View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 5:42 pm



Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Proto-Indo-European connections 
Author Message

Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 20
It's more well known among Germanic Odinists, Odinists and Teutonic Polytheists that Germanic language, culture and religion all come from the Proto-Indo-European tongue, daily customs and deities, who lived up to 40,000 years ago in either Russia or Turkey. The reconstruction of the deities are based on similarities between different deity epithets from different cultures. The best examples are:

Tyr, coming from PIE Djews Phter (literally meaning "sky father", a cognate of Zeus, Jupiter and Dyaus Pitar.
Eostre, from Heusos (meaning "rising" and also "east"), a cognate of Eos, Aurora and Ushas.

There are others as well. In fact almost every Germanic deity has scholar-attested linguistic or mythological origins in the PIE pantheon.

Does this mean that, because of the same origins, Tyr is another name for Zeus? Thus suggesting Universalism? If not, because of the ethno-linguistic differences among the speakers? following that logic, because Saxons and Vikings are ethnically and linguistically different, regardless of the common origins, Tyr and Tiw are very different and Saxons should never call upon Tyr and vice-versa.

So are gods created whenever there so happens to be a group of people who divides into two different dialectal tribes?

Others can have that anti-multicultural worldview all they want, but I personally don't wish to lower gods to owing their existence to accidental, linguistic evolution.


Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:37 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2012 9:44 pm
Posts: 1530
This is an excellent and a thought provoking post.

This is a debate that has been going on for quite some time and one that I have difficulty choosing a side on. Each camp can present equally valid and compelling arguments to counter the other. Mainly I think it comes down to whether one is devoted to more to theological or academic point of view. I certainly do not consider myself a universalist but I do think that it is possible (and actually, highly probable) that the linguistic commonalities do indeed signify a divergence from a common source.

One of the arguments that the "academic" group can present is that even our lore clouds the issue. The Yngling saga holds that Odin was originally a king who came from the east. If this is true he would have brought the customs and beliefs of his culture with him . This would definitely lend credence to the theory that other beliefs have sprung from the same roots as our pantheon.


Tue Nov 11, 2014 5:01 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 4:01 am
Posts: 310
It is true that humans have moved and taken belief and language with them. Further, other groups have intermixed or passed through to bring more beliefs into those tribes. If we take the mixing principle, does this means that the coast of England is actually to be considered the Caribbean? That is the basis for those waters and the temperature relative to the latitude.

My point is that origin is not the best view of substance. We make things our own and interact with them differently. Just because a concept was valid or gave us the words to express our god linguistically does not mean that this has forever altered or attached it to another point.

Beyond that idea, there is a fairly simple principle. The stories and culture we pass down are viewed out of context. They are not for everyone, as opposed with middle-eastern beliefs. Those systems were recording a history of the family lines so as to say that one unified culture existed and all people shared this history. Those who converted were aligned and brought into this shared history.

We do not have converts. Our history and culture is our family identity. It is our direct link to ancestors and who we are in the world. Each time that our ancestors made an addition or alteration, we are seeing our history. It is where a branch joined our family or a culture shifted our ancestor's ways. The sagas do a decent job of conveying this information. We see the mixing of cultures and sharing of gods.

Consider it in terms of a family. One branch of the family will have set traits and beliefs. They are tied to a common origin, yet all that happened after is unique. How they see the world or what qualities they possess to interact with it are not truly related to any other line. With each step and generation apart, the other lines begin to take on totally different views.

You could say, we know exactly where these splits occurred, so we know the basis of these views. All we really can pinpoint is where someone found a word they liked or that expressed what they wanted to say more clearly. Further, we could easily be pinpointing a time when the older word was met with a newer word for the god, so they chose to refer to the old god with a new standard to adapt. That means that the newer title could well have been given to a much older god. In turn, those followers would easily have had the attributes, if better fitting, bleed back into the feeding linguistic origin.

It is something that takes a lot of connections above just surface level similarity. How did the culture grow? Where do we see evidence of similar trends and where was that tribe moving? Language does not move the same way that culture and identity moves. As you see, we say god and pray, yet do not confuse the idea that it conveys our terms and not the original linguistic roots of the language through our personal expression. What we believe or do is not directly impacted by our region, yet how we express those things is.


Tue Nov 11, 2014 5:45 am
Profile

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2012 5:32 pm
Posts: 561
I look at it as being a matter that the lives and doings of the gods are quite extensive. Thor, Odin, Loki, Tyre and others have been around for many centuries, and no one body of lore would contain all of their lives' achievements.


But, trying to figure out who is who in each belief system would get messy. Also, it is quite possible that there are some gods in the Greek pantheon that are the same gods as those in the Oddinic pantheon, but others who are not. Some gods may only have a place in one pantheon.

I don't think Zeus or Ares is Tyre. Well, maybe Ares, but probably not. Hermes and Odin could be the same, because Odin is known to take on multiple guises and names and wander the Earth.

Loki could be the Coyote of Native American lore. Fenrir might also have a place in Native American lore. (And in both cases, it would be due to real encounters, rather than just exchange of ideas if it is so.)


Sun Nov 16, 2014 10:04 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 5:01 pm
Posts: 3427
Location: Vinland
Our Brotherhood lore makes it clear that our gods and goddesses were known by all the Indo-Europeans under different names.

Odin is Hermes in Greek lore, and Rudra/Shiva in Vedic lore. Thor is Zeus in Greek lore and Indra in Vedic lore.

The Eddaic version of the lore, which we follow, is the purest form of the lore.


Mon Nov 17, 2014 3:25 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Posts: 163
I have done some research, and it brought me to realizing this: the Germanic people, genetically, culturally, linguistically, etc. are the closest to the original natives of Europe. Yes, we are definitley influenced by outside sources, as is everyone, but we are the least influenced. We are primarily descended, in all forms, from those natives, but changed just enough that we are no longer called that. I'm not saying this from an entirely nationalistic bias, i was conflicted and worried before i found all this information. It took a period of time to gather, but i believe it is true. Feel free to ask me specifics about what i have found out.

-Defender


Tue Aug 02, 2016 4:09 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:35 am
Posts: 561
DefenderofMountains wrote:
I have done some research, and it brought me to realizing this: the Germanic people, genetically, culturally, linguistically, etc. are the closest to the original natives of Europe. Yes, we are definitley influenced by outside sources, as is everyone, but we are the least influenced. We are primarily descended, in all forms, from those natives, but changed just enough that we are no longer called that. I'm not saying this from an entirely nationalistic bias, i was conflicted and worried before i found all this information. It took a period of time to gather, but i believe it is true. Feel free to ask me specifics about what i have found out.

-Defender


Defender, are you Germanic then? Feel free to share anything you have discovered. I love northwestern European history and will be glad to read.


Tue Aug 02, 2016 7:31 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2014 6:39 pm
Posts: 678
I too am interested to hear what you have found. Stormr


Tue Aug 02, 2016 11:17 pm
Profile

Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 2:42 pm
Posts: 32
Tocharians, Guanches, Garamantes, Kiffians, Saxons, Celts, Gauls, Hellens, Scythians etc all come form the same stock, same gods just separated by time. The oral traditions also get corrupted over time. The Vikings being the last to practice the old religion makes it the least corrupted.


Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:17 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 5:01 pm
Posts: 3427
Location: Vinland
Lugal's statement is well said.

In our tradition, the oldest texts seem to the Vedas of Hinduism, and the youngest are the Eddas of the Vikings. (Note the two texts have similar names.)

Because Hinduism is so old, however, it has been greatly corrupted. Since the Odinism of the Vikings is so young, it has been preserved best.

The Vedas themselves are rather pure, but the later texts of Hinduism, such as the Puranas, add all the distortions.

In the Vedas, there is no phallic worship, and --notably--no reference to karma.

It is erased out for political correctness reasons, but the Vedas clearly show a hostility to dark skin. In the passages below, the Daysans refers to the dark-skinned indigenous people of India:

"Indra, the slayer of Vrittra, the destroyer of cities, has scattered the Dasyu sprang from a black womb." RgV. II 20.6

The Rig Veda praises the god who "destroyed the Dasyans and protected the Aryan color." - Rg.V. III 34.9

Rig Veda IX 73 states that “stormy gods who rush on like furious bulls and scatter the black skin", and the text claims that “the black skin, the hated of Indra" will be swept out of heaven - Rig Veda. IX 73.5

Rig.Veda I 130.8 tells of how the “black skin” was conquered: "Indra protected in battle the Aryan worshipper, he subdued the lawless for Manu, he conquered the black skin."

The Rig Veda thanks a god for "scattering the slave bands of black descent", and for stamping out "the vile Dasyan colour." - Rg.V. II.20.7, II 12.4

Of course, all of this is academic. Our focus is on the Eddas.


Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:06 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:35 am
Posts: 561
OdinBrotherhood wrote:
Lugal's statement is well said.

In our tradition, the oldest texts seem to the Vedas of Hinduism, and the youngest are the Eddas of the Vikings. (Note the two texts have similar names.)

Because Hinduism is so old, however, it has been greatly corrupted. Since the Odinism of the Vikings is so young, it has been preserved best.

The Vedas themselves are rather pure, but the later texts of Hinduism, such as the Puranas, add all the distortions.

In the Vedas, there is no phallic worship, and --notably--no reference to karma.

It is erased out for political correctness reasons, but the Vedas clearly show a hostility to dark skin. In the passages below, the Daysans refers to the dark-skinned indigenous people of India:

"Indra, the slayer of Vrittra, the destroyer of cities, has scattered the Dasyu sprang from a black womb." RgV. II 20.6

The Rig Veda praises the god who "destroyed the Dasyans and protected the Aryan color." - Rg.V. III 34.9

Rig Veda IX 73 states that “stormy gods who rush on like furious bulls and scatter the black skin", and the text claims that “the black skin, the hated of Indra" will be swept out of heaven - Rig Veda. IX 73.5

Rig.Veda I 130.8 tells of how the “black skin” was conquered: "Indra protected in battle the Aryan worshipper, he subdued the lawless for Manu, he conquered the black skin."

The Rig Veda thanks a god for "scattering the slave bands of black descent", and for stamping out "the vile Dasyan colour." - Rg.V. II.20.7, II 12.4

Of course, all of this is academic. Our focus is on the Eddas.


I learn something new everyday! ;)
A note on the relation of the Germanics to the Gauls/celts. I've read up a lot about the history of barbarian Europe. Unfortunately, I had to give up my books for our move overseas, but from what I gather, the early Germanic actually were the first (recorded) wave of migrants out of Scandinavia into northern Europe into Germanic territory, making them close cousins to the Scandinavian Vikings to come, which would explain some of the cultural similarities. The Gauls or celts seem to have already been established when the Germanics arrived. Once in the northern regions of Europe, the Germanics and the Gauls/celts clashed. The celts had more sophisticated societal advantages over the Germanic tribes, and often became overlords to some of those Germanic tribes. Their gods and religions were originally different, at least when this wave of migration came about.
Also, interesting is that when Gaul was facing absolute defeat by the Romans, rather than reaching out to the Germanic tribes to the north, they refused, whereas Rome seized the advantage and persuaded the germanics to fight against the Gaulish celts. Had the celts been able to overcome their pride, they might have been able to defeat Rome with the help of the Germanic tribes. Perhaps. Could have totally rewritten history, possibly prevented the rise and spread of Christianity. Oh well.
Perhaps, you can find some more detailed info. Like I said, I no longer have my books, so I can't pull specific dates and details.


Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:42 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:25 am
Posts: 577
OdinBrotherhood wrote:
Lugal's statement is well said.

In our tradition, the oldest texts seem to the Vedas of Hinduism, and the youngest are the Eddas of the Vikings. (Note the two texts have similar names.)

Because Hinduism is so old, however, it has been greatly corrupted. Since the Odinism of the Vikings is so young, it has been preserved best.

The Vedas themselves are rather pure, but the later texts of Hinduism, such as the Puranas, add all the distortions.

In the Vedas, there is no phallic worship, and --notably--no reference to karma.

It is erased out for political correctness reasons, but the Vedas clearly show a hostility to dark skin. In the passages below, the Daysans refers to the dark-skinned indigenous people of India:

"Indra, the slayer of Vrittra, the destroyer of cities, has scattered the Dasyu sprang from a black womb." RgV. II 20.6

The Rig Veda praises the god who "destroyed the Dasyans and protected the Aryan color." - Rg.V. III 34.9

Rig Veda IX 73 states that “stormy gods who rush on like furious bulls and scatter the black skin", and the text claims that “the black skin, the hated of Indra" will be swept out of heaven - Rig Veda. IX 73.5

Rig.Veda I 130.8 tells of how the “black skin” was conquered: "Indra protected in battle the Aryan worshipper, he subdued the lawless for Manu, he conquered the black skin."

The Rig Veda thanks a god for "scattering the slave bands of black descent", and for stamping out "the vile Dasyan colour." - Rg.V. II.20.7, II 12.4

Of course, all of this is academic. Our focus is on the Eddas.


I went to college for this- and OB is 100% correct- the migration then continued through what is now Iran and ancient Mesopotamia- with Iran still bearing temple ruins in Persopolis in runes to our Gods- seen by archetype. Mesopotamia has been the origination of Hel (Eresh-Kegel), Freyja (Inanna), and Loki (Enki) according to theologic scholars.

Tyr is said to be a combination of Tuisto, the sky god of the mongolians, and well as with some greek and indiginous influence from the area. Idunna and Eris Discordia of the Greeks also share congruency in story and domain.

Think of it this way- it is like as you travel through life, you gain names: Nicknames, married names, titles, etc. So it is with our Gods.


Thu Aug 04, 2016 5:18 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Posts: 163
Sorry for not getting back to this thread in an age. It's hard to give an easy explanation of what I researched, but basically what I found was that prior to the Indo European invasion of Europe, Europeans were peaceful farmers, who worshiped a Mother Earth goddess, (Look up the Venus of Willendorf). She sounds a lot like Jord to me. Anyhow, the IE's were a warlike society, with three main classes. Rulers, Warriors, and Commoners. We can see this in Germanic sites of worship with Odin, (ruling) Thor (warrior) and Freyr (commonfolk) being the "big three". Besides this, all European peoples are technically Indo European societies, not Old European (pre IE) societies. A friend of mine and I have a theory on how the Germanics are so different from the other pre christian European societies. We believe that when the Indo Europeans invaded, a group of people fled as a tribe or simply remained in Denmark/southern Sweden and Norway. These people were isolated geographically and best preserved the OE religion and language. It is here when we become "Germanic", the Germanics were born from war, because instead of being subjugated by the IE's we resisted. Obviously, their use of Horses in warfare and their advancement militarily meant that an entirely agrarian society didn't really stand a chance, but from what I can tell, the pre then proto Germanics took to war to protect themselves instead of simply allowing IE's to assimilate. In Germanic language there are mystery words that don't have an IE basis, and Culturally Germanics are different from the others drastically. Many argue that European paganism is all one but with different names, but I see and feel differences in Germanics that are unique and have their origin in OE customs. as the OB says, Odinism is the religion of the ice age hunter. We are the last of the Europeans to have preserved as close to a pure OE culture as possible. I don't claim that it is pure, or even mostly pure, but it is as close as there is. It was an interesting period of study for me, and I don't know as much as there is to know but feel free to continue to ask questions.

In addition, I have found that Germanics are the most Native European. The way i use them, Native European and Old/Original European are different. OE is post Cro Magnon, NE is pre Cro Magnon (meaning Neanderthal). Things like the Bear Cult and totemic Shamanism/spirituality come straight from the Neanderthals from my research. so, Germanic people are the least influenced by Cro Magnon interbreeding (though much like IE's we are of the homo sapien species), and also least influenced by invasion, (IE's primarily) making us as close as possible to both Native Europeans in blood (neanderthal and pre IE migration) and culture (Neanderthal cults and OE beliefs). Again, I am not all knowing or seeing. This is just what I have discovered. Check out the article I posted in Magic about a 9000 year old Shamanic settlement. (this would be Old Europe)
Thanks,
-Defender


Thu Oct 20, 2016 11:08 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:35 am
Posts: 561
DefenderofMountains wrote:
Sorry for not getting back to this thread in an age. It's hard to give an easy explanation of what I researched, but basically what I found was that prior to the Indo European invasion of Europe, Europeans were peaceful farmers, who worshiped a Mother Earth goddess, (Look up the Venus of Willendorf). She sounds a lot like Jord to me. Anyhow, the IE's were a warlike society, with three main classes. Rulers, Warriors, and Commoners. We can see this in Germanic sites of worship with Odin, (ruling) Thor (warrior) and Freyr (commonfolk) being the "big three". Besides this, all European peoples are technically Indo European societies, not Old European (pre IE) societies. A friend of mine and I have a theory on how the Germanics are so different from the other pre christian European societies. We believe that when the Indo Europeans invaded, a group of people fled as a tribe or simply remained in Denmark/southern Sweden and Norway. These people were isolated geographically and best preserved the OE religion and language. It is here when we become "Germanic", the Germanics were born from war, because instead of being subjugated by the IE's we resisted. Obviously, their use of Horses in warfare and their advancement militarily meant that an entirely agrarian society didn't really stand a chance, but from what I can tell, the pre then proto Germanics took to war to protect themselves instead of simply allowing IE's to assimilate. In Germanic language there are mystery words that don't have an IE basis, and Culturally Germanics are different from the others drastically. Many argue that European paganism is all one but with different names, but I see and feel differences in Germanics that are unique and have their origin in OE customs. as the OB says, Odinism is the religion of the ice age hunter. We are the last of the Europeans to have preserved as close to a pure OE culture as possible. I don't claim that it is pure, or even mostly pure, but it is as close as there is. It was an interesting period of study for me, and I don't know as much as there is to know but feel free to continue to ask questions.

In addition, I have found that Germanics are the most Native European. The way i use them, Native European and Old/Original European are different. OE is post Cro Magnon, NE is pre Cro Magnon (meaning Neanderthal). Things like the Bear Cult and totemic Shamanism/spirituality come straight from the Neanderthals from my research. so, Germanic people are the least influenced by Cro Magnon interbreeding (though much like IE's we are of the homo sapien species), and also least influenced by invasion, (IE's primarily) making us as close as possible to both Native Europeans in blood (neanderthal and pre IE migration) and culture (Neanderthal cults and OE beliefs). Again, I am not all knowing or seeing. This is just what I have discovered. Check out the article I posted in Magic about a 9000 year old Shamanic settlement. (this would be Old Europe)
Thanks,
-Defender


Interesting! Thanks for sharing!


Sat Oct 22, 2016 5:24 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 14 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.