Read on Twitter
Refuting the accusation of homosexuality against Odin,
or,
on erroneous claims and their origins.
When conflicts arise among the religious spheres of the right, you're sure to hear a specific sentiment thrown about: that Odin was homosexual, or specifically, a semen-drinker.
or,
on erroneous claims and their origins.
When conflicts arise among the religious spheres of the right, you're sure to hear a specific sentiment thrown about: that Odin was homosexual, or specifically, a semen-drinker.
In actuality, this claim is false and entirely unfounded, based upon a laughably poor understanding of the Old Norse language, passed like a game of telephone between 'scholars' writing outside their fields. Moreover, it is advanced as part of a much wider subversive narrative.
This narrative targets not only European Religious Traditions, but other cultures as well, and even Christianity. Allow me to demonstrate —
The common form of the claim against Odin originates in a passage from David F. Greenberg's 1988 work "The Construction of Homosexuality"
The common form of the claim against Odin originates in a passage from David F. Greenberg's 1988 work "The Construction of Homosexuality"
Putting aside the first claim, itself erroneous, that Odin was in danger of depleting his power through sexual activity, we find the crux of Greenberg's assertion: Odin visited the corpses of hanged men to harvest their semen in "the myths."
Greenberg is a former Sociology Professor at UChicago. He is of Jewish descent. His book is described as arguing that "homosexuality is only deviant because society has constructed, or defined, it as deviant."
Very well, but on what basis does he make these claims about Odin?
Very well, but on what basis does he make these claims about Odin?
Greenberg cites one article, "Runes, Mandrakes, and Gallows" by Jeannine E. Talley. In this article, Talley attempts a translation of the Hávamál, an Old Norse poem attributed to Odin. Specifically, Talley examines the Rúnatal, where Odin tells how he won the knowledge of runes.
In the myth, Odin hangs himself for nine days and nights on Yggdrasil, the World Tree. Following this self-sacrifice, he is blessed with the knowledge of the sacred Runes. Below, find the relevant passage and translations by Benjamin Thorpe and H.A. Bellows, both experts.
Focus specifically on stanza 141 (142 in Bellows, 143 in Thorpe), where Odin describes the knowledge being bestowed upon him —
Þá nam ek frævask ok fróðr vera
Jeannine Talley writes "Clearly, in the grammatical construction Þá nam ek frævask, frævask is a noun."
She is wrong.
Þá nam ek frævask ok fróðr vera
Jeannine Talley writes "Clearly, in the grammatical construction Þá nam ek frævask, frævask is a noun."
She is wrong.
Bellows translates:
"Then began I to thrive, and wisdom to get, I grew and well I was."
frævask = thrive.
Thorpe translates:
"Then I began to bear fruit, and to know many things, to grow and well thrive."
frævask = bear fruit.
In either case, frævask is clearly a *verb.*
"Then began I to thrive, and wisdom to get, I grew and well I was."
frævask = thrive.
Thorpe translates:
"Then I began to bear fruit, and to know many things, to grow and well thrive."
frævask = bear fruit.
In either case, frævask is clearly a *verb.*
Frævask means to expand, to grow and thrive as a plant does. The wisdom is metaphorically "implanted" in his mind, and he thrives.
Talley, on the other hand, recognizes the metaphor but mistranslates frævask as a noun: "seed." She contends the line means "I took seed/semen."
Talley, on the other hand, recognizes the metaphor but mistranslates frævask as a noun: "seed." She contends the line means "I took seed/semen."
This is absolutely ridiculous on its face, and moreover, Talley fails to realize (or hopes the reader will forget) that it is Odin *himself* who is hanged, not a "hanged criminal" who Odin "visits" in order to harvest "seed."
Some have argued Odin is therefore taking his own 'seed' in order to 'replenish' his power (in Greenberg's words), but I have already demonstrated that there is no mention of any such metaphorical "seed" in the text, let alone any explicit reference to "semen."
This ludicrous misunderstanding and obvious mistranslation is the only basis for Greenberg's claim. Surely such poor scholarship has been thoroughly discredited yes? On the contrary, Greenberg's work is cited over 50 times across Wikipedia as an authoritative source.
The Wikipedia article for the Aztec god Xo claims that he is the patron of homosexuality (despite his having a female consort), the only citation being - you guessed it - Greenberg's "The Construction of Homosexuality."
Greenberg makes similar claims about Jesus and the Christian Disciples, citing Morton Smith, who argued that the Apostolic Christians practiced ritual homosexuality.
In short, nothing I've written above should surprise you. Think to yourself — in whose interests would it be to abandon all historical scholarship to concoct a narrative of homosexuality out of thin air?
That which rises first to your mind... is true.
Got Jul.
That which rises first to your mind... is true.
Got Jul.
