Talk:Norse cosmology

message: This page needs an introduction. Just thought I'd say that, cos I haven't time to work out what it should say. - IMSoP 00:07, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs an introduction

message: Some of the Wikipedia's work on Norsh cosmolgy (such as the article Norse Mythology) prvide contradicting information regarding the position of the nine worlds. The Mythology article tells they are flat, located at the same level, where this article believes them to be on three distinct levels. Sources on this subject are also contradicting. Is there anyone who can give a definite answer regarding the 3d representation of Yggdrasil and the Nine worlds? Thanks. -- Redge 10:15, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The original sources are very unclear and, some would say, contradictory on this point. The theory presented in this article is just an interpretation - a somewhat fanciful one, if you ask me, but with a certain beauty to it. Haukurth 02:01, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia should be documenting what historians believe, and be pointing out differences when they exist. It isn't the job of the article to judge which interpretation is correct, but to instead just offer the interpretation. Does a group of historians (that aren't a bunch of cooks ;)) believe the Norse beleived the the Nine Worlds to be circular and on several levels? If so, then this article is fine, but it should also address the fact that others believe the Nine worlds to be flat and on the same plane. I don't know anything about Norse mythology, so I'm not going to edit the article. I just thought I'd chime in with my advice.--John Lynch 05:00, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, there are almost *no* scholarly analyses of the 'Nine Worlds' concept as far as cosmological arrangements are concerned. Aside from that, my comments are covered by what Haukur says here. Slainté, P.MacUidhir (t) (c)  07:54, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I just removed that paragraph, I haven't ever seen this speculation in a good source (or a bad one, for that matter). Haukur 20:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradictory information

message: I edited the contrast between Asgard/Hel to read "heroic dead" vs. "ordinary dead"; that seems much more consistent with Norse beliefs than "salvation" (there was no terrible fate to be saved from) and "damnation" (the real place of punishment was reserved for heinous evil-doers, according to the Eddas).
I also described Hel as an "underworld" rather than a "hell" as most people use the word; some descriptions in the Eddas (as in Baldrs draumar) describe the place as neutral or even pleasurable for the dead.
--Ingeborg S. Nordén 00:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salvation/damnation?  Wrong! 

message: I called them jotnar and it was changed to giant.  I know its a more familiar name for the jotnar, but it was linked for further explanation and is technically more correct than the term "giant", which is a Greek invention.Lars951 20:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. This is an article on Norse cosmology. There is so much unnecessary confusion, especially with alien concepts that come from non-Norse cultures. Staying as close to the Norse sources as possible is helpful. --Haldrik 13:56, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Giant vs. Jotunn

message: Miðgarðr is translated in the article as 'Middle Townwall'. "Townwall" here is pretty absurd - at the time the Old Norse mythology was believed in, there were no towns in Scandinavia. "Garðr" often means "fence" of some sort - though not always - but I don't think it could mean "townwall" without the word for "town" being added. The reason I haven't removed it already is that I don't know what exactly the correct translation would be, but I hope someone can supply a more appropriate translation. --Barend 23:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation of "-garðr" 

message: I have twice corrected the translation of "heim" to "home". In this context, it means "world". This is the translation used in both the English language translations of Alvíssmál which may be found linked to in the article on edda. The translation to "heim" is not only Original Research, but wrong.--Barend 14:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing strange about a language having two terms for the same concept. "heimr" in many contexts simply means "world", and to say that it's "literal" meaning is always "home" is incorrect. See for instance the introduction to Ynglinga saga - "kringla heimsins" etc. I would also like you to give references for your edits about the term "heimr". You also need to provide a reference for your translation of Völuspá, and the others. All translations linked to from the article Völuspá give the translation as "world". As long as you don't provide a reference for the translation you have given, it appears to be your own translation, thus original research, and should be removed.--Barend 16:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes - it can mean "world" or "home", "homeland". The etymology is probably from "home" originally, but that doesn't affect its literal meaning. I would strongly suggest that a translation is original research when it differs from most established translations, and, as I stated above, your translation of "heimr" as "homeland" in these passages does so.--Barend 13:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation of "heim" 

message: As for the idea that the dwarves-world is called Nidavellir, is this a common concept held by scholars, or is it just someone's speculation? And if this comes from some legitimate source, which one is it? I ask because there's barely anything in the Eddas that supports this interpretation. Nidavellir is only mentioned as the place in which the mansion of Sindri is located, along with Okolnir being the place where the mansion of the giant Brimir is. If Okolnir is not the name of the giants-world (that would be Jotunheim), then I don't see why Nidavellir would be the dwarves-world, rather than just a valley, as its name indicates. Moreover, the Prose Edda already mentions a name for the dwarves-world, and it's Svartalfheim, not Nidavellir.212.183.218.231 (talk) 18:39, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The world of Nidavellir? 

message: Why aren't these included in the cosmology?
--172.78.220.21 (talk) 14:21, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inangard and utangard 

message: I've now launched a complete rewrite of the article free of the WP:OR and WP:SYNTH that plagued earlier version of the article. There's a lot more to add here, but the article will necessarily be at least partially a directory to more extensive articles (such as to Ragnarök). :bloodofox: (talk) 04:35, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite Launched 

message: The two verses
    I recall being reared by Jotuns,
    in days long gone. If I look back, I recall
    nine worlds, nine wood-witches,
    that renowned tree of fate below the earth.[12]
and
    Vafthrudnir said:
    "I can tell you the true secrets of the Jotun
    and all the gods because I've journeyed
    into all of the nine worlds below Niflhel
    Where the dead dwell below Hel."[14]
are not in agreement with the meaning of the original. What are 'wood-witches'?, and the tree is below the Earth? And the dead dwell below Hel? I think the Doods translation lack the required quality to be cited in the article. Carystus (talk) 06:42, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doods translation is faulty 

message: In the "Yggdrasil" section it is written: "Creatures live within Yggdrasil, including the dragon Níðhöggr, an unnamed eagle, and the stags Dáinn, Dvalinn, Duneyrr and Duraþrór.". However when you click on the article for "unnamed eagle" a name clearly shows up! What's up with that? Why not just include the name of the eagle "Veðrfölnir" and then add a parenthesis (or something else) saying that it is sometimes left unnamed? Emilej01 (talk) 22:06, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unnamed eagle