Talk:Seeress (Germanic)

message: Cite needed for spaewife cognates - I did some Googling and found the identical text repeated on many sites without attribution.  It isn't clear which, if any, of these might be a secondary or tertiary source (maybe they're all quaternary?), so we need a philologist with a library of Norse & OE lexicons here! D A Patriarche (talk) 00:52, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Names and etymology

message: "Völva" redirects here, while "Vala" links to "völva" (mentioning that "vala" is a "spelling variant"). Therefore they both need an early and clear mention/definition in this article. Before my edit: "völva" occurs abruptly without introduction in the third paragraph. There is also not a clear introduction to the word in the Names section. The "vala" variant is not mentioned at all. 
=> I took the liberty of adding to the initial paragraph: 
"In Norse mythology the seeress is usually referred to as völva or vala." 
(Anders Hallström) 165.1.243.180 (talk) 09:32, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Völva/Vala redirects here

message: It is to notify that the temrinus 'shaman' is originated in the Tchutchen-Siberian language, which means 'wanderer of the worlds'. Even if voelvas have partially similar methods, they cannot legitimally be called 'shamans' - because they are not following the same path.
:Well, even though the Völvas did not have exactly the same rituals as their counterparts of the Tchutchen-Siberian language, the term "Shaman" is nowadays used for the archetypal role of healer-priest that has existed in most cultures. Note that "medicine men" are more and more often called "shamans". You could just as well claim that American English is not legitimately "English" as it isn't spoken in England and in exactly the same way.
::The etymology of the word shaman supports the use of the term to describe Völva.
::sha·man
::/ˈSHämən,ˈSHāmən/
::noun
::noun: shaman; plural noun: shamans
::a person regarded as having access to, and influence in, the world of good and evil spirits, especially among some peoples of northern Asia and North America. Typically such people enter a trance state ::during a ritual, and practice divination and healing.
::    synonyms:	medicine man, medicine woman, healer; More
::    witch doctor;
::    peai, peaiman;
::    kahuna;
::    angekok;
::    pawang;
::    dukun
::Origin
::late 17th century: from German Schamane and Russian shaman, from Tungus šaman.https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/shaman
::shaman (n.)
::1690s, "priest of the Ural-Altaic peoples," probably via German Schamane, from Russian sha'man, from Tungus saman, which is perhaps from Chinese sha men "Buddhist monk," from Prakrit samaya-, from Sanskrit ::sramana-s "Buddhist ascetic" [OED]. Related: Shamanic.https://www.etymonline.com/word/shaman
::Shaman
::Etymology
::Borrowed from German Schamane, from Russian шама́н (šamán), from Evenki шама̄н (şamān), сама̄н (samān). The Evenki word is possibly derived from the root ша- ("to know"); or else a loanword from Tocharian B ::ṣamāne (“monk”) or Chinese 沙門 (shāmén, “Buddhist monk”), from Pali samaṇa from Sanskrit श्रमण (śramaṇa, “ascetic, monk, devotee”), from श्रम (śrama, “weariness, exhaustion; labor, toil; etc.”), which would ::make this a doublet of Sramana https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shaman
SvarturVölva (talk) 20:55, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Shamanism

message: I have noticed that in one part of the article, the Volvas' wands are compared pretty convincingly with distaff tools, whilst later in the article, it says that this has no foundation and they are actually phallic symbols. Even if there is contradictory evidence, shouldn't we just point both sides out rather than contradicting ourselves? 85.158.139.99 (talk) 15:24, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It says that "all" wands cannot be associated with distaffs. Many or most can be associated with distaffs, while others cannot, so I can't see any contradition.--Berig (talk) 15:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Consistency

message: This article is skewed somewhat against "the competing Roman Catholic Church". The most obviously POV statement is that "they were demonized", meaning that they were represented as evil. This I'll change myself; other points that imply a certain bias and merit a look from others include:
*"Since they maintained the old faith", "competing" and "they and the old faith are targeted"—the implication is that this was merely a contention between religions on the grounds of being different, and that the Catholics "demonized" their opponents. The contending view is that the "old faith" was actively evil to a Catholic perspective.
*"persecuted" (loaded term)
-- Perey 07:07, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of these articles have this "neo-pagan" bias. even Arianism and similar. It should be enough to just quietly remove it, and add the NPOV notice only if someone reverts you. dab 08:03, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it is that biassed. Burning people alive is a pretty strong way of persecuting them.--Wiglaf 08:14, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No, burning people alive is a pretty strong way of killing them. Persecution is in the why, not the how. And dab, I was hoping to attract editors with a lighter touch for navigating religious POV than I. But I might give it a shot in the end. -- Perey 09:42, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead. But AFAIK, it is uncontroversial that the old faith was demonized. The old gods Thor and Odin were called devils by the priests during the middle ages, and the quote in the text is authentic AFAIK. In fact people risked their lives by being caught red handed worshipping the old gods. Note: I am not an Asatrúar.--Wiglaf 10:51, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: The controversy is in the idea of representation. To the old Norse mind, Christianity was a foreign religion pushing its way in and demonizing the old gods. To the Christian mind, the Norse gods were inherently false—myths, idols or demons. There was no question of demonization, only calling them what they were. -- Perey 11:19, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, in my mind that statement is even more POV than the article.--Wiglaf 15:21, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: How so? If you mean the statements reflect non-neutral points of view, then yes, that was my intention. I'm trying to describe the two perspectives with respect to which the article must remain neutral. If you mean they show my personal (inaccurate?) POV on those perspectives, by all means, give us yours and we'll see what compromise can be reached. -- Perey 08:11, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Make a try to make it neutral, then.--Wiglaf 09:15, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I'm reverting the edits by 68.198.87.154 (Talk). One is just changing Roman Catholic Church to Catholic Church (a redirect to the former; this user is doing this all over the place), and the other changes this sentence:
:They were persecuted, slandered and killed in the course of christianization, which also brought a changed role for women in society.
The change is from course to name. Now I'm not happy with that sentence as it stands anyway, but I'll at least let it stand with 'course' in there. That way, it looks something like an NPOV statement of historical events (even if 'persecuted, slandered and killed' can't help but sound harsh), instead of a statement of the reasons for doing so ('in the name of...'). It's a subtle point, but so be it. (Incidentally, I'll capitalise and link 'Christianization' at the same time.) -- Perey 05:32, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversion

message: I'm removing the 'slandered' from that sentence chiefly because it's rather difficult to tell what was slander and what wasn't; there's much less doubt about the persecution and killing. I'm curious about the change in women's position in society; the sentence leaves one wondering how did it change? For better, for worse, or just different? Without some kind of elaboration, the article would be better off not mentioning it. Wesley 04:47, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It is surprising how people object to stating that Christianity changed the way women were perceived in society. The clergy worked hard throughout history to remove women's rights. See e.g. Blenda, which was a legend created by women in 17th century Sweden to defend their rights, which the Church (of course) wanted to remove. Note that the women referred to deeds done prior to Christianity in order to defend their rights. They were conscious of the fact that their rights belonged to a pre-Christian era.--Wiglaf 07:54, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

text: The "slandering" is now discussed in a section called Christianity.--Berig (talk) 06:21, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Slandered'

message: Anyone know why Seidman redirects to here?  I see no mention of that term in the body of the article.  There are four articles on people with that last name, so it should probably be a disamb page, but I can't even see why this would be listed as a possible meaning. Matchups 02:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seidman 

message: What is rational for using the name Volva as the page namee?  Normally page names should be in English. What language is "Volva" (old Norse?) and each of the other varients? This shold be stated and each language with period identified if its multilingual.  Thank you. Goldenrowley 00:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Völva is a Norse concept, and shouldn't be translated. By your logic, words like ninja and samurai should also be translated. As for what a "völva" is, it's explained in the article. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 19:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks an awful lot like a word for female private parts. 68.36.120.7 (talk) 16:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: I tried looking up this source for this entry: "In the grave, there were also four seeds from the cannabis plant which probably had been in the pillows that supported the corpses.[13] Moreover, additional cannabis seeds were discovered in a small leather pouch.[13] Since the pouch contained too few seeds to have anything to do with the cultivation of cannabis, they were probably used for something else.[13] If the queen who had been buried in Oseberg had smoked these seeds, she would not only have sensed a feeling of weightlessness and happiness, but she would also have had a distorted experience of time and space.[13]" I don't know where this person got this information but it's completely wrong. Perhaps the seeds were supposed to represent what the plant did. However ingesting or smoking cannabis seeds wouldn't have had any effect. In fact if a person was going to try to smoke seeds, they'd find the seeds would pop or burst, not smoke! If there's a creditable reason for this being here, I'll leave it, if not I'm taking this rubbish out.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justgivemeanaccount (talk • contribs) 15:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am afraid that the information is properly referenced to a scholarly book. Your personal experience and knowledge may be perfectly accurate, but Wikipedia articles only rely on published sources, per WP:RS, and so we have to trust the authors referred to.--Berig (talk) 16:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Complete Load

message: It is dubious, possibly New Age fluff, to simply equate oracles, priestesses, shamans and witches. Do we have sources equating Völva, Seiðkona and Spákona as implied by the lead? Even if we do, Old English Wicce is clearly the odd one out still. Looking through the article, it would seem appropriate to  it into a discussion of Völva (proper), and a more general treatment of "magic and sorcery in early Germanic society". It is a completely flawed notion recurring in poorly informed neopaganism that somehow pagan priestesses "turned into witches" due to Christianization. It's not that simple. There was belief in witches (i.e. people trying to do damage by magical means) all along, throughout the pagan period, and Christianity  actually combatted belief in witchcraft as pagan superstition, and a bona fide priestess would probably not have been amused to be equated with a witch. Per WP:REDFLAG, any claim lumping together priesthood, shamanism and witchcraft needs solid academic support in order to avoid WP:SYN  --dab (𒁳) 14:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is little risk for WP:SYN here, since most of structure is taken from "Vikingaliv" (2007) written by a prominent historian (Dick Harrison) and an archaeologist (Svensson). It appears that you are trying to divide the subject into a "good priestess" vs "evil witch" which is in stark contrast to what scholarly literature does. Removing sourced RS information like "the Völvas were not considered to be harmless" is not going to get this article closer to mainstream scholarship.--Berig (talk) 05:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Equations

message: I noticed a lack of vandalism of the main article, which surprised me, due to the term's similarity to that for a certain part of the female anatomy and the similarity to a certain car brand's name. I guess the word "volva" isn't that famous. Otherwise, some folks would've been all over it. 198.151.130.51 (talk) 18:24, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of vandalism 

message: D A Patriarche (talk) 09:43, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Hi,
"straight member" for "Rettilbein" is a mistranslation. "Straight-limbed" might possibly be passable,
but the literal translation is Straight-Bone, with "bein" also being the word for "leg", i.e. Straight-Leg.
T 88.89.219.147 (talk) 23:09, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rettilbeine = Boner? Nope. 

message: There is nothing demonstrating that the accounts of witches, prophetesses and priestesses among various early Germanic peoples as given in the "early accounts" section represent something specifically like the Norse vǫlur. Witches, prophetesses, priestesses, shamans and the like existed in many cultures. What makes these intrinsically linked as some sort of precursors to the vǫlur, other than the fact that they presumably spoke Germanic languages? The link seems altogether anachronistic as it is given here, we're talking about a separation of over half a millennium in the case of the haliurunnas and even more in the other cases: assuming these represent some ur-Germanic archetype of a vǫlva seems a bit much. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 20:26, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm currently preparing a rewrite for this topic under the new title "Seeress (Germanic)". It should resolve these issues. :bloodofox: (talk) 17:40, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed early accounts completely because it was not appropriate. It is however important to leave Völva as a unique page due to the fact that being a seer is only one aspect of being Völva. Essentially the removal of the page is invalidating to the people for which it is named. I am willing to take Völva over and will be attempting to update with new information and sources in time. I am asking that you please respect the need for a unique page and be patient with me while I gather new material and sources. SvarturVölva (talk) 21:37, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This is incorrect: As essentially every relevant reference used in this article states, the Old Norse noun völva is a synonym for various other terms of a seeress among the North Germanic peoples. :bloodofox: (talk) 14:42, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Early accounts" 

message: I've prepared a rewrite of this article, which is now live. I rewrote the article for the following reasons:
*North Germanic focus': The previous version of the article focused on the North Germanic record to the detriment of the broader picture. I've expanded the non-North Germanic record considerably here, and built a new framework for easier expansion on this topic.
*Synthesis and POV: A significant percentage of the previous article contained original research and synthesis. The new article is now fully referenced to modern reliable sources.
*Theory as fact': The previous version of this article presented theory as fact. The new article avoids this problem by separating scholarly reception from the facts of the corpus.
I'll be expanding this and related articles as time permits. :bloodofox: (talk) 02:50, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite launched 

message: I propose to merge Þorbjörg Lítilvölva into Seeress (Germanic). I think that the content in the Þorbjörg Lítilvölva article can easily be explained in the context of Seeress (Germanic), and the Germanic Seeresses article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Þorbjörg Lítilvölva will not cause any problems as far as article size is concerned. PepperBeast (talk) 20:42, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Closing, given the consensus not to merge. Klbrain (talk) 20:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: I just realized that I started this article on February 19, 2004, when I was a Ph.D. student.--Berig (talk) 15:31, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Time sure flies, doesn't it? :bloodofox: (talk) 21:13, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. WP has changed so much since those days.--Berig (talk) 05:39, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: WOW!!!

message: I see some "integrity problems" with the wikilinks back and forth here. 
In general I think links between articles should run both ways when the subjects are sufficiently related. Two problems:
: 1) The subsection about chanting begins with "Further information: Chant#Chant_as_a_spiritual_practice", but the linked article fails to mention the variant German seeress chanting and thus there is no link back. Inconsistency, and no "further information" was offered from the Germanic point of view. (Please do not remove the link though, the link to the more general concept of chanting is still a good thing to have.)
: 2) Price writes... the interesting comparison to herd-calling, giving the impression that herd-calling might be a modern remnant of ancient spiritual chanting. However the linked article on herd-calling ("Kulning") denies any connection between herd-calling and religious chanting, and consequently does not offer a link back to Germanic seeress chanting, which I think is unfortunate and somewhat contradictory. Besides, the reference to "Swedish herd-calling" seems to be too narrow: according to the linked article it is a Scandinavian tradition (occurring in Norway, Sweden, Finland).
(Anders Hallström) 165.1.243.180 (talk) 10:29, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Chanting vs Germanic seeress chanting vs herd-calling

message: I am trying to keep a balance between coverage and size, and I think the primary sources would simply be too massive to include with translations. Although, I usually agree with the approach you are mentioning , I think this article is better served by going into secondary sources, and having the primary sources and the translations in the specific articles on the individual seeresses. The reason why I made Gambara (Lombard) into a redirect is because it was hardly a stub and in its present state it served the readers best as  a redirect. Later, I (or someone else) may expand it with primary source quotations and translations.--Berig (talk) 11:55, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Primary and secondary sources

message: On second thought , I will merge the content into the article, and refer to it, as you suggested.--Berig (talk) 08:02, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Frigg and Freyja common origin hypothesis