|
||
| Return to Website | ||
 First |
 Prev |
 Reply |
 Home |
Next  |
Last  |
| Viewing Page 1 of 1 (Total Posts: 2) |
| Author | Comment |
nerthus
 Mar 20, 08 - 1:56 PM |
Historically correct or Ásatrú interpretation?
Hiya, I've been wanting a runic tattoo for a while now and have been researching meanings on the net and in books. Just wondered if anyone knows how close to the original meanings the common interpretations are? Or are these all reconstructionist pagan ideas? For example, I've always been drawn to Mannaz since I was a little girl, for many reasons - of course the meaning(the individual and it's place in humanity, appealing to the socialist and humanist in me hehe), plus my name's Holly, and that's the connected tree, my stone is garnet, it's colour is often described as 'rainbow' which is kind of my symbol too. But what I want to know is whether vikings ever ascribed these qualities to runes, or is it something relatively modern? I'm going to study Vikings at university next year, so soon I'll probably be able to answer these questions myself.  But I feel like I need this tattoo now, so any insight would be appreciated. Cheers guys.
|
|
Sentinel
Jul 5th, 2008 - 12:32 AM |
Re: Historically correct or Ásatrú interpretation?
Quote: "I'm going to study Vikings at university next year, so soon I'll probably be able to answer these questions myself." Don't forget, the term 'viking' meant 'to go a-raiding' (or some such term!) which was a popular with the ancient Danes and other Scandinavian peoples.However, good luck with your course! Blessings, Sentinel |
| First |
Prev |
Reply |
Home |
Next |
Last |
powered by
bravenet.com