendary accounts 2.1Brynhildr Buðladóttir and Guðrún Gjúkadóttir 3Archeology 4In popular culture 5See also 6References Historical accounts[edit] There are few historic attestations that Viking Age women took part in warfare,[6] but theByzantine historian John Skylitzes records that women fought in battle when Sviatoslav I of Kiev attacked the Byzantines in Bulgaria in 971.[6] When the Varangians (not to be confused with the Byzantine Varangian Guard) had suffered a devastating defeat in theSiege of Dorostolon, the victors were stunned at discovering armed women among the fallen warriors.[6] When Leif Erikson's pregnant half-sister Freydís Eiríksdóttir was in Vinland, she is reported to have taken up a sword, and, bare-breasted, scared away the attacking Skrælings.[6]The fight is recounted in the Greenland saga, though Freydís is not explicitly referred to as a shieldmaiden in the text.[7] Saxo Grammaticus reported that shieldmaidens fought on the side of the Danes at theBattle of Brávellir in the year 750: Now out of the town of Sle, under the captains Hetha (Heid) and Wisna, with Hakon Cut-cheek came Tummi the Sailmaker. On these captains, who had the bodies of women, nature bestowed the souls of men. Webiorg was also inspired with the same spirit, and was attended by Bo (Bui) Bramason and Brat the Jute, thirsting for war. — Saxo Grammaticus[8] Legendary accounts[edit] Examples of shieldmaidens mentioned by name in the Norse sagas include Brynhildr in theVǫlsunga saga, Hervor in Hervarar saga ok Heiðreks, the Brynhildr of the Bósa saga ok Herrauðs, the Swedish princess Thornbjǫrg in Hrólfs saga Gautrekssonar and Princess Hed, Visna and Veborg in Gesta Danorum. Two shieldmaidens appear in certain translations of the Hervarar saga. The first of these Hervors was known to have taken up typically masculine roles early in her childhood and often raided travelers in the woods dressed as a man. Later in her life, she claimed the cursed sword Tyrfing from her father's burial site and became a seafaring raider. She eventually settled and married. Her granddaughter was also named Hervor and commanded forces against attacking Huns. Although the saga remarks on her bravery she is mortally wounded by enemy forces and dies on the battlefield.[9] Scholars Judith Jesch and Jenny Jochens theorize that shieldmaidens' often grim fates or their sudden return to typically female roles is a testament to their role as figures of both male and female fantasy as well as emblematic of the danger of abandoning gender roles.[9] Brynhildr Buðladóttir and Guðrún Gjúkadóttir[edit] Main article: Brynhildr Brynhildr of the Vǫlsunga saga, along with her rival in love, Guðrún Gjúkadóttir, provides an example of how a shieldmaiden compares to more conventional aristocratic womanhood in the sagas. Brynhildr is chiefly concerned with honor, much like a male warrior. When she ends up married to Gudrun's brother Gunnarr instead of Sigurðr, the man she intended to marry, Brynhildr speaks a verse comparing the courage of the two men: Sigurd fought the dragonAnd that afterward will beForgotten by no oneWhile men still live.Yet your brotherNeither daredTo ride into the fireNor to leap across it.[10] Brynhildr is married to Gunnarr and not Sigurðr because of deceit and trickery, including a potion of forgetfulness given to Sigurðr so he forgets his previous relationship with her.[10]Brynhildr is upset not only for the loss of Sigurðr but also for the dishonesty involved. Similar to her male counterparts, the shieldmaiden prefers to do things straightforwardly, without the deception considered stereotypically feminine in much of medieval literature. She enacts her vengeance directly, resulting in the deaths of herself, Sigurðr, and Sigurð's son by Guðrún. By killing the child, she demonstrates an understanding of feud and filial responsibility; if he lived, the boy would grow up to take vengeance on Brynhildr's family. Guðrún has a similar concern with family ties, but at first does not usually act directly. She is more inclined to incite her male relatives to action than take up arms herself. Guðrún is no shieldmaiden, and Brynhildr mocks her for this, saying, "Only ask what is best for you to know. That is suitable for noble women. And it is easy to be satisfied while everything happens according to your desires."[10] In her later marriages, however, she is willing to kill her children, burn down a hall, and send her other sons to avenge the murder of her daughter, Svanhildr. In the world of the sagas, women can be both honorable and remorseless, much like the male heroes. While a shieldmaiden does not fill a woman's typical role, her strength of character is found in even the more domestic women in these stories. Archeology[edit] Graves of women settlers containing weapons have been uncovered, but scholars do not agree how these should be interpreted.[11] Norse immigrant graves in England and chemical analysis of the remains suggested a somewhat equal distribution of men and women, suggesting husbands and wives, while some of the women were buried with weapons.[12][13]In a tie-in special to the TV series Vikings Neil Price showed that a Birka-burial excavated in the 1970s containing a large number of weapons and the bones of two horses turned out to be the grave of a woman upon bone analysis by Anna Kjellström.[3] In popular culture[edit] While women warriors are a staple of fantasy, they are not often referred to as shieldmaidens. Some who are include Éowyn in J. R. R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings and Thorgil in Nancy Farmer's The Sea of Trolls trilogy. In the 2013 TV series Vikings, the legendary Viking shieldmaiden Lagertha, played byKatheryn Winnick, is a principal character. See also[edit] Women in ancient warfare Women in post-classical warfare Women in warfare (1500-1699) Women warriors in literature and culture List of women warriors in folklore References[edit] ^ Jump up to:a b The article Sköldmö in Nordisk familjebok (1917). Jump up^ Enoksen, Lars Magnar, 2004, Vikingarnas stridskonst s 20, s286, s 295f och s 314 ISBN 91-85057-32-0 ^ Jump up to:a b http://www.history.com/shows/vikings/videos/secrets-of-the-vikings-shield-maidens Jump up^ http://www.motpol.nu/oskorei/2008/03/08/skoldmon-i-nordisk-myt/ Jump up^ http://blog.britishmuseum.org/2014/04/19/viking-women-warriors-and-valkyries/ ^ Jump up to:a b c d Harrison, D. & Svensson, K. (2007). Vikingaliv. Fälth & Hässler, Värnamo. ISBN 978-91-27-35725-9. p. 71 Jump up^ Thorsson, Ö. (Ed.) The Sagas of the Icelanders. Penguin Books, 1997. Jump up^ Elton, Oliver. "THE DANISH HISTORY, BOOKS I-IX by Saxo Grammaticus".Project Gutenberg. Project Gutenberg. Retrieved 16 June 2015. ^ Jump up to:a b Tolkien, Christopher. "The Saga of King Heidrik the Wise" (PDF). Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd. Retrieved April 22, 2013. ^ Jump up to:a b c Byock, Jesse L. (Trans.) Saga of the Volsungs.University of California Press, 1990. Jump up^ http://sciencenordic.com/don’t-underestimate-viking-women Jump up^ McLeod, Shane. "Warriors and women: the sex ratio of Norse migrants to eastern England up to 900 AD". Early Medieval Europe. Wiley. 19 (3): 332–353.doi:10.1111/j.1468-0254.2011.00323.x. Jump up^ Vergano, Dan (July 19, 2011). "Invasion of the Viking women unearthed". USA Today.

IVAR BONELESS Ivar the Boneless (Old Norse: Ívarr hinn Beinlausi; Old English: Hyngwar) was a Viking leader and a commander of the Great Heathen Army which invaded the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of England, starting in 865. According to the tradition recorded in the Norse sagas, he was one of the sons ofRagnar Lothbrok, and his brothers included Björn Ironside, Halfdan Ragnarsson, Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye and Ubba. He is often considered identical to Ímar, the founder of the Uí Ímair dynasty, which dominated the Irish Sea region throughout the Viking Age. Ivar was one of the leaders from the Great Heathen Army which invaded the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of East Anglia in 865.[2][3] According to the Norse sagas this invasion was organised by the sons of Ragnar Lodbrok, of whom Ivar was one, to wreak revenge against Ælla of Northumbria. Ælla had supposedly executed Ragnar in 865 by throwing him in a snake pit, but the historicity of this explanation is unknown.[4][5] Late the next year the army turned north and invaded Northumbria, eventually capturing Ælla at York in 867.[6]According to legend, Ælla was executed by Ivar and his brothers using the blood eagle, a method of execution whereby the ribcage is opened from behind and the lungs are pulled out, forming a wing-like shape.[3] Ivar and Ubba are identified as the commanders of the Danes when they returned to East Anglia in 869, and as the executioners of the East Anglian king, Edmund, for refusing their demand that he renounce Christ.[7][8] How true the accounts are of Edmund's death is unknown, but it has been suggested that his capture and execution is not an unlikely thing to have happened.[7] Following the conquest of East Anglia, Ivar apparently left the Great Heathen Army - his name disappears from English records after 870.[9] According to the saga of Ragnar Lodbrok, Ivar Boneless was the youngest son of Ragnar andAslaug. It is said he was fair, big, strong, and one of the wisest men who had ever lived. He was consequently the advisor of his brothers Björn Ironside, Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye, andHvitserk. The story has it that when king Ælla of Northumbria had murdered their father, by throwing Ragnar into a snake-pit, Ivar's brothers tried to avenge their father but were beaten. Ivar then went to king Ælla and sought reconciliation. He only asked for as much land as he could cover with an ox's hide and swore never to wage war against Ælla. Then Ivar cut the ox's hide into so fine strands that he could envelop a large fortress (in an older saga it was Yorkand according to a younger saga it was London) which he could take as his own. (Compare the similar legendary ploy of Dido.) Right after the messenger of king Ælla delivered the message that Ragnar had died to Ivar the Boneless,Bjorn Ironside, Sigurd Snake-eye, and Hvitserk, Ivar said: "I will not take part in or gather men for that, because Ragnar met with the fate I anticipated. His cause was bad; he had no reason to fight against King Ella, and it has often happened that when a man wanted to be overbearing and wrong others it has been the worst for him; I will take wergild from King Ella if he will give it".[17] As Ivar was the most generous of men, he attracted a great number of warriors, whom he subsequently kept from Ælla when Ælla was attacked again by Ivar's brothers. Ælla was captured, and when the brothers were to decide how to give Ælla his just punishment, Ivar suggested that they carve the "blood eagle" on his back. According to popular belief, this meant that Ælla's back was cut open, the ribs pulled from his spine, and his lungs pulled out to form "wings." In Ragnar Lodbrok's saga, there is an interesting prequel to the Battle of Hastings: it is told that before Ivar died in England, he ordered that his body was to be buried in a mound on the English Shore, saying that so long as his bones guarded that section of the coast, no enemy could invade there successfully. This prophecy held true, says the saga, until "when Vilhjalm bastard (William the Conqueror) came ashore[,] he went [to the burial site] and broke Ivar's mound and saw that [Ivar's] body had not decayed. Then [Vilhjalm] had a large pyre made [upon which Ivar's body was] burned... Thereupon, [Vilhjalm proceeded with the landing invasion and achieved] the victory."[18] A Nice documentary about him:

This Forum thread will show the ranking of players of Valhalla!

VALHALLA! Home to noble Viking warriors, fallen in battle. Abode of the Norse Gods. Valhalla (Valhöll) is the grandest of the great halls of Asgard. There, the warrior and gods feast, hunt, fight, and play chess. The mead flows like water, and the platters of food are never empty. Ruled over by the great Odin, and home to the mighty Thor, the valiant departed are transported to Valhalla by the Valkyries. Freya, the Goddess of Love & War beckons you! Come join us in the great hall. Prepare to revel in glory. We await you, mighty warriors.

This is an engine analysis of another fine Vote Chess victory against the Egypt Chess Club! I have once again specified 20 seconds per move and a threshold of 0.30. Both sides played a solid and quiet middlegame where the Queens came off the board early. We focused on building pressure on the queenside and ultimately gained a significant material advantage when White overextended their central pawns in the endgame.

This is an engine analysis of our latest Vote Chess victory, which was against the Egypt Chess Club. As usual, I specified 20 seconds per move and a threshold of 0.30. The middle game was a closed positional scuffle where we gradually built up an advantage and started an attack on the kingside. This eventually translated into winning material and transitioning into an advantageous endgame. This analysis is an experiment: I tried to run a version of Stockfish 16 better optimized for my CPU. If you spot evaluations that seem especially odd or incorrect, I will be glad to redo the analysis with a different Stockfish version.

Here is an engine analysis of our recent Vote Chess victory against the Chessbase Attackers. I again used Stockfish with 20 seconds per move and a 0.30 threshold. We gained space and a slight advantage early in the game, but gradually our advantage slipped away. However, Black then faltered with overexpansion on the kingside, leading to sharp positions with opportunities for us to harass their King. These positions were resolved by trades which led to a favorable endgame for us.

Here is an engine analysis of our recent Vote Chess victory against the Paradise Chess Club. It was analyzed with Stockfish 14, 20 seconds per move, and a threshold of 0.30 pawns. It seems that we faltered in the middlegame, but Black let their advantage slip away and we came back and won in the endgame.

Recently our vote chess game "We Shall Go to Valhalla, Not Hel" ended in our victory against the PHILIPPINES' FINEST Chess Club. After the game ended, I performed an engine analysis of it with Stockfish 11 with a threshold in pawns of 0.30 and 20 seconds per move. This analysis is given below, and it is rather instructive. Our opponents' main error seems to have been 36. ... Re2, after which Valhalla never let go of the advantage (thanks to some excellent endgame analysis by Colefinger).

ODIN: “Odin the Wanderer” by Georg von Rosen (1886)Odin (pronounced “OH-din”; Old Norse Óðinn, Old English and Old Saxon Woden, Old High German Wuotan, Wotan, or Wodan, Proto-Germanic *Woðanaz, “Master of Ecstasy”) is one of the most complex and enigmatic characters in Norse mythology, and perhaps in all of world literature. He’s the chief of the Aesir tribe of deities, yet he often ventures far from their kingdom, Asgard, on long, solitary wanderings throughout the cosmos on purely self-interested quests. He’s a relentless seeker after and giver of wisdom, but he has little regard for communal values such as justice, fairness, or respect for law and convention. He’s the divine patron of rulers, and also of outcasts. He’s a war-god, but also a poetry-god, and he has prominent “effeminate” qualities that would have brought unspeakable shame to any historical Norse/Germanic warrior. He’s worshiped by those in search of prestige, honor, and nobility, yet he’s often cursed for being a fickle trickster. What kind of literary figure – let alone a god whose historical worship spanned much of a continent and several centuries – could possibly embody all of these qualities at once, with their apparently glaring contradictions? What’s in a Name? As mentioned above, Odin’s name can be translated as “Master of Ecstasy.” His Old Norse name, Óðinn, is formed from two parts: first, the noun óðr, “ecstasy, fury, inspiration,” and the suffix -inn, the masculine definite article, which, when added to the end of another word like this, means something like “the master of” or “a perfect example of.” The eleventh-century historian Adam of Bremen confirms this when he translates “Odin” as “The Furious.”[1]Óðr can take countless different forms. As one saga describes Odin, “when he sat with his friends, he gladdened the spirits of all of them, but when he was at war, his demeanor was terrifyingly grim.”[2] This ecstasy that Odin embodies and imparts is the unifying factor behind the myriad areas of life with which he is especially associated: war, sovereignty, wisdom, magic, shamanism, poetry, and the dead. War In modern popular culture, Odin is often portrayed as being an eminently honorable ruler and battlefield commander (not to mention impossibly muscular), but to the ancient Norse, he was nothing of the sort. In contrast to more straightforwardly noble war gods such as Tyr or Thor, Odin incites otherwise peaceful people to strife with what, to modern tastes, is a downright sinister glee.[3]His attitude is not far from Nietzsche’s dictum, “You say it is the good cause that hallows even war? I say unto you: it is the good war that hallows any cause.”[4] In keeping with his associations with sovereignty (see below), Odin doesn’t generally concern himself with average warriors, preferring instead to lavish his blessings only on those whom he deems to be worthy of them. Many of the greatest Germanic heroes have enjoyed Odin’s patronage, such as Starkaðr and the Volsung family. He maintains particularly close affiliations with the berserkers and other “warrior-shamans” whose fighting techniques and associated spiritual practices center around achieving a state of ecstatic unification with certain ferocious totem animals, usually wolves or bears, and, by extension, with Odin himself, the master of such beasts. Thus, as a war-god, Odin is principally concerned not with the reasons behind any given conflict or even its outcome, but rather with the raw, chaotic battle-frenzy (one of the primary manifestations of óðr) that permeates any such agonism. Sovereignty Odin’s preference for the elite extends to all realms of society. As the chief of the Aesir gods, he’s the divine archetype of a ruler. He’s the legendary founder of numerous royal lines,[5] and kings are as likely as shamanistic warriors to claim him as their beneficiary. The Germanic peoples, like other Indo-European peoples, originally had a three-tiered social/political hierarchy: the first tier consisted of rulers, the second of warriors, and the third of farmers and others occupied with production and fecundity. The gods and goddesses can be profitably mapped onto this schema, and Odin, along with Tyr, corresponds to the first tier, the rulers.[6]The crucial difference between Tyr and Odin in this regard, however, is that Tyr has much more to do with rule by law and justice, whereas Odin has much more to do with rule by magic and cunning. Tyr is the sober and virtuous ruler; Odin is the devious, inscrutable, and inspired ruler.[7] Paradoxically, Odin is often the favorite god and helper of outlaws, those who had been banished from society for some especially heinous crime, as well. Like Odin, many such men were exceptionally strong-willed warrior-poets who were apathetic to established societal norms – Egill Skallagrímsson (Egil’s Saga) and Grettir Ásmundarson (The Saga of Grettir the Strong) are two examples. The late twelfth/early thirteenth-century Danish historian Saxo Grammaticus even relates a tale of Odin being outlawed from Asgard for ten years so that the other gods and goddesses wouldn’t be tarnished by the vile reputation he had acquired amongst many humans.[8] Whatever their social stature, the men and women favored by Odin are distinguished by their intelligence, creativity, and competence in the proverbial “war of all against all.” Whether such people become kings or criminals is mostly a matter of luck. Wisdom, Magic, and Shamanism One of the greatest differences between monotheistic theologies and polytheistic theologies is that, in the former, God is generally all-knowing, all-powerful, all-loving, etc. Polytheistic gods are none of these things; like any human, tree, or hawk, they are limited by their particularity. For Odin, any kind of limitation is something to be overcome by any means necessary, and his actions are carried out within the context of a relentless and ruthless quest for more wisdom, more knowledge, and more power, usually of a magical sort. One of the most striking attributes of his appearance is his single, piercing eye. His other eye socket is empty – the eye it once held was sacrificed for wisdom. On another occasion, Odin “sacrificed himself to himself” by hanging on the world-tree Yggdrasil for nine days and nights, receiving no form of nourishment from his companions. At the end of this ordeal, he perceived the runes, the magically-charged ancient Germanic alphabet that was held to contain many of the greatest secrets of existence. He is depicted as having subsequently boasted: Then I was fertilized and grew wise;From a word to a word I was led to a word,From a work to a work I was led to a work.[9] Odin’s competitive side once drove him to challenge the wisest of the giants to a contest to see who was more knowledgeable and learned. The prize was the head of the loser, and Odin won by asking his opponent something that only he himself could know. Odin then claimed his prize and returned to Asgard.[10] Along with Freya, he’s one of the two greatest practitioners of shamanism amongst the gods. His shamanic spirit-journeys are well-documented. The Ynglinga Saga records that he often “travel[s] to distant lands on his own errands or those of others” while he appears to others to be asleep or dead.[11] Another instance is recorded in the Eddic poem “Baldur’s Dreams,” where Odin rode Sleipnir, an eight-legged horse typical of northern Eurasian shamanism,[12] to the underworld to consult a dead seeress on behalf of his son.[13] Odin, like shamans all over the world,[14] is accompanied by many familiar spirits, most notably the ravens Hugin and Munin, the wolves Geri and Freki, and the valkyries. The shaman must typically undergo a ritual death and rebirth in order to acquire his or her powers,[15] and Odin underwent exactly such an ordeal when he discovered the runes. We’ve already, albeit briefly, discussed the berserkers and other distinguished “warrior-shamans” under Odin’s patronage. This was the form of Germanic shamanism that was the most socially acceptable for men to practice. The other main form of Germanic shamanism is contained within the magical tradition known as seidr, of which Odin and Freya are the foremost divine practitioners. In traditional Germanic society, for a man to engage in seidr was effectively to forsake the male gender role, which brought considerable scorn upon any male who chose to take up this path. As the sagas show, this didn’t stop some men from practicing seidr anyway. However, even Odin wasn’t exempt from such charges of “unmanliness,” and was taunted for adopting the feminine traits and tasks that form part of the backbone of seidr. Saxo, in the passage on Odin’s exile alluded to above, relates that “by his stage-tricks and his assumption of a woman’s work he had brought the foulest scandal on the name of the gods.”[16] Note also the reference to being “fertilized” in the verse quoted above – while this is certainly a metaphor, it’s a metaphor loaded with sexual implications that would have been immediately recognizable to any Viking Age or medieval reader or hearer of the poem. A fuller discussion of the relationship between Germanic shamanism and gender roles can be found here. For our present purposes, it’s sufficient to point out that, in the eyes of the pre-Christian northern Europeans, Odin’s practice of seidr made him a rather “unmanly” being incapable of fulfilling the expectations placed upon an honorable man. But we’ve already noted Odin’s scant concern for honor. He isn’t one to refuse any ecstatic practice, even those that bring him ill repute. Poetry Odin speaks only in poems,[17] and the ability to compose poetry is a gift he grants at his pleasure. He stole the mead of poetry, the primeval source of the ability to speak and write beautifully and persuasively, from the giants. Ever since, he has dispensed it to certain gods, humans, and other beings whom he deems worthy of it. The mead’s Old Norse name is Óðrœrir, “The Stirrer of Óðr,” and, as we have seen, óðr (“ecstasy, fury, inspiration”) is the root of Odin’s name as well. This intoxicating drink, along with the power it grants, is yet another manifestation of his overflowing ecstasy. The Dead When Roman writers spoke of the gods and goddesses of other peoples, they generally tried to identify them with deities from their own religion. When they mentioned Odin, they glossed him as Mercury, the Roman psychopomp (the divine figure who guides those who have just died from the realm of the living to that of the dead, and, in due time, back to the land of the living again).[18] This is significant, because it shows that Odin’s associations with death were seen as being even more significant than his associations with war, or else he would have been glossed as Mars. (This designation usually fell to Tyr or Thor instead.) Odin presides over Valhalla, the most prestigious of the dwelling-places of the dead. After every battle, he and his helping-spirits, the valkyries (“choosers of the fallen”), comb the field and take their pick of half of the slain warriors to carry back to Valhalla. (Freya then claims the remaining half.) He was a frequent recipient of human sacrifice, especially of royalty, nobles, and enemy armies. This was generally accomplished by means of a spear, a noose, or both – the same manner in which Odin “sacrificed himself to himself” (Old Norse gefinn Óðni, sjálfr sjálfum mér) in order to acquire knowledge of the runes. A common – and chilling – way of securing his favor in battle was to throw a spear over one’s foes, sacrificing them to the god with the cry, “Odin owns ye all!” (Old Norse Óðinn á yðr alla).[19] His mastery of necromancy, the magical art of communicating with and raising the dead, is frequently noted.[20] While there are several reasons Odin maintains this commerce with the dead, including his desire to learn what knowledge and wisdom they possess, the most significant reason is his dread-driven desire to have as many of the best warriors as possible on his side when he must face the wolf Fenrir during Ragnarok – even though he knows that he’s doomed to die in the battle. The Allfather One of Odin’s countless names is “Allfather” (Old Norse Alfaðir), “because,” according to Snorri Sturluson, “he is the father of all of the gods.”[20] And, as we’ve already noted, Odin is listed as the divine ancestor of countless families from all over northern Europe. He’s simultaneously an Aesir god, a Vanir god (the Vanir god Óðr is only an extension or transposition of Odin), and a giant (his mother is Bestla, one of the first frost-giants). One Old Norse poem even identifies him with önd, the breath of life.[22] What can we discern in all of this regarding Odin’s identity? Odin is the primal animating force that permeates all life. Or, to put it in Nietzschean terms, he’s the Will to Power (German die Wille zur Macht) that dwells at the heart of the world, by which the cosmos eternally strives to overcome itself, to grow and to flourish and to sweep away stagnation. The shamans, rulers, warriors, outlaws, poets, and sorcerers who enjoy Odin’s patronage are the highest ambassadors of óðr, the ultimate and unconditional life-affirming force. Looking for more great information on Norse mythology and religion? While this site provides the ultimate online introduction to the topic, my book The Viking Spirit provides the ultimate introduction to Norse mythology and religion period. I’ve also written a popular list of The 10 Best Norse Mythology Books, which you’ll probably find helpful in your pursuit.

Here is an engine analysis of our latest completed Vote Chess game. It was a wild, sharp battle where the Vikings of Valhalla prevailed. We followed opening theory during the first half, and then followed up with a wonderful attack on White's King. I apologize if there are any formatting issues in the game below; I recently switched to a different chess GUI/program. I analyzed the game with Jerry using Stockfish 12 (with a threshold in pawns of 0.30 and 20 seconds per move).

Using Scid vs. PC and Stockfish 10, I have created an annotated version of our recent Vote Chess victory against Ukraine Love Chess. From what I have gleaned from the engine's analysis, we were worse during a lot of the middlegame, but they blundered and we held onto our advantage for the rest of the game. I hope you find the engine's analysis informative.

As promised, here is the Valhalla vs. The 1. b3 and 1. ..b6 Study Group Vote Chess game. It has been annotated by Stockfish 6 at a depth of 22 starting on move 3.

As promised, I have analyzed our recently finished Vote Chess game against the Boris Spassky Chess Club with an engine and I am posting the analysis. I annotated it using Stockfish 6 in Scid vs PC. From what I have seen, it seems like we started to go wrong when we tried to double our Rooks on the b-file, and Bxa3 was the blunder that got us into trouble near the end. I hope you find the analysis helpful! If you want the PGN, I can post it in text format so you can copy and paste it.