"It was in the eighteen-eighties that Viktor Rydberg, with
passionate energy, plunged into the study of Germanic
mythology, What prompted him to enter upon this study was a
pamphlet, published in 1876 by a Norwegian scholar, Dr.
Bang, in which the author set out to prove connection
between The Voluspa and the Sibylline Oracles, and which
seemed to support the views set forth shortly before by
Sophus Bugge that many Old Norse sagas were partly of
antique-classical, partly of Jewish-Christian origin, and
that they had been carried over to Scandinavia from the
British isles in the Viking days. Rydberg found himself
called upon to appear as an Opponent to Dr. Bang and
published, in 1881, a treatise, The Sibylline Books and the
Voluspa, in which he subjected Dr. Bang's arguments to
severe criticism. From his boyhood, Rydberg had been
interested in the Old Norse myths; some passages out of the
Voluspa, besides the catechism, had been the printed matter
from which he learned to read. Now, mythology was to keep
him spellbound for many years. During these years,
especially the· beginning of the eighties, he hardly allowed
himself time for food and rest. Whole days and nights
through he would sit lost in his speculations without
leaving his writing-desk, without saying a word to those
around him. He shut himself off from all intercourse, did
not communicate with the outside world. Rydberg's untiring
labours resulted in his Undersokningar i Germansk mytologi~
in two imposing volumes, the first published in 1886, the
second in 1889. English, French, and German editions of the
first volume were planned, but only the English translation
was carried out. The translator was Rasmus R. Anderson,
United States ex-minister to Denmark, whose offer to
translate the book was greeted with joy by Viktor Rydberg.
The book was reviewed by several German scholars, who all
took up a more or less disparaging attitude towards
Rydberg's methods of investigation and his results. Although
they speak with high praise of the author's learning, his
thorough insight, his ability occasionally to throw light
upon intricate problems by means of ingenious suggestions,
they criticize severely his hazardous etymologies, his
identification of different mythical figures without
sufficient grounds, his mixing up of heroic saga and myth,
and, above all, his bent for remodelling myths in order to
make them fit into a system which (they say) never existed.
The general opinion prevails that the poet in him had a
fatal influence on the scholar. "Rydbergs Undersökningar
sind zum grossen Theile keine streng wissenschaftliche
Behandlung der My then sondern geistreiche Construction en
eines Dichters" (Detter). "Die dichterische Schopferkraft
hat Rydbergs wissenschaftlichen Sinn zu boden geworfen" (E.
H. Meyer). Among contemporary Swedish reviewers, Hildebrand
and Båath are appreciative; especially the latter bestows
unreserved praise' on Rydberg's work. On the other hand,
Rydberg met with severe criticism later from A. Noreen, who
blames him for misinterpretation of the myths: what Rydberg
holds to be primeval myths are often inventions of a later
date, christianized, systematized by theologians. "The first
of the theologians whose name is known to us, was Snorre,
the last Viktor Rydberg ... Rydberg is not a restorer of old
myths but something far greater - a creative artist, a great
poet". Schück endorses the opinion that Rydberg's great work
is a failure and finds an explanation in the fact that his
researches had earlier turned on theological subjects: in
particular, he had penetrated deeply into the theological
system of the Middle Ages, and the views with which he had
become familiar during these studies, he brought with him
when turning to mythology. Here too he wanted to find a
system. E. H. Meyer in his first review' had already
emphasized the fatal influence which these circumstances
seem to have exercised on Rydberg's work. Rydberg's work
was, then, stamped as a failure, and this verdict which from
certain points of view cannot be considered unjust, seems to
have caused the book to fall into oblivion! a fate which
surely it has not deserved. In spite of fundamental
deficiencies and many errors in detail, the book presents
stimulating reading, and even the severest critic should
recognize Rydberg's many ingenious deductions.
As already mentioned the first volume was translated into
English. Within the Anglo-Saxon world the book seems to have
attracted some attention. In a translation of Saxo
Grammaticus, published by Elton, Mr Powell has written an
introduction where, among other things, he treats of Saxo's
mythology. We here find the following enthusiastic
appreciation of Viktor Rydberg:
"No one has commented upon Saxo's
mythology with such brilliancy, such minute consideration,
and such success as the Swedish scholar, Victor Rydberg.
More than occasionally he is over-ingenious and over-anxious
to reduce chaos to order; sometimes he almost loses his
faithful reader in the maze he treads so easily and
confidently, and sometimes he stumbles badly. But he has
placed the whole subject on a fresh footing ... " ,
Stopford A. Brooke, in his History of
Early English Literature, refers to Rydberg's researches on
some points and says about his book:
"When we have made every allowance for
a certain fancifulness, and for the bias which a well-loved
theory creates, this book is a real contribution to Northern
mythology ... ".
Another proof of Anglo-Saxon appreciation is that the book
has been considered worthy of a re-print. It was indeed
published by a so-called "Norroena Society", in 1906, in
three extremely handsome volumes bound in leather, the
impression being limited to 450 copies. The latter part of
Rydberg's work, which only appeared in Swedish, is certainly
not widely known. I have not seen many signs, for instance,
of scholars having paid attention to Ryd- berg's
contribution to Beowulf research. Yet Rydberg devotes
several pages, chiefly in the second part of his book, to
un- ravelling problems touching upon the mythical elements
of the Beowulf-poem. His theories, with due regard paid to
the views prevailing at the time when his work was
published, are not void of interest, and, whatever their
deficiencies, they are re- markable for their originality.
Even though the views set forth by Rydberg never stood a
chance of being accepted, there are points in his exposition
that, deserve being once more brought to light. Among the
questions discussed by Rydberg, I choose to state his views
on Grendel (in the first part of his book), his comments on
nature-myths, the Breca Episode, and the Haethcyn-Herebeald
Episode." "...Rydberg took up a very critical attitude
towards what he calls the "myth-meteorological" school:
"The gravest fault that this school has committed from a
methodological point of view is that it has not seen the
difference between mythogony and mythology, that is to say,
the difference between the science of the origin of myths
and the science of their present contents, their epic
connection and historic development. Mythogony, which is an
ethno-psychological and ethnographic science, . has been
regarded by this school as mythology. Connected with this
methodological fault is the untenable conception from which
this school starts, namely that myths in their present form
contain appropriate material, by the aid of which it is
possible to explain their origin from different phenomena:
from the storm, the lightning, the dawn, or the sunset glow
etc. This fault became aggravated through the influence of
the philologists who imagined, when a mythical person's name
had been interpreted and found to mean 'the roaring one',
'the shining one' etc., that all myths connected with him
could be explained from this meaning of the name. This
meteorologic-etymological school has been blind to the fact
that the myths, whatever their genesis - and it is highly
probable that several of them have indeed arisen from the
effect of natural phenomena on the imagination - exist now
in a form that they have attained after a process of
development, continued for an indefinite number of thousands
of years, during which time quite other factors than the
phenomena of sky and weather were working on behalf of the
genesis of new myths and the transformation of the old
nature- myths. "It may be safely asserted that since the
time when super- human forces began to be shaped by man's
imagination into concrete personalities, everyone with his
definite character and his sphere of activity marked out,
the purely nature-mythical elements of the myths faded or
were more or less remodelled, and were combined with
elements of quite a different origin and character ..."
"...in order to solve its tasks, mythogony has to regard
myths in their present form as material to be used only with
the greatest discrimination, and as being only a slight
portion of the material it has to collect and examine. It is
the new folklore movement, with its investigation into
ethno-psychology, from which we have to expect a mythogony
that will be able to solve its task". The
Herebeald-Hrethcyn Episode "The 'Geat' princes with whom
Beowulf has been brought up are Herebeald and Heethcyn. A
careless and disastrous shot from Haethcyn's bow kills his
brother Herebeald. The prototype of this episode is the myth
of Balder's death, caused by an arrow from his brother Had's
bow. It is strange that students of the Beowulf- poem should
have overlooked this connection, as the names of Had and
Balder reappear in Haethcyn and Herebeald and as Herebeald
and Haethcyn are brothers like Balder and Had, and one is
killed accidentally by the other's arrow . . .
"After Haethcyn has unintentionally killed his brother, he
goes to the wars and falls at the hand of the Swedish king
Ongentheow, according to the Beowulf-poem. Thus the latter
has succeeded the Vali of the myth as the slayer of
Hrethcyn. The statement of Hyndluljod that one Angantyr
(Ongentheow) claimed the inheritance of Vali's sword [vala
malmi, Hyndluljóð 9] the sword that slew Had, is
evidently mythically connected herewith and confirms the
original identity of Herebeald and Haethcyn with Balder and
Had. "Saxo's tale of Had's (Hotherus') death is also
mythically connected with the Beowulf-poem. Saxo, who
supposed Herebeald's and Haethcyn's fosterbrother Beowulf to
be identical with Balder's and Had's brother Vali, makes
Beowulf, under the name of Bous, avenge Balder and slay.
Had. Saxo's account of the burial of Bous reminds us of the
description of Beowulf's burial in the poem. Bous is
accorded a sumptuous funeral (cujus corpus magnifico funeris
apparatu Rutenus tumulauit exercitus), Beowulf is buried in
a gigantic mound, filled with treasures, helmets, coats of
mail etc. The name of Bous is attached to the mound (nomine
ejus insignem collem), Beowulf himself orders that his mound
shall bear his name. It is piled on a headland, Hrone's ness
("Whalesness"). Vali, whose role Saxo has given to Bous,
bears the epithet Ranr and, in heroic legend, Hrane, as I
have shown elsewhere. "The Beowulf-poem makes its hero take
part in a war between Onela-Ali and Eadgils-Athils. The
mythical counterpart of this is what was told above of Bjarr
taking part in the celebrated winter campaign, when gods,
heroes, primeval smiths and emigration leaders til tss
ritru, - in which campaign Bjarr fought on one side, one
King Athils on the other. Undoubtedly there is some
connection between this and the fact that just as the
Beowulf-poem tells about the death of the Swedish king
Ongentheow, fighting alone against two warriors, so does
Saxo tell, about the death of a Swedish king Athislus; and
also that the description in the Beowulf-poem of the
character and exploits of King Ongentheow agrees with Saxo's
description of Athislus. Whilst the myth made Bjarr fight
against Athils, the Beowulf-poem makes Beowulf fight partly
against one Eadgils-Athils", partly against one Ongentheow,
whose character, adventures and death calls to mind his
original identity with one Athislus ... " Detter, after
enumerating some interesting ohservations made by Rydberg,
goes on to say: "Die hübscheste dieser Bemerkungen findet
sich s. 6651; Haedcyn ist Hodr, Herebeald sein Bruder. Wir
haben also hier ganz deutlich den Baldr-mythus vor uns. Ich
bemerke class mir mein Lehrer Prof. Heinzel schon vor langer
Zeit dasselbe mitgetheilt hat.
Nerman, who made the same observation many years afterwards,
found later on that the identity (of Herebeald and Balder)
had been already noticed by others; he refers to Englische
Studien, LIV, where the matter is discussed.' In this volume
it is stated (p. 33) that Gisle Brynjulfsson was the first
to point out the resemblance between the episode and the
myth, but from the way in which Brynjulfsson expresses
himself in the passage referred to it is not obvious that he
means to connect the episode in question with the myth of
Balder. I think Rydberg is the one who first stated the
connection in plain terms, but no mention is made of him.
Klaeber, on the other hand, refers to Rydberg among other
scholars, who have discussed this question.
1942 D. Whitelock
The Year's Work in English Studies
"... In his relation of the Herebeald- Haethcyn story to the
Balder myth Rydberg has had some following, and he
anticipated Schütte in identifying Ongentheow with Saxo's
Athislus."
1943 Hilda R. Ellis Davidson
The Road to Hel
“All through the heathen period belief and thought was
shifting and fluid, varying according to local cultures,
developing in accordance with particular influences in
specific localities; and the oral literature that reflected
it was shifting and developing too.”
“The evidence for Odainsakr in Norse literature is slight
and tantilising. Rydberg (Teutonic Mythology, trans.
Anderson, London, 1889) built up a fascinating but wild
theory around it equating it, among other places, with the
land behind the high wall in the story of Hadingus, and the
land beyond the golden bridge next to Gudmundr’s realm in
Saxo; but we have unfortunately no grounds for accepting
these suggestions, pleasant though they might seem, without
more weighty evidence. Apart from the reference in Saxo to
Fjaller, governor of Scandia, who is said to have been
driven into exile and ‘to have retired to a spot called
Undersakre, unknown to our people’ (IV 105), we are limited
to the strange Saga Eiriks Vidförla in the Fornaldar
collection, which caused even Rydberg to despair because of
the preponderance of Christian influence.”
1945 John Gustaf Berg, Rolf Hillman
Urval ur Viktor Rydbergs Diktning
Tor [Thor]
Helge Ljungberg, 1947
(Partially translated by William P. Reaves)
(c) 2010 All Rights Reserved
Indra - Thor.
Viktor Rydberg especially has collected in detail all
comparative mythological material concerning Indra and Thor
with the intent of showing the identity of both gods.
“The question is not as to similarity in special details,”
writes Rydberg, adding “that kind of similarities may be
pointed out in nearly all mythic groups in the world, and,
as a rule, altogether too bold hypotheses are built on the
feeble foundations they offer." (UGM1, p. 660)
1. According to Rigveda (9,28,5; 9,97,31; 9,72,2) a primeval
smith Tvashtar sharpened a heavenly-stone for Indra, like
Sindri forged Thor’s hammer. Animosity arose among the
smiths and the gods in the Indic and the Norse regions.
2. Indra like Thor was a son of “Mother Earth” (RV 4,17,2).
Both gods had two sets of parents one divine and one
belonging to the demon class. According to Rgveda Indra is
born at a point when the battle between good and evil forces
rages its worst (comparable to Ahriman’s struggle against
Ahura Mazdah) and when the forces of evil had taken the
forces of good into their power. Indra is born as a savior
under dramtic circumstances. The goddess Earth did not want
to know her fetus, but abandoned it. In the womb of the
deep-water giantess, Kusava, incubated the fetus. Her
husband, the giant Vyamsa, "as bad as Vrtra himself" (RV
1,32; 4,18,1) wanted to kill the fetus at the moment of
birth, but Indra broke his way out of his mother’s side and
newly born crushed Vyamsa’s head with the lightning wedge
(RV 4,22,3). Kusava, that Indra now “made a widow”, died of
sorrow, while the while the discarded gods rallied again.
Indra got a soma-drink from Tvastr, killed the dragon Vrtra
and liberated the bound masses of water so that the earth
could become fruitful again and released the sun from its
prison. Rydberg maintained that this mythic
complex would reflect in the stories about Thor, if in a
distorted form. He assumed from the description in the
Prologue to Snorri’s Edda, according to which Thor was
raised in Thrace by the Duke Loricus. At twelve years old
Thor killed his foster-father and his wife Lora, took Thrace
for himself and traveled widely in the world “and alone
conquered all berserkers, giants and the greatest dragon,
and many animals.” Rydberg considers these similarities
sufficient to show the original identity of the myths
between Indra’s and Thor’s birth and youthful exploits.
3. According to one of the hymns of the Valakhilya (3,8)
Indra once took possession of a krivi (according to Rydberg
a mead-kettle) and killed the giant Susna, “drought”. Susna
lived on the other side of Rasa, the border river between
the worlds of the giants and the humans. Rydberg compared
this myth with the story of Thor and Hymir and held that one
probably had its root in the other.
4. The myth of Indra and the dragon Vrtra is well-known (RV
3,30,8).
The waters exceeded Vrtra. Han lay by their feet, the
dragon. In the middle of the never stopping, never sleeping
water’s course lay the serpent’s body. In far reaching
darkness Indra’s enemy sinks. (RV 1,32,8-10.) Indra hit
Vrtra i the head with the many-sided lightning-wedge. (RV
1,52,15.) Rydberg correctly establishes, like many before
and after him, the similarities with the myth of Thor and
the Midgard serpent. 5. A single giant, Rauhina,
dared to enter the gods’ dwelling, but was afterward crushed
by Indra’s lightning wedge (RV 1,103,2; 2,12,12). Indra
killed the giant on his own territory and brought along two
other gods on his journey. The myth shows similarities with
the story of Thor and Hrungnir. 6. The
giant-race the pani possessed fleet-footed horses and stole
the heavenly grain. They chased away and imprisoned the
rain-clouds and the morning dews, so that the earth dried
up. The gods, Indra before all others, undertook crusades to
punish the pani. Rydberg makes far-reaching comparisons
between the pani’s excellent horses those of the Nordic
giants (Gullfaxi) and wishes to prove that “giant-demons in
horse-shape” (like the Iranian Apaosa) exist in both the
Indic and Germanic mythology (Sleipnir, son of Loki and the
horse
Svadilfari, the demon Moinn in horse-form). Grain also
played a prominent role within Germanic mythology: according
to Lokasenna 23, Loki milked cows in the underworld for
eight years; white cows drew Terra Mater’s wagon according
to Tacitus. 7. Indra, accompanied by a group of
warriors, on one occasion had gone off to kill the giant
Ahi. The way there was difficult to find, and Ahi
complicated the journey further by sending hail-showers
toward Indra and his men (RV 1, 32, 13). They must wade
through 19 rivers (RV 1, 32, 14). Two of Indra’s companions
were almost drown but were rescued and carried to the other
shore by the god. At the meeting of Indra and Ahi, the giant
cast lightning toward Indra, but Indra was unharmed and
killed Ahi (RV 1, 32, 13). With that, the giantess’ caves
opened and the water gushed out. Similarities with the
Geirrod myth are obvious. 8. Indra stood in
irreconcileable opposition to all winter-powers and storms.
Rydberg compares the winter-giants with Gymir, and he
identifies the Sanskrit hima, Latin hiems, greek. χιών
'wintercold' and sees in him the same giant that Saxo calls
king Snow. 9. Both Thor and Indra ride in a
wagon through the atmosphere (RV 10, 89, 2; 49:7 etc.) but
walk on foot into the world of the giants. When they wade
through the streams of water, they grow in bodily size as
high as the wave-swells (RV 1, 52, 7 - Thorssdrapa 7).
10. Both gods require a considerable amount to eat and
drink. Indra feels stong when he eats 1,000 bulls, Thor is
satistfied with less. At Hymir’s (Hym. 15) he eats two
bulls. At Thrym’s (Thrymskvida 24) one bull and eight salmon
in addition to it. Indra was the greatest soma-drinker (RV
1,8,7): at one time, he emptied thirty bowls of soma (RV
8,66,4), while Thor in this regard was his superior; at
Skrymir’s he drank nearly the whole sea from a horn.
11. Indra’s thunder-wagon was yoked with haris, 'the
red-brown', that he slaughtered to revive again like Thor’s
goats.
12. In character, Thor and Indra were completely like one another;
“friendly to humans”, “noble-minded” easily aroused, quickly
calmed again, basically good-hearted, joyous with song and
mead” which Rydberg using folk-pyschology, interpreted as a
creation from “the Aryan time of unity, when unsubdued
heroic courage was united with goodness and good-will as an
ideal.” 13. Rydberg maintains that Thor’s oldest
weapon, a hammer, was of stone, and sees this confirmed by
the folk-concept of the thunder-wedge (flint). Indra’s
weapon, vajra, was “four-edged” like the swastika (RV
4,22,1,2). 14. The name Thor, according to
Rydberg, 'means “roarer' and is related to Sanskrit tan,
tanyati, 'roar', 'thunder', which is an ancient epithet for
Indra’s weapon probably also a name borne by Indra himself.
In Thor’s byname Einridi Rydberg sees a distorted echo of
Indra” every attempt to explain the word from the Norse
store of language “smacks of folk-etymology.”
15. Indra’s friend, ward and battle-brother was the hero
Kutsa, who belonged to the class of beings comparable to the
Norse alfar. Rgveda’s angiras and rbhus. Kutsa lived
together with his “judicial, imaginative” wife and a darling
son on a farm near the border-river Rasa. Kutsa fought,
alone or together with Indra, against the giant dasyus and
susnas. Indra stayed with him on his journeys to the giant’s
land. In Kutsa’s company Indra killed the giant Susna (RV
4,16,12; 1,63,3; 1,121,9 etc.). Kutsa rides together with
Indra on the thunder-wagon, etc (RV 2,19, 6). Rydberg
compiles Kutsa with the Norse Egill-Aurvandill. In the first
volune of his Investigations, Rydberg has sought to show the
identity of Völund’s brother Egill and Svipdag’s father
Aurvandill. Egill-Aurvandill lived by the Elivagor, the
boundary water between Jotunheimm and Asgardr, he was Thor’s
friend and received him on his farm. Rydberg identifies
Kutsa’s wife with Groa, »the dis of vegetation» Egill-Aur-
vandil’s wife. Kutsa was like Egill the protector of crops.
Indra rescued Kutsa from mortal danger like Thor rescued
Egill-Aurvandill. Kutsa utilizes a weapon, “so
characteristic that it is called by his name kutsya” (RV
4,16,12). Rydberg gives approval that kutsya was a bow.
Egill-Aurvandill too was an archer. In Rigveda
two other heroes are named beside Kutsa, Aya and Atithigva.
Aya, one of the smith-competent rbhus, Rydberg associates
with Old Norse Ajo, another name of the smith Volund. Egill
stood in the same relationship to Volund as Kutsa to Aya.
Kutsa, Aya and Atithigva Gradually beome Indra’s enemies in
the same manner as Volundr, Egill and Slagfinr from having
been the gods’ friends to becoming their adversaries. 16.
Rydberg finally identifies Pusan and Thjalfi. “Among the
Rigveda-Aryans he became Indra’s ward, among the Germans he
became Thor’s. Thialfi was an orphan, adopted into Egil’s
house (FAS 3, 241). Pusan too was an orphan encountered in a
concealing vavri (RV 10,5,5). Thialfi accompanied Thor on
his campaigns against the giants and took part in battles.
Pusan played the same role, when in Indra’s company he
fought the Vrtras (RV 6, 56,2). Thjalfi broke the goat’s
bone. The same is said of Pusan. Both had sisters who are
mentioned in the myths. “Pusan, like Thialfi, is the Aryan
tribes’s and family’s leader and defender, when they
departed to find their new dwelling-places ...Among the
Rigveda-Aryans as well as the Germans, the same hero became
the defender of migrants and colonizers, and particularly in
the Germanic, the prototype for settlers. Det har synts mig
vasentligt att redogora for Rydbergs syn pa problemet
Thor-Indra, and this for many reasons. Rydbergs forskningar
har pa ett satt. som de ingalunda Iortjanar blivit
asidosatta in the scientific discussion.
Hans sammanstallning of the mythological elements show that
he sjalv havdat, »gemensamhet in a large, central,
connected-myth complex»." Rydberg's view on the myth i
allmanhet och den vediska myten i synnerhet ar i stort sett
riktig, da den i vasentlighet vilar pa Bergaigne’s theories
about Iorhallandet between rite and myth. Svagheten i
Rydbergs position sammanhanger framfor allt med att han till
varje pris ville pressa fram likheter for att pa sa satt
stalla the Germanic mythology in samklang with the
Indo-European. Harmed samanmanhanger ocksa hans benagenhet
for en viss fri tolkning av de... Obviously considerable
similarties exist between Indra and Thor although not
to such a high degree as Rydberg wanted to prove. One has
pointed out, for example, a similarity in the
name-conception: *Þun-ra and Ind-ra, with the same suffix.
Hela den stora fragan, huruvida gemensamma myth-complex
forelegat fardiga already during the so-called
Indo-European cultural time of unity, a question that
Rydberg tillmatte stor vikt, maste Iamnas obesvarad, da dels
prehistorien ar for litet kand for att kunna laggas till
grund for sakra slutsatser, dels fragan om mytkomplexens
uppkomst och vandringar mellan de olika kulturkretsarna
inrymmer alltfor manga osakerhetsmoment, for att man skall
kunna giva en helhetsbild by the mythic world. Av vikt ar
ocksa i detta sammanhang att understryka att ett flertal
Indra myths, som Rydberg ej tagit stallning till, inte ager
tillampning pa the Nordic thunder-god. The older forskningen
explained tamligen enhalligt Indra as the god of heaven. His
original character as a thunder-god is commonly maintained,
for example by Maurice Bloomfield and H. Oldenberg.
Macdonnell saw in Indra, partially a thundergod and secondly
a wargod. E. W. Hopkins had a strong feeling that the
disparate elements in the Indra-form that had “too much
storm in himself to be the sun, too much light to be the
storm, too closely related to monsoons to be the heaven and
too rainy to be the fire.”