A discussion of hidden lore, inner lore, rune worlds, runic numerology, runic Edred Thorsson Thorsson goes over many different areas in this book. Thorsson, Edred. Runelore: a handbook of esoteric runology. Bibliography: p. I. Rune-Miscellanea. 2. Magic 3. Inscriptions, Runic. 4. O ld Norse poetry. I. Tide. Runelore is divided into two parts. In Part One of Runelore, Historical Lore, Thorsson uses archaeological evidence to explain where the runes come from, what.
|Published (Last):||17 February 2009|
|PDF File Size:||11.53 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.66 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
No Ad Hominem this includes racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, etc. Violation of this rule may result in a ban, with or without warning. Search First, and show it.
Reference any threads that may have touched on but not answered your question or topic. If your post is covering the same topic as another post in the last 3 months, we will delete it.
If you take a blog post off of a website, fb, or something tell us. The mods are the final authority on the rules. How bad are Edred Thorsson books? Please also bear in mind that I have only began deeply studying runes and Norse practices within the last 6 months. My question is why exactly are Edred Thorsson books seen as so terrible?
Regardless of his personal choices, he is still very well versed in Germanic history, runes, etc. The best answer I have seen so came from Sweyn Plowright in The Rune Primer, but much like everything else I have read so far it mostly boiled down to “Thorsson imposes satanic philosophy in his works”, without giving examples. Could anyone point out some specific instances Thorsson dose this, or how he dose this?
I am the author of “The Serpent and the Eagle: An Introduction to the Elder Runic Tradition. I am not anti-Thorsson. However I am going to offer my view here also as an author on this topic as well.
First, the thorssoon regarding his Left-Hand-Path views I think are not entirely on the mark. If you read his LHP and Runic books you will see a sharp difference of viewpoint. I don’t think it is accurate to say these are merged. I also know from personal discussions with him that his Runic views are not the same as his LHP publications.
Runelore : a handbook of esoteric runology / Edred Thorsson – Details – Trove
So let that sink in. Some of us do follow multiple traditions and some of us can keep the teachings separate.
Thorsson does a decent job here. Thorsson is immensely knowledgeable and well studied. Of the authors in this area, he is probably the one who has had the strongest academic background in this area. In my conversations with him he has always been respectful, knowledgeable, remarkably humble, and open to disagreement and debate. His books are worth reading.
Particularly “Green Runa” if you can find a copy. Additionally the books are essentially the foundation of contemporary Runic practice even for a lot of people who dislike Thorsson Mr Plowright is no exception. Every book that is out there is worthy of critique, even mine. Heck I am even happy to critique my own book if you like though I still think you really should read it.
Thorsson’s books are no different. Reading his major Runic books, there are a few things I personally think a reader should bear in mind. The first difficulty is you can see a strong evolution in his writing between Futhark and Runelore.
Futhark was his first book and is far more Armanen-influenced than Runelore. But Futhark is a practical book and Runelore is not so much, so the reader is somewhat left trying to navigate an evolving understanding. But as authors our viewpoints evolve. I remember reading my own book shortly after publication and realizing how much my own viewpoint had changed during the editing process Frankly you are better off using Northern Magic as a practical book and then reading Futhark later after Runelore and others.
A second major problem that a lot of the commentary doesn’t really cite sources. This makes it difficult for a student to decide whether or not to accept his interpretation of the staves.
I don’t actually know if this is deliberate or not it could be a starting point, to be rejected and hopefully returned to later but I don’t personally find this helpful. He is clear I think that this part is subjective but I didn’t feel like there is an adequate framework communicated to allow a student to evaluate the subjective bit itself. So those are my two major critiques. The books are certainly worth reading, though they don’t fit well into the sort of “strict reconstructionism” that has become trendy in some Asatru circles — esoteric practices never will and for good reason.
Naturally I think my book should be read first but then I won’t call myself unbiased. Additionally, I think it is a bad idea to only read books from one author or another. If you really want understanding you want to get a few different author’s takes on the topic and then think about how they go together or not. Under no circumstances should you limit yourself to THorsson’s works. Thanks so much for such an I depth response.
I will definitely look into the books you mean ruined as well as your own. I wrote the book as my Masterwork for the Rune Gild. I did so because I was frustrated at my choices to recommend beginners.
The book in some ways draws upon the same sources as Thorsson but takes them rund a different direction. The goal was to provide a way of talking about the Runes that people could more easily debate and discuss. Consequently all my commentary does cite sources. The first is that my view of fate and time has changed quite a bit since I wrote the book. This is important because I tended to follow the sort of standard Grimm interpretation of the Norns as being past, present, and future.
But that cuts out a larger series of insights I have gained since this has been written. This would be a long discussion but I now think the Norns are universally badly covered in Heathen literature and my book is no exception.
The second and more problematic critique I runf offer is edrer I wrote the book before I really understood the post-structuralists in the field of anthropology. As a result, the methodology in the book is helpful but missing something important. It is overly focused on form, perhaps overly trying to avoid what I see as shortcomings in works of other authors in the area.
I don’t know if I will put together a erred edition or instead try to write a follow-up. I think it is worth reading but like all writings, I would be concerned if you agreed with it all uncritically.
Are you looking for information on rune lore specifically? If so, Pollington’s primer on the runes is pretty good, and others have recommended the first half of Thorsskn Paxon’s Taking up the Runes. But thorzson the hole, if you’re 6 months into studying this religion, you do not have the cultural context in which to understand what they are and what thorsdon represent.
Their use in divination and magic is only a small part of the role they play. Note that Page who focuses on Futhorc thorson only in academic thorssin, and is uninterested in modern interpretations like those you’re likely to find in most other books mentioned in this thread. He does in one chapter cover historical rune magic, but sources are rather thin on the ground, which serves to emphasise how speculative modern pagan books tend to be.
And, I think, his book is all the better for it. Obviously in early times runes were used for occult purposes, but the question arises whether the supernatural power lay in the runes themselves or in the words they formed, whether runes were a magical script or just a script that happened to be used for magic.
Runelore: The Magic, History, and Hidden Codes of the Runes
There is a detailed, if rather indigestible, discussion of ‘magical’ runic inscriptions in S. Flowers, Runes and Magic: American University Studies, ser.
I get the feeling Flower’s started out very respectable and strived for historical accuracy as much as possible but then got a bit crazy. But thank you for your book suggestions.
Can’t get end quote formatting to work]. Because he writes about a Left Hand Path masquerading as Heathenry, all the while asserting some secret, revealed, information, which generally consists of MUS.
I hear this claimed often, but almost never elaborated on or cited. Could you give specific instances or explain how you see this happening?
For whatever reason Tyorsson never thought to look to see if the thorssson guild had its own web site. As I said, I hear claims without cites or any info to back them up. My question was can you cite any instances where he dose these things or explain how? Flowers writes occult ritual structure into his prayers, it really boils down to that.
In addition, I’d be careful with saying people are well-versed in runes when there’s been pretty much no continuous runic tradition and the sagas specifically warn of botched rune charms. Don’t want to speak for others but Flowers’ works mostly read like hedge magic magyycke?
Thprsson they spell it these days Asatru doesn’t need young wanna-be sorcerers, it needs young wanna-be normal people. Flowers’ release of all these books of mysticism runs counter to that in my opinion, especially since his name pops up when people google the religion. Are his books Asatru specific? The one I read did not seem to be, and I have asked about him because I was considering getting more books edrec him although I have read quite a few others by other authors and will continue to do so.
Runelore: The Magic, History, and Hidden Codes of the Runes by Edred Thorsson
I am not currently interested in becoming or claiming to be Asatru. Simply a practicing Norse heathen without claiming any organize religion or path within those parameters. When I know more general info then I will look into the specifics of Asatru. We’re reconstructionists, not magicians, and Thorsson mostly writes magic books.
Might be what you’re looking for but it isn’t a historically or culturally sound method of worship, which is what we in this sub are looking tuorsson practice in modern times.