Celtic Influences in Germanic Religion: A Survey

160 Pages·2013·4.686 MB·English

by  Matthias Egeler

Matthias Egeler
Celtic Influences in Germanic Religion
A Survey
Herbert Utz Verlag • Miinchen
Münchner Nordistische Studien
herausgegeben von
Annegret Heitmann und Wilhelm Heizmann
Band 15
Titelbild: “A British Druid,” from William Stukeley: Stonehenge. A Temple restor’d to
the British Druids. London: Printed for W. Innys and R. Manby, at the West End of St.
Pauls 1740,plate I (facingp. 1).
Reproduced with the kind permission of the Library
of St Catharine s College, Cambridge.
Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation
in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten
sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.
Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt.
Die dadurch begründeten Rechte, insbesondere die der Übersetzung, des Nachdrucks,
der Entnahme von Abbildungen, der Wiedergabe auf photomechanischem oder ähnli­
chem Wege und der Speicherung in Datenverarbeitungsanlagen bleiben - auch bei nur
auszugsweiser Verwendung - Vorbehalten.
Copyright © Herbert Utz Verlag GmbH -2013
ISBN 978-3-8316-4226-7
Printed in EU
Herbert Utz Verlag GmbH, München
089-277791-00 • www.utzverlag.de
3

“Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight,
which is not so much a twilight of the gods as of the reason.”
J.R.R. Tolkien (1963, p. 30)
4

(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:3)(cid:7)
After I had published some of my work on Valkyries and their
Celtic (and other) relatives, one day I found myself being asked
whether I would contribute a short overview of Celtic influences in
Germanic religious history to an edited volume. I agreed immedi-
ately – only to realise a while later that (apart from the Valkyries) I
really did not know very much at all about the general state of
scholarship on this topic. This was all the more worrying as no-one
else within living memory seemed to have produced a detailed,
critical synthesis on which to build.
After some two years of further thought and after collecting the
historiography in question, the present text is an attempt to provide
both a summary and a critical assessment of the debate concerning
Celtic influences in Germanic religious history since the beginning
th
of the 20 century. (It should perhaps be emphasised at the outset
that this attempt is restricted to religious history, though under-
stood in a relatively broad sense; ‘secular’ heroic legend has not
1
been included, as this topic would require a book in its own right. )
The original plan was to sum up the state of scholarship in a short
article, but after surveying the historiography I had the impression
that more was called for: in over a century of research, many

1
What exactly is meant by ‘religious history’ and what lies outside its scope de-
pends on the vexed question of the definition of the term ‘religion’. (For overviews
and theories on this question cf. e.g. Zinser 2010, pp. 35-80; Rüpke 2007, pp. 26-
27; Auffahrt & Mohr 2006; Kehrer 1998; Ahn 1997; Geertz 1973.) I do not wish to
venture into such definitional debates here: to do so would be to raise a multitude
of hotly contested questions without contributing much to a survey whose primary
purpose is to establish the current state of scholarship in the field. In the following,
the selection of material will therefore be based on an understanding of ‘religious
history’ which uses the term in a very wide sense based on the varying usage of the
terms ‘religion’ and ‘mythology’ in the historiography rather than on theoretical
considerations about ‘religion’ as such. I will return to this question below (p. 106).
5

suggestions have been put forward, but there has been very little
critical debate. Accordingly, the present text aims to provide not
only an overview of the proposals advanced to date, but also some
assessment of their plausibility. In terms of sources, the main
emphasis is on the evidence of the Middle Ages, which has
constituted the centrepiece of scholarly discussion to date; Celtic
and Germanic antiquity also receive attention (albeit briefly), but
the treatment of the archaeological evidence in particular has been
largely restricted to the presentation of a digest of current opinions.
The section dealing with the Middle Ages – i.e. the question of
insular Celtic influences on Norse mythology – enganges in more
sustained criticism and discusses the proposed Celtic-Norse
relationships in enough detail to allow an assessment of their merit.
This section presents broad coverage of research conducted from
th th
the early 20 century onwards. 19 century research, although
groundbreaking for its time, has not normally been addressed
explicitly; the methodology of Sophus Bugge (the most important
contributor of his time by far) was felt to be unsatisfactory already
at the turn of the century, and another century later this assessment
2 th
remains valid. Occasional gems of 19 century research are,
however, mentioned where appropriate.
th
Even for the 20 century, I have not aimed at complete coverage
of existing scholarship. Rather, the goal was a detailed treatment of
methodological problems on the basis of a broad, but not exhaustive
analysis of the historiography: much of what follows is a discussion
th
of methodological issues raised by many 20 century contributions
to the debate surrounding Celtic influences in the North. These
methodological issues will soon make clear why I have chosen the
th
above quotation of Tolkien to introduce this little book: 20
century discussions repeatedly faced seemingly insurmountable

2
E.g. Bugge 1889; Bugge 1899. For a concise summary of this earliest part of the
debate cf. Chesnutt 1989, pp. 35-36; Andersson 1964, pp. 56-61. For a (compara-
tively) recent critique of Bugge cf. also Harris 1976, pp. 70-71. Early critical re-
marks can be found already in Mogk 1896, p. 27; von der Leyen 1908; von Sydow
1910, p. 65; Finnur Jónsson 1921, pp. 80-93; or cf. van Hamel (ed.) 1933, p. 260.
6

methodological problems which have rarely led to a constructive
debate. Instead, they have created a widespread climate of scepti-
cism towards any attempt at elucidating possible historical
connections between Norse and insular Celtic mythological
patterns and motifs. The following survey will show that this
feeling of scepticism is on the one hand justified (at least from a
historiographical perspective), but that it is in some respects also
overstated: while much that has been proposed is indeed rather
problematic, there are also a number of contributions which
illustrate that a methodologically responsible approach to the
question of Celtic-Norse religious contact is possible.
In fact, in spite of the many problems inherent in the debate
about Celtic-Norse religious contact, there is probably more to it
than the present climate of scepticism would lead one to expect – if
one has the patience to search for the worthwhile contributions
among those that belong to the (as Tolkien put it) ‘Celtic twilight’.
To restrict the following to a collection of the best pieces, however,
would not have served the debate. On the one hand it is of
methodological interest to analyse failed comparisons and to show
(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)they have failed. On the other, the lack of actual discussion of
proposed insular Celtic-Norse influences to date (as opposed to
mere expressions of disbelief) makes it worthwhile to present such
a discussion – if only to clear the way for new approaches. Those
who are interested less in methodological questions and more in
interesting results may jump directly to the sections about
Útgarðaloki, the Valkyries or the Ódáinsakr, perhaps making a
stopover with the mythological pigs along the way.
Like every book (and probably more than many), the present
one has not been written in isolation, and I owe thanks to a number
of people for their help in bringing it to completion (while it goes
without saying that full responsibility for any errors of omission,
fact, interpretation or English grammar remains with me alone). In
the first place I am indebted to Jens Peter Schjødt, who gave me the
idea of starting this little book, while I owe much of the motivation
to actually finish it to Wilhelm Heizmann and Bernhard Maier.
Alex Woolf pointed me to some literature which I would otherwise
7

surely have missed. Bernard Mees had the patience to read the
whole manuscript and to point out a number of oversights. Special
thanks go to Kathryn Stevens, who undertook the laborious task of
correcting my English style and grammar across the whole
manuscript, and who along the way also forced me to clarify my
presentation of a number of points, as well as to re-think my
interpretation of some Tacitean historiography. Colin Higgins and
Sarah Fletcher kindly provided me with a cover image from one of
th
the 18 century volumes held by the library of St Catharine’s
College. And, of course, I thank the editors of the (cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:4)
(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:10)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:8)(cid:2)(cid:9)(cid:4)(cid:17)(cid:16)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:9)(cid:7), Annegret Heitmann and Wilhelm Heizmann,
for accepting the manuscript for publication in their series, and the
(cid:19)(cid:7)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:14)(cid:16)(cid:18)(cid:16)(cid:4) (cid:20)(cid:6)(cid:10)(cid:4) (cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:10)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:8)(cid:2)(cid:9)(cid:4) (cid:21)(cid:2)(cid:14)(cid:22)(cid:12)(cid:22)(cid:12)(cid:23)(cid:14)(cid:9)(cid:4) of the Ludwig-Maximilians-
University in Munich for covering the costs of printing. I dedicate
this little book to my parents Sigrid and Reinhold Egeler.
St Catharine’s College, Cambridge
Autumn 2012
Matthias Egeler
8

(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:3)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:7)

1. Introduction: the Penny for the Ferryman...................................10

2. Celtic-Germanic Parallels in Antiquity........................................16
2.1. Parallels and Influences? Rejection of Cult Images, Hair-
sacrifice, the Dioscuri, the Island of Mother Earth, Animal
Standards........................................................................................16
2.2. Further Parallels: Weapon Sacrifices ....................................22
2.3. Borrowing and Linguistics: Veleda, nimidas, the Matres....29

3. The Middle Ages...........................................................................33
3.1. Útgarðaloki..............................................................................33
3.2. Hrungnir’s Whetstone .......................................................... 44
3.3. Thor.........................................................................................45
3.4. Eschatology............................................................................ 50
3.5. Drowning in Mead.................................................................53
3.6. The Death of Balder...............................................................55
3.7. The Everlasting Battle............................................................58
3.8. Grave Mounds........................................................................62
3.9. Rebirth................................................................................... 64
3.10. Heimdall............................................................................... 69
3.11. Ægir........................................................................................79
3.12. Mythological Pigs .................................................................81
3.13. Mímis brunnr and its Surroundings ....................................85
3.14. Odin......................................................................................90
3.15. Freyr.......................................................................................97
3.16. Fruits of Summer in Winter..............................................103
3.17. Satire ....................................................................................105
3.18. Myth, Legend, Literature.................................................. 106