Talk:Odin/Archive 2

message: I only just realized that there is an independent article on Woden. Since this article aims at portraying the common Germanic god, should it maybe be merged here? dab (ᛏ) 10:18, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely, it was created in order to "reclaim him for the English". I have left a merger note on the talkpage, if a better reason was not provided. I have intended to merge the two for some while but haven't got around.--Wiglaf 11:40, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: doh, sorry, I failed to check the Talk page. However, the present article is growing long, and we may have to export some stuff. The popculture-references should be the first to go , though, we can do a List of references to Odin in popular culture. dab (ᛏ) 12:06, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Great idea! I think this article needs a lot of work, anyway.--Wiglaf 12:24, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: My take is that Odin was perceived by the believers as one and the same, whether they called him Wotan, Wodan, Woden, Oden or Odin. Likewise modern believers seem to use the form they like most, without implying a division into several gods. So, I think the best way would be to have themes that start with a link to a "main article" on the theme. For instance, I have added a part on the Battle of Lena and I think it would be better to have it together with a more extensive discussion on later beliefs in a separate article.--Wiglaf 12:44, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the best thing would be to have this article as the "main article" and then spin off both geographical and thematic subarticles. We could make a navigation table as well.--Wiglaf 13:37, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: (And :Category:Vodinaz?)  -- let's think this over, first, cautiously, reviewing the material we have. It would mean we go back to a Woden article, which I have just merged here. I have exported the pop culture references, and the list of kenningars, this should give us some breathing space for now. dab (ᛏ) 13:56, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just considering your suggestion.--Wiglaf 15:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: you see, the "worship part" is supposed to be about Odin/Woden/Wotan summarily, so we shouldn't say remnants are preserved in Scandinavian folklore, since there are also traces in English and German folklore.dab (ᛏ) 14:08, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake. I misunderstood the paragraph since a similar line exists in Scandinavian folklore.--Wiglaf 15:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: We'll take it slowly. This article is a jungle.--Wiglaf 15:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: it is :) but it could be very good -- we may have to separate it into sections pointing to main articles. So will we have Woden and Wotan after all? Then, for symmetry, the Scandinavian main article should be at Odin, begging the question: where will we put the summarizing, reconstructing article? At Vodinaz? At Vatinos? These forms are not current at all. Odin (summary)? Odin/Woden/Wotan? difficult, difficult... Let's clean up the jungle first, and see where that leads us :o) dab (ᛏ) 16:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it could be a great article. I have began by cleaning up the intro :).--Wiglaf 19:07, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Woden

message: I don't have the time to do this right now, but we may need a separate "Odin and Jesus" section treating the similarities, including the Nazi ideas. I found a suggestion somewhere concerning Triskaidekaphobia that links Loki to Judas, and the feast in Valhalla where Loki gate-crashes with the Last Supper. dab (ᛏ) 09:57, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Jesus and Odin sub-section

message: A new proposal on representation of Norse mythology names is now up for a vote. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 00:51, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming convention vote notice 

message: ===Compromise===
I just checked the edits in question.
I own Cleasby's Icelandic English Dictionary (of Old Norse), Jan de Vries' Altnordisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch, and many other titles.  I am an experienced Old Norse to Modern English translator, with linguistic, cultural and historical background in the field.  At first glance, Anon's edits look to me to be ALL correct.  
This article as it stands has a number of errors in the form of serious misunderstandings and some all-too-common (but excusable) out-of-date information...
Wighson 05:08, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I just redid the section on Etymology with internal citations and references added at the article's end.  (I just finished writing a book, and I didn't know what to do with myself.) --Wighson 07:52, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: I just checked the edits in question.
I own Cleasby's Icelandic English Dictionary (of Old Norse), Jan de Vries' Altnordisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch, and many other titles.  I am an experienced Old Norse to Modern English translator, with linguistic, cultural and historical background in the field.  At first glance, Anon's edits look to me to be ALL correct.  
This article as it stands has a number of errors in the form of serious misunderstandings and some all-too-common (but excusable) out-of-date information...
Wighson 05:08, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I just redid the section on Etymology with internal citations and references added at the article's end.  (I just finished writing a book, and I didn't know what to do with myself.) --Wighson 07:52, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Compromise

message: :An obsolete alternate etymology, which has been adhered to by many early writers including Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa in his Libri tres de occulta philosophia, is to give it the same root as the word god itself, from its Proto-Germanic form *ɣuđ-.
You removed this without replacement, and without explanation. We can agree that the etymology is obsolete. It may still be notable. Why did you want it gone? Is the statement incorrect? (it's not mine, and I didn't check Agrippa. Did you?). Don't forget that this article is also about Lombardic Godan.
:Proto-Germanic *Wōðinaz may go back to a pre-Proto-Germanic *Vatinos. It has been noted, however, that the Anglo-Saxon Woden is not in exact correspondence with German Wotan, suggesting that the latter has been transformed by popular etymology to conform with the meaning "the raging one", particularly after Christianisation, when Wotan was seen as a demon, while the Nordic and the Anglo-Saxon forms preserved the original form of the name. One possibility is that the name was borrowed from the Celts, during the Pre-Roman Iron Age, when both groups lived in northern Germany, and that it is associated with the Celtic priestly caste of the Vates. The Celtic word is ultimately derived from the same root (possibly Proto-Indo-European, but only attested in Celtic and Germanic) as the Germanic words for "possessed" cited above, *vāt-, with a more general meaning of "spiritually excited", also preserved in the Irish word for "poet", fáith. If the word is indeed a loan from the Celtic, it may be an important hint to the dating of the Proto-Germanic Grimm's law.
You replaced this entire paragraph with a note of the Celtic cognates. I must say your approach is quite confused here. You off-handedly reject a connection of "wrath" and "poetry" via a Proto-Germanic root for "spiritual excitement". My reference is Rübekeil (2003) (cited on Vates). Note that Adam von Bremen in Wotan id est furor  uses the West Germanic form. Old Norse doesn't enter into this discussion. Rübekeil (2003) reconstructs pre-Proto-Germanic *Vatinos (which you have removed). Your statement "Adam von Bremen was wrong" is not universally accepted, at least not regarding root etymology. dab (ᛏ) 14:33, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: removals

message: What we are discussing is your own [unreferenced edits], which have led you repeatedly to remove all others' edits that displeased you.  Since I was able to introduce for the first time citations (and with endnotes), the matter in Etymology should have been solved.  However, you continued to remove the corrections, going so far as to alter the citations.  This alteration in particular violates Wikipedia policy.
:An obsolete alternate etymology, which has been adhered to by many early writers including Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa in his Libri tres de occulta philosophia, is to give it the same root as the word god itself, from its Proto-Germanic form *ɣuđ-.
You removed this without replacement, and without explanation. We can agree that the etymology is obsolete. It may still be notable. Why did you want it gone?   Is the statement incorrect? (it's not mine, and I didn't check Agrippa. Did you?). Don't forget that this article is also about Lombardic Godan.
::You admitted that it is obsolete. You gave the explanation here and in the History.   When you say that it is obsolete, you are admitting it is wrong.  Can you imagine what Wikipedia would like if we put in the millions of factual errors that one could invent?  You have reinserted what you know is wrong.  To reinsert something you know is wrong is in violation of Wikipedia policy.
:Proto-Germanic *Wōðinaz may go back to a pre-Proto-Germanic *Vatinos. It has been noted, however, that the Anglo-Saxon Woden is not in exact correspondence with German Wotan, suggesting that the latter has been transformed by popular etymology to conform with the meaning "the raging one", particularly after Christianisation, when Wotan was seen as a demon, while the Nordic and the Anglo-Saxon forms preserved the original form of the name. One possibility is that the name was borrowed from the Celts, during the Pre-Roman Iron Age, when both groups lived in northern Germany, and that it is associated with the Celtic priestly caste of the Vates. The Celtic word is ultimately derived from the same root (possibly Proto-Indo-European, but only attested in Celtic and Germanic) as the Germanic words for "possessed" cited above, *vāt-, with a more general meaning of "spiritually excited", also preserved in the Irish word for "poet", fáith. If the word is indeed a loan from the Celtic, it may be an important hint to the dating of the Proto-Germanic Grimm's law.
You replaced this entire paragraph with a note of the Celtic cognates. I must say your approach is quite confused here. You off-handedly reject a connection of "wrath" and "poetry" via a Proto-Germanic root for "spiritual excitement".
::The paragraph had major factual errors and had no citations.  The information is not part of the scholarly consensus.  I corrected the errors, expanded the section, and for the first time in the history of this page, I added citations.  Adding citations is not "off-handed."  They prove the scholarly consensus of the topic at hand top avoid original research.  This is Wikipedia policy.
My reference is Rübekeil (2003) (cited on Vates).   Rübekeil (2003) reconstructs pre-Proto-Germanic *Vatinos (which you have removed). 
::Really?  That isn't what you said before!  In the article you said Rübekeil discovered a Celtic loanword?  And on  April 29, you said "Rübekeil (2003) suggested that the name of the Germanic god Woden may be connected with the Vates."  But the Celtic word which you thought was on loan and meant "ire," (=anger), meant "poet", a separate word.  So now each separate homograph is from the same "pre-Proto-Germanic" reconstruction.  This is new!  Further, your reference is to the title of an article in German on Wodan and exhumation of graveyards.  Since the title does not match reconstructing a "pre-Proto-Germanic *Vatinos", you need to provide the article itself.   Without that, this is not a credible source and in violation of Wikipedia policy.
Note that Adam von Bremen in Wotan id est furor  uses the West Germanic form. Old Norse doesn't enter into this discussion.
::That is disengenuous.  This is an article about an Old Norse word, Óðinn.  This contradicts your own statement above that we are discussing "proto-Germanic" roots.
Your statement "Adam von Bremen was wrong" is not universally accepted, at least not regarding root etymology.
::Both that Adam of Bremen was wrong about Wotan's ire, and that the words are homonyms is the scholarly consensus.  I have cited that consensus.  You have nothing to cite.  Folk etymologies such as what you are asserting are unfounded, but have an amazing shelf-life: they keep coming back to life.  I have already cited conclusively the separation of *wōd- and *wōþ-.  You have mentioned but one source (Pokorny) which you are well aware is out of date (1959), 46 years older than DeVries 4th edition.  This is dishonest.  This violates Wikipedia policy.
::--Wighson 04:36, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Re:  removals

message: I found no source glossing the -(a)na- suffix as expressing "lordship" in particular. Orel (2003) treats it simply as a suffix to derive nominal stems. drótinn, dryten he derives from *đruxtīnaz. These are  just reflexes of the PIE -(i/o)no- stems, and I haven't seen a claim of an inherent meaning. It is flawed to argue that if *đruxtīz means "people/troops" and *đruxtīnaz means "lord of the people/troops", na must mean lord. With the same justification, you can argue that if English king is from the same root as English kin, logically English g must mean "lord". But I suppose I don't have to point this out to somebody with a "linguistic background". dab (ᛏ) 08:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: lol, hang on, I did find your "lord" reference. *na as a "Herrschersuffix" is a suggestion by Wolfgang Meid in BNF 8 (1957). I daresay the suggestion didn't find much favour, but now that we have the reference, we can of course mention it. I hope you realize that I did your work for you there. dab (ᛏ) 09:39, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: -na- (dab again)

message: Is it me or is the etylmology section too far up in the article. Although pertinent it is a largely academic part with little for the average reader. How about putting it further down the article? GraemeLeggett 11:22, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: whoa, can we wait with the layout until the worst of the content-related row has died down? Imho it is customary to treat the etymology first. I don't know about the "average reader", but I find it difficult to make informed statements about a term before discussing its origin. If you read the section you will note that it is deeply intertwined with mythological and legendary aspects of Odin. I am also always happy to counter the "anti-academic bias" of Wikipedia :) dab (ᛏ) 12:01, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

text: There is no reason to shoot down GraemeLeggett, too.  Simple courtesy means one should listen to others.  I have to agree with him here.  A single sentence could summarize it in "General Characteristics." Wighson 19:35, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: I have before me this book:
* Ásgeir Blöndal Magnússon (1989). Íslensk orðsifjabók. Reykjavík: Orðabók Háskólans.
It is an etymological dictionary of Icelandic. It's a reasonably recent and reasonably respected work. Having only one author it can't help but be a little eccentric and it's somewhat more conservative than one would expect from a book with this publication date. The author, for example, is skeptical about the laryngeal theory - something not seen a lot these days. I'll summarize a few entries from it.
Óðinn: Related to Swedish Oþin, Oþan, Oþun, Old Danish Othin- in compounds, Old Saxon Wôden, Old High German Wuotan, Old English Wôden; < Germanic *wôðana-, related to óður (noun). ... From IE *wât- or *wôt- "being agitated", cf. Latin vâtês.
óður (noun): poetry, poem; agitation; mind; related to Nynorsk od, ode, Old English wôð, Mid High German wôt and Old High German wuot, Latin vâtês, Old Irish fáith and Old Indian api-vâtáyati. Originally meaning something like "intense state of mind" and from there the meanings "inspiration" and "poetry" developed. See óður (2) and Óður (3) ...
óður (adjective): 'agitated, mad; fast, eager'; related to Faroese 'óður', Nynorsk 'od', Old English wôd, Old High German ver-wuot, Gothic 'woþs'; from IE *wât- or perhaps rather *wôt-, cf. Old Indian api-vâtáyati, api-vátati. Perhaps the root originally meant "inspiration" and could then be related to IE *(a)wê- in Icelandic "vindur" and German "wehen"
Óður (name): Hardly related to Gothic woþeis, rather related to óður (noun) and óður (verb) and really another form of the god name Óðinn and with the same meaning. The word occurs as a prefix of human names, as in the Proto Norse inscription Woduride (dative) and it seems to have originally been an u-stem as various god-names like Njörður and Ullur.
Sorry for the modern Icelandicisms. Hope this is intelligeble. Basically he thinks this is all from the same root and doesn't really try to set a time-frame for the semantic developments. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 23:40, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "intense state of mind" is good, that's the unifying core meaning. The unity of the concept was lost with Christianity, I suppose, when such agitation had to be either sinful/demonic (wrath, obsession) or artistic/divine (poetry, inspiration). dab (ᛏ) 08:11, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps. But the split might be earlier, I suppose, especially since it seems to be present both in West-Germanic and North-Germanic. The entries in Lexicon Poeticum can be read here:  All the occurrences of the words in the oldest poetry are noted. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 21:50, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Haukurth.  Wighson 22:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ÁBM 

message: I finally got round to looking for the source of Lombardic Godan. It is the 7th c. Origo Gentis Langobardorum . The identification with Wodan is due to Paulus Diaconus  ,
:Certum tamen est, Langobardos ab intactae ferro barbae longitudine, cum primitus Winili dicti fuerint, ita postmodum appellatos. Nam iuxta illorum linguam lang longam, bard barbam significat. Wotan sane, quem adiecta littera Godan dixerunt, ipse est qui apud Romanos Mercurius dicitur et ab universis Germaniae gentibus ut deus adoratur; qui non circa haec tempora, sed longe anterius, nec in Germania, sed in Grecia fuisse perhibetur.
So, Paul basically says Godan is G+wodan, but there is no reason to assume the names are cognate at all, Godan may be an independent theonym, or it may indeed be a contamination of "God" and "Wodan". I'll try to find some literature on this. dab (ᛏ) 14:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Godan