Grimm believed Hrêða/Hrêðe to be cognate to Old High German Hrouda, with a connection to Hludana, attested in Frisia and western Germany, the root of whose name means fame, not unlike victorious/famous in Hrêðe.
Grimm linked Hludana with Old Norse Hlóðyn, a byname of Jörð/Frigg, who is also referred to as Hlín in the Völuspá, meaning protector. As a goddess governing fate, it makes sense She would be invoked in battle.
Bledsian Hrēþmōnaþ!
Painting by Lisa Hunt. ᛏ

Is Jörð another name of Frigg? I believe so.

In Sæmundr Fróði’s Nóregs Konungatal, the earth is referred to as Odin’s wife multiple times.
Kennings he uses include;
Hárs Vífi: Hárr’s Wife
Þundar beðju: Þundr’s bedmate
Yggs mani/mani Yggjar: Yggr’s girl

One of Jörð’s epithets is Hlóðyn, the etymology of which is unclear; but quite possibly cognate to Hlín, an epithet of Frigg in the Völuspá, along with continental Holda and Frau Holle. Hlín refers to a handmaiden (or aspect?) of Frigg in the Gylfaginning, but in the older Völuspá, it’s another name of Frigg.

And, similar themes appear in other Indo-European religions, with the Earth Mother elevated to the position of Queen of Heaven through Her marriage to the Sky Father; for example, Sáti is reborn as Parvati in Her marriage to Shiva.

The name Frigg means beloved, cognate to the Sanskrit name Priya; Odin’s beloved. Frigg maintains a connection with the earth; Her hall is called Fensalir, Fen-Hall.

Art by John Charles Dollman, 1909. 𐃏

An Old English word I just learned that I like a lot is ān-genga (pronounced AHN-YENGA-ga), which means “a solitary walker, a lone wanderer.

Very (W)Odinic when you compare that with some of his ON attestations:

Vegtamr (wanderer, waytame)

Farmagnuðr (journey empowerer)

Váfuðr (wanderer)

And of course —

Gangleri (wayweary)

Woden is the thirst for knowledge, the One who roves all over and thirsts for wisdom is all the hidden and secret places in the Universe.

- Huwila 🦉

It is imperative that we as Heathens make an argument against AI.
My friend Þorr Siðr makes a great point.

“The Gods are artisans. They shaped and prepared this realm for us, which required struggle and a great deal of violence to do. That was not an easy thing for them to do; what they made for us, was not easy to make. It took time and effort to do so. So, when someone uses this generative art and all its imperfections and imitation of reality, they don’t respect that struggle for creation that the Gods underwent at the beginning. In fact, it mocks their work, and that is why we must reject AI art.”

AI generated images are dishonest theft.
AI generated images can only be generated after they have downloaded and copied images from artists. No artists were even given a choice as to whether they wanted to be a part of the amalgamation or not. AI companies intentionally used living artists on social media in relative secret while rejecting the use of public domain art.

All three of us are deeply against AI. I refuse to accept AI generated content as art. It's not. Art comes from human beings, end of.

Hrafna 🌸

The famous Viking Egill Skallagrimsson was gifted by Odin with a poetic skill that was evident by the time he was three years old when he composed his first public verses.

He was still a child when he composed the above prophetic verse for his Mother about his future as a Viking. It is the basis for the 'my mother told me' Viking song.

This art of Egill was created by Ryan Murray for my coming film about the heroes of the Icelandic sagas.

I'm curious about Pagans who talk about 'winning'. I suspect they would elaborate by saying that they want Paganism to become the dominant religion. Dominant where? Nationally? Among their ethnic kin exclusively? Globally?

And which Paganism, exactly, should 'win'? Germanic? Celtic? Hellenistic? Should Icelandic Heathenry 'win', or should Anglo-Saxon? Mercian or Bernician?

It seems to me that to talk of Paganism 'winning' is to treat it like a political movement rather than an indigenous way of life. The aforementioned are merely questions; my real point is this...

Any 'winning' that comes by the indiscriminate use of technology is of the material kind. For a political movement, that might be okay. But for a religion/indigenous spirituality, equal (if not greater) consideration must be given to the spiritual, philosophical and cultural impact of technologies. Is it any wonder that critics accuse Folkish Paganism of being foremostly political when many Folkish Pagans act more like a political movement by prioritising material victory?

According to official history, in 2600-1500 BC, whilst the people of the Indus Valley were writing scriptures, the proto-Germanic people hadn't even discovered the runes. We were essentially illiterate until Christianity brought to us the technology of writing. Is that because we were so inferior, or did our ancestors choose not to adopt this technology?

Technological adoption can be beneficial, when the material benefits are weighed against the spiritual, cultural and physiological dangers. AI's proponents seem concerned solely with the material impact. That's not surprising in this godless modern age. But it is surprising when self-proclaimed religious people likewise pay no heed to the spiritual, cultural and physiological dangers.

So now you can produce visual propaganda in the blink of an eye. Meanwhile the hand withers, the mind atrophies, imagination fades, the exchange of energies (gift for a gift) principle is overlooked, the very purpose for which the gods gave us this life (to share in the act of creation, to nurture beauty, to forge powerful bonds of kinship, to exercise mind and body) is shunned. Worse still - those who adopt AI technology may be empowering Loki and the þursar (more on that in a future post).

PS: Why the assumption that AI will even give 'us' material victory? AI tools are heavily controlled by the Technocratic System. Just like the InterNET, if AI was any threat to the System that birthed it, it would have been aborted in the womb.

Working on some statues for a hypothetical sanctuary. This is Taranis. Used Roquepertuse as main reference. Cathal is drawing something similar, which inspired me.

"Wilt thou do the deed and repent it? thou hadst better never been born:
Wilt thou do the deed and exalt it? then thy fame shall be outworn:
Thou shalt do the deed and abide it, and sit on thy throne on high,
And look on today and tomorrow as those that never die."
Sigurd the Volsung: The Wisdom of Brynhild By William Morris

Fairy Glen, Isle of Skye - Scotland

Around 800 CE, Ireland had many small kingdoms, tuatha, under a Gaelic system with no central state.

Over 100 existed, each led by a rí túaithe, varying from 80–150 due to shifting borders.

Above them, rí ruirech ruled clusters, with dynasties like Uí Néill (north) or Eóganachta (Munster) as rí cóicid.

The ard rí at Tara was symbolic, per texts like the Annals of Ulster. Uí Néill (split into Cenél Conaill and Cenél nEógain), Connachta (west), Laigin (east), and Munster’s Eóganachta were key, with Dál Riata linking to Scotland.

Kings used cattle wealth and Brehon Law, while monasteries like Armagh grew powerful.

Norse raids hit coasts by 800, but inland kingdoms held.

This kin-based system lasted until Viking and Norman shifts.

Watercolor landscape from a private lesson I gave.

Artemis depicted in stained glass by Géza Maróti

The conversion of English kingdoms to Christianity began with their kings but did NOT end there.

The last Heathen English king, Arwald, died in 686. Bede was born in 672/3. In Bede’s own land of Northumbria there had been mass reversion to Heathenry in 633 following the death of their Xian king.

The idea that Bede’s account of the goddess Easter can be seen as “faulty history” as some claim, is absurd. He very probably met Heathens as first hand sources! Or even if he was too sheltered in his cloisters to have experienced rural peasant culture, the elder monks around him, and travelling merchants would have FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE of English Heathens. Many of them raised by Heathen parents!

There is absolutely no way he could have made up an imaginary goddess to explain the name of such an important Christian holiday. It would go against all his purposes to do so. This is wishful thinking from certain Christians who want to throw shade on what is an uncontroversial fact among philologists.