The Soul in Heathen Belief

[Podo]

Replies like these are why I dont bother, I was simply making the point that the list cannot be considered a reflection of "The Soul in Heathen Belief" if it does not contain Old English words for the soul or even provide a coherent discussion of AS sources on this issue.

If the Troth's list is purporting to reflect the AS soul it is conflating soul with mind; two separate entities in AS belief. I am happy to go through the list paragraph by paragraph; but I often find that people are happy with the eclecticism of organisations like the Troth and get abusive or defensive.............being abused just gets a little old after a while.

You were "simply making the point" in a condescending way. This above quoted text is fine, there's nothing wrong with it. Just post what you mean, next time. That isn't what you did, in this thread initially though; you sparta-kicked someone else's door in and declared that you could tell them all the reasons they were doing it wrong, if they asked you to do so. That's not discussion, that's taking control of a conversation and declaring yourself an authority and everyone else as an inferior. If you don't want to "be abused" then consider that others similarly don't take kindly to being talked down to, and everything will go smoother. Case and point, I've enjoyed reading the stuff you posted, AFTER you got past your soapboxing.

In the Old English corpus the ‘mind’ revolves around the five key words: mód, hyge, sefa, ferhð and (ge)mynd. As A. Harbus (2002) concluded, “ The most common word for 'mind' is mód found over 2500 times in the corpus, along with approximately 900 instances in total of the other simplex nouns — ferhð, hyge, sefa and (ge)mynd”; the author also points out that these words were often deployed for alliterative convenience.

The ‘mind’ words mentioned above are polysemous (have several meanings), so their meanings often overlap; particularly hyge, sefa and mód. Terms for the ‘mind’; ferhð, hyge; mod; sefa and (ge) mynd refer to the mind in a general sense but each term also has specific meaning in Old English poetry. These words also form compounds such as, módgemynd (intelligence of mind), ferhðsefa (thought mind) and módsefa ( the commonest of all the mind compounds).

The polysemous nature of these words are obvious in their definitions:

Mynd = mind; memory; remembrance; memorial or commemoration. Harbus (2002) found that (ge)mynd is found proportionately throughout the corpus (530x prose, 39x poetry); because this term alliterates on 'm'.
Hyge = masc noun thought, mind; heart; disposition; intention or courage; can also mean the top part of the gullet. In Old English poetry hyge appears to have connoted the place of thought or intention, occurrences of hyge in Old English texts reveal that this word’s prototypical meaning concerns the cognitive mind with preference towards emotive contexts. Kazuyosh Toeda in her study of the Old English word hyge states that “hyge distinctively dissociates itself from the soul words; such as sáwol and gast”.
Mód = heart ; mind ; feeling; courage ; pride ; grief ; anger; state of mind; arrogance; inner man/ spiritual part of man as opposed to the bodily part of man.
Sefa= masc noun mind; spirit; heart. Used to indicate spirit in Old English poem The Seafarer. According Harbus (2002), in Old English poetry sefa usually connotes 'understanding' or 'frame of mind' rather than 'mind', though in some cases the broader meaning is perhaps to be understood.

Mistakes in this passage:
Mód does not translate as mood.
Hyge does not translate as high that would be hēah
Orþanc = masc noun: skill; art; contrivance; cunning. Can therefore mean inborn thought, depending on the construction and context of the sentence. Not used in the context expressed by the author in regards to ancestral memory or instinct.
Min means small. Possibly he means mín pers pron first person singular genitive = my/of me eg. Mín nama is Hildeburh.( my name is….). Otherwise has nothing to do with the AS mind or soul. Perhaps ingeþanc masc noun: private thought, conscience would better reflect personal memories.



Hyge as expressed by A. Harbus (2002) seems to indicate the place of thought or intention, though this word can function as a near-synonym for mod, connoting 'mind' generally. Rather than a specific cognitive, emotional, or spiritual, hyge can connote the thoughts in the mind as well as the faculty itself”.

Mistakes in this passage:
Angit no such word in Old English. It's andgit neut noun, other forms andgiet, andgyt or andget meaning understanding; knowledge; perception. In the suggested context of the five senses it is angitu; þa fif andgitu (the five senses)
Wit incorrect. Wit pers pron dual = we two. Probably means witt more commonly gewitt strong Neuter Noun = understanding; intellect; sense; knowledge; consciousness; conscience. Gewit forms a kenning for the mind in gewitloca 'container of intelligence (the mind).



Mistakes in this passage:
Wode = is Middle English not Old English. Wóde in Old English is hemlock (as in Wódewistle). Wód on the other hand means mad/angry/enraged/furious/crazy as in Wóden (Wód = fury/anger/madness + en = made of). Wód does not govern anything it is exactly as it translates.



Spæd I have searched the databases for this word but it does not exist in the Old English lexicon. The closest is spædu = spade or sped= success; prosperity; power; speed; riches. Spæd however is Danish for tiny/tender/infant. If anyone has any sources I would like to read them.

There is no Old English word for luck, luck is Middle English. The closest concept would be wyrd fem noun (what happens, fate, fortune, chance), odd to have a discussion on AS worldview of any kind without the inclusion of wyrd.



Fæcce. Textual evidence for the word fæcce is obscure, it is found only twice, glossed for mære (a monster/creature terrifying people during sleep also known as being hag ridden). Mære has cognates in most Germanic languages all with the similar meaning of a supernatural female creature that commits night assaults on people, so fæcce would be analogous with Old Norse mara.

'FECCAN' - Bosworth–Toller Anglo-Saxon Dictionary
http://bosworth.ff.cuni.cz/finder/3/mære

Confusion surrounds the word fæcce, in that its origin is contested; it may or may not be Old English and it may or may not be the origin of the word fetch; as apparition/wraith/prophetic double. With the exception of glossed for mære you will not find this word in Old English databases. The word fetch has become a modern English gloss for the Old Norse verb fylgia (which means “follower”, attested in Njál’s Saga, The Song of Helgi Hjőrvarson and The Saga of Hallfred). However, the word was not used in this context by Anglo Saxons and the description of the fetch is not drawn from AS sources. Recorded in one's fate, that would be wyrd but there is no AS textual evidence that deeds are recorded in one's wyrd.

There is a discussion of the word fetch here

A Hiberno-Norse Etymology for English fetch 'apparition of a living person'



Mistakes in this passage:
Hame no such word in Old English. It's Hama = a natural covering; integument; membrane; skin; slough of a serpent. Physical body is líchama.
Ferth. I don't know whether the author is alluding to ferhð (varients: ferhþ ferrþ. fyrhþ, ferþ, ferht, masc noun= spirit, mind), in AS literature ferhð often seems to connote the spiritual aspect of the mind. Or Feorh, which is an elusive word in the AS corpus, as Lockett (2011) indicates that feorh is often confused with ferhð but the evidence shows that feorh is separate from both soul and mind.



This passage is a mess and difficult to untangle.
Athem is not Old English; possibly Middle English from ethem =breath, vapor, puff, blast which is in Old English is ǣþm= breath, to breathe. Etymologically linked to Sanskrit atma "essence, breath, soul," from PIE *etmen "breath" (a root found in Sanskrit and Germanic; source of Old English æðm)

atman | Origin and meaning of atman by Online Etymology Dictionary and Indo-European Lexicon: PIE Etymon and IE Reflexes

Unfortunately this has little to support it in AS literature, in AS literature the two words to for soul are sáwol (soul) and gast (spirit); in Old English gast is used to gloss the Latin Spiritus. As Lockett (2011) shows in AS literature the soul enters the body at animation and leaves at death and does very little in between; the soul and the ‘mind’ are discrete entities. Feorh (condition of being alive or the life span) in AS literature may refer to ‘life force’. It is poorly understood but Lockett (2011) suggests that is, “ functionally and substantially discrete from both mind and soul".

The window on the AS mind and soul is found in AS literature and as Godden (2002) observes, “two distinct traditions of thought are evident among the Anglo-Saxons'. Godden (2002) found that the first is the Latin one of Alfred, Alcuin and Elfric”. 'Secondly', Godden (2002) states, “there is a vernacular tradition, more deeply rooted in the language, represented particularly by the poets but occasionally reflected even in the work of Alfred and Elfric, it was a tradition which preserved the ancient distinction of soul and mind, while associating the mind at least as much with passion as with intellect.'



Lich spelt wrong. líc = a body living or dead, usually living. Líchama = our physical body in contrast to the spiritual part of man. Can also mean corpse.

Definitions from:
Welcome to the digital edition of the Bosworth-Toller Anglo-Saxon Dictionary
EOW: Modern - Old English Translator
A Thesaurus of Old English :: Search

References
Leslie Lockett: Anglo-Saxon Psychologies in the Vernacular and Latin Traditions (2011)
M. Godden: Anglo Saxons on the Mind (2002)
A. Harbus: Life of the Mind in Old English Poety ( 2002)
Kazuyosh Toeda: A study of old English Hyge.

Why not just post all of this initially and skip over all of the "woe is me, everyone is mean to me, this is why I don't bother" nonsense? All of the above is interesting to read. Your self-aggrandizement, less so.

 

[Podo]

Upon looking into some of your sources, I am wondering how relevant Godden is. His 2002 work seems to focus almost exclusively on post-Christian Saxon concepts. If this discussion is regarding Anglo0Saxon Heathenry, it seems like a better idea to look pre-christian, if possible, though I do acknowledge the relative lack of prechristian writings.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

you presented eclectic poorly researched fluff.

Talk about rubbish. Most of what you've "corrected" here below are - at worst - spelling errors. But even then, not really. When Podo stated a preference to Anglo-Saxon views, I posted a paraphrase of what was in Our Troth: Volume I. Nowhere did I say that words used were Old English specifically, which is what you've thrown up a ditther about being "poorly researched fluff". We'll get into that here. Secondly, you present it yet again as eclectic, showing a poor grasp of that word and a further tool to use for elitism. When I start tossing in Egyptian, Buddhist, or even Celtic sources, then you can start throwing daggers at eclecticism. Until then what I have presented is Germanic. Nothing more, nothing less. Eclecticism requires broad and diverse sources.

Mistakes in this passage:
Mód does not translate as mood.
Hyge does not translate as high that would be hēah
Orþanc = masc noun: skill; art; contrivance; cunning. Can therefore mean inborn thought, depending on the construction and context of the sentence. Not used in the context expressed by the author in regards to ancestral memory or instinct.
Min means small. Possibly he means mín pers pron first person singular genitive = my/of me eg. Mín nama is Hildeburh.( my name is….). Otherwise has nothing to do with the AS mind or soul. Perhaps ingeþanc masc noun: private thought, conscience would better reflect personal memories.

Neither did I say that mód translates to mood. That is a modernized spelling. Saying this is a "mistake" is like saying it's a mistake to spell Þórr as "Thor". The same follows for the spelling of hyge.
Regarding orþanc, as defined by the Bosworth-Toller Anglo-Saxon Dictionary (also sourced by Our Troth, by the way) it is defined as original, inborn thought. Which is stated in Our Troth. Inborn thought - also known as innatism - is the philosophy that we are born with knowledge. Where else would this come, if not from our ancestors? What else would this be, if not instinct?
The Old English word for min is myne. Min is a Middle English derivative. Myne is defined as:

1. memory, remembrance
2. feeling, affection, love, favor
3. purpose, desire, wish
4. memorial

Mistakes in this passage:
Angit no such word in Old English. It's andgit neut noun, other forms andgiet, andgyt or andget meaning understanding; knowledge; perception. In the suggested context of the five senses it is angitu; þa fif andgitu (the five senses)
Wit incorrect. Wit pers pron dual = we two. Probably means witt more commonly gewitt strong Neuter Noun = understanding; intellect; sense; knowledge; consciousness; conscience. Gewit forms a kenning for the mind in gewitloca 'container of intelligence (the mind).

Again, nothing denoted angit as Old English. Our Troth does state that the Old English for angit is andget.
Wit is the modern spelling of the Old English witt, which is mind, understanding, sense, and sanity.

Mistakes in this passage:
Wode

= is Middle English not Old English. Wóde in Old English is hemlock (as in Wódewistle). Wód on the other hand means mad/angry/enraged/furious/crazy as in Wóden (Wód = fury/anger/madness + en = made of).

Third time; nothing denoted wode as Old English. It's OE origin is listed as wod which, as described, is "everything from ecstasy and madness to inspiration."

Spæd

I have searched the databases for this word but it does not exist in the Old English lexicon.

Wiktionary has it listed as the Old English spēd, identified as "luck, prosperity, success".

Mistakes in this passage:

Hame no such word in Old English. It's Hama = a natural covering; integument; membrane; skin; slough of a serpent. Physical body is líchama.
Ferth. I don't know whether the author is alluding to ferhð (varients: ferhþ ferrþ. fyrhþ, ferþ, ferht, masc noun= spirit, mind), in AS literature ferhð often seems to connote the spiritual aspect of the mind. Or Feorh, which is an elusive word in the AS corpus, as Lockett (2011) indicates that feorh is often confused with ferhð but the evidence shows that feorh is separate from both soul and mind.

Again, no mistake there. Hame was not identified as Old English.
Ferth (alternative spelling of ferþ; alternative of ferhþ) defined as 1. life; 2. heart, spirit, mind

This passage is a mess and difficult to untangle.
Athem is not Old English; possibly Middle English from ethem =breath, vapor, puff, blast which is in Old English is ǣþm= breath, to breathe. Etymologically linked to Sanskrit atma "essence, breath, soul," from PIE *etmen "breath" (a root found in Sanskrit and Germanic; source of Old English æðm)

Looks like it wasn't that hard to untangle after all. Yes, athem is derived from the Old English æþm.

Lich spelt wrong.

Lich spelled modernly, and noted as being from the Old English líc. Which, annoyingly, is what most of your "corrections" seemed to be; assuming that what was written was Old English, and throwing the dictionary at me from there. Which, while we're nit-picking spellings you might want to revise your profile: it's Fyrnsidu, not frynsidu.

 

[Hildeburh]

Wiktionary dude? I gave you the three most authoritative sources for Old English and you resort to wiktionary.

Dude it's either Old English or it's modern english, if it's not in a modern English dictionary then it exists in not man's land; just a curruption or a nonsense. Did you even bother to look them up in modern english:

Ferth= a break in the time space continuum where fourth melds with fifth, to create a hidious freak of placement, they also explode within a week for disturbing the natural order of things.
When someone travels through time to try and win a race they and exit a worm hole just as they fnish a race, they finish the race in in ferth. URBAN DICTIONARY.
Lich=In death, wizards of great power are sometimes able to turn themselves into liches. A lich is a skeletal, undead creature, whose magical powers can only be matched by its malevolence. URBAN DICTIONARY.
Hame= either of two curved pieces lying upon the collar in the harness of an animal, to which the traces are fastener or Middle Dutch hame; related to Middle High German hame fishing rod
Wit the modern english cognate of OE witt, but the list was supposedly the preChristian representation of the 'mind'. But yay! They got the modern English cognate right, but boo they spelt the OE wrong, so makes no sense in OE.
Mód does not equal the modern mood just because it looks the same does not mean it is the same. You are thinking with your 21st century brain not attemping to understand the Old English context. Mód is polysemous; Mód in the context of mood means the seat of emotions, which in Old English context was considered to be the chest.
Spéd so they also spelt that wrong in their list (as I said). Spéd does not equal luck spéd= abundance, plenty, good fortune, ability, capacity, power, utility, occasion, convenience. Seriously, you could have looked that up, I gave you the tools to do so.

Luck is Middle English Etymology Online=
c. 1500, "fortune good or bad, what happens to one by chance (conceived as being favorable or not); good luck, quality of having a tendency to receive desired or beneficial outcomes," not found in Old English, probably from early Middle Dutch luc, shortening of gheluc "happiness, good fortune," a word of unknown origin. It has cognates in Modern Dutch geluk, Middle High German g(e)lücke, German Glück"fortune, good luck."

You clearly don't understand Bosworth and Toller, they present all contexts of a word was used in Old English. As I said ,"Orþanc = masc noun: skill; art; contrivance; cunning. Can therefore mean inborn thought, depending on the construction and context of the sentence. Not used in the context expressed by the author in regards to ancestral memory or instinct". Bosworth and Toller entry below:

or-þanc es; m. n. Original, inborn thought. I. mind, genius, wit, understanding; ingenium Orþanc ingenium, cræftica artifex, Wrt. Voc.i. 47, 8-9. Líflíces orþa[nces] vivacis ingenii, Hpt. Gl. 407, 40-43. Hé genam þurh heora láre on his orþance ða egeslícan dǽda, Ælfc. T. Grn. 17, 21. Nú wolde ic ðæt ða æðela[n] clericas ásceócon fram heora andgit ...

or-þanc es; m. [or without] Thoughtlessness, want of thought Nǽnig man scile oft orþances(heedlessly) át ábrédan wǽpnes ecgge, Salm. Kmbl. 329 ; Sal. 164. ...

or-þanc adj. Cunning, skilful Ceastra beóþ feorran gesýne, orþanc enta geweorc, wrǽtlíc weallstána geweorc. Menol. Fox 463; Gn. C. 2. Orþonc ǽrsceaft. Exon. Th. 477, 1 ; Ruin. 16. Mé þurh hrycg wrecen hongaþ under án orþonc píl, óðer on heáfde, Exon. Th. 403, 23; Rá. 22, 12. Hwǽr com heora snyttro and seó orþonce gláunes, and se ðe gebregdnan dómas démde ? Blickl. Homl. 99, 31.

Angit so as I said a spelling mistake or an attempt to manufacture a word to impress,or just can't be bothered looking it up. If "Our Troth" says its andget why spell it wrong in the first place? Can't proof read or think their audience is too stupid to know the difference?

Athem? Look it up dude took me quite a while, another mispelling, and really doesn't change the fact that it has nothing to do with the OE 'mind' You now know what it means because I explained it to you, not 'Our Troth' (your welcome).

Cant imagine why you bother to defend that mess but that's what I've come to expect from you, do some research dude stop accepting second rate eclectic drivel and passing it off as Heathen.

 

[Hildeburh]

Upon looking into some of your sources, I am wondering how relevant Godden is. His 2002 work seems to focus almost exclusively on post-Christian Saxon concepts. If this discussion is regarding Anglo0Saxon Heathenry, it seems like a better idea to look pre-christian, if possible, though I do acknowledge the relative lack of prechristian writings.

Read it you may find out for yourself, Godden distinguishes between vernacular and classical tradition in the AS corpus. There is no way other than though reading AS poetry to tackle the idea of the AS mind.

It is true AS sources are challenging but no more so than the Icelandic sources.

 

[Hildeburh]

You were "simply making the point" in a condescending way. This above quoted text is fine, there's nothing wrong with it. Just post what you mean, next time. That isn't what you did, in this thread initially though; you sparta-kicked someone else's door in and declared that you could tell them all the reasons they were doing it wrong, if they asked you to do so. That's not discussion, that's taking control of a conversation and declaring yourself an authority and everyone else as an inferior. If you don't want to "be abused" then consider that others similarly don't take kindly to being talked down to, and everything will go smoother. Case and point, I've enjoyed reading the stuff you posted, AFTER you got past your soapboxing.

Why not just post all of this initially and skip over all of the "woe is me, everyone is mean to me, this is why I don't bother" nonsense? All of the above is interesting to read. Your self-aggrandizement, less so.

Ƿes þū hāl
I have and I just get the same crap, damned if you do and damned if you don't. But nice to see another AS heathen on the site.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Yeah dude, wiktionary.

Dude it's either Old English or it's modern english,

I said modernized spelling, not Modern English.

Angit (as I said) a spelling mistake or an attempt to manufacture a word to impress or just can't be bothered looking it up. If "Our Troth" says its andget why spell it wrong in the first place? Can't proof read or think their audience is too stupid to know the difference?

Again, modernized spelling. It is not that hard to understand hilde. It is not spelled wrong (nor are any of the words given), and the Old English origins are given. Not everyone likes to live buried in the past, you know; some Heathens move forward.

Cant imagine why you bother to defend that mess but that's what I've come to expect from you, do some research dude stop accepting second rate eclectic drivel and passing it off as Heathen.

It is Heathen hilde, and you're not the final say on what is or is not. Get off your high horse, especially since that "mess" references your sources as well.

 

[Podo]

Read it you may find out for yourself, Godden distinguishes between vernacular and classical tradition in the AS corpus. There is no way other than though reading AS poetry to tackle the idea of the AS mind.

It is true AS sources are challenging but no more so than the Icelandic sources.

Most of it is still Christian, unfortunately. Praise be the archaeologists for their pre-christian data-gathering. I studied OE for four years in university, basically everything the stab-happy buggers wrote was Christian in nature, since it all kinda starts with Caedmon's Hymn. It's still interesting, though, since the heathen aspects crop up every now and a again.

 

[DanishCrow]

Guys, this is the RECONSTRUCTIONIST HEATHEN forum.

Fight all you like, fact of the matter is that our last priests died over a thousand years ago, and we have bits and pieces of ancient poetry to go on. The rest is something we're making up. If ever the question is "did historical sources confirm that original heathens said or believed [x]", the answer is ALWAYS no.

Please don't get so caught up in archeological remnants that you start thinking you have the patent on what a reconstructed religion is or is not, it's a waste of time and removes your own connection to the sacred.

 

[Podo]

Guys, this is the RECONSTRUCTIONIST HEATHEN forum.

Fight all you like, fact of the matter is that our last priests died over a thousand years ago, and we have bits and pieces of ancient poetry to go on. The rest is something we're making up. If ever the question is "did historical sources confirm that original heathens said or believed [x]", the answer is ALWAYS no.

Please don't get so caught up in archeological remnants that you start thinking you have the patent on what a reconstructed religion is or is not, it's a waste of time and removes your own connection to the sacred.

Well yeah but surely you see the value in basing modern conclusions from the historical record. If someone wants to get ideas as to how to do a Blot, it makes sense to look at the old sources as much as one can, and then fill in the rest. If your conclusion is "we weren't there so do whatever you want" then what is the point of reconstructing anything? Why not just do whatever you want, regardless of culture or history, and call it a day?

Unless I am misunderstanding what your point is. If that's the case, sorry.

 

[DanishCrow]

My point is that while we clearly have to base our practice on some sort of source material, said source material is, without fail, inconclusive and hard to interpret and so, claiming that one interpretation is more heathen than the other is a good way to play the fool.

 

[Podo]

My point is that while we clearly have to base our practice on some sort of source material, said source material is, without fail, inconclusive and hard to interpret and so, claiming that one interpretation is more heathen than the other is a good way to play the fool.

I had misunderstood you, then, because I agree fully with the above statement. Thanks for clarifying