Honour in todays combat.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

Honestly, I don't think there is any honor in war (as opposed to individual or group actions in combat), period. Historically, I actually think it was worse than it is today. ...And, I could come up with a giant list of reasons, but right now I'm getting ready for a meeting, lol.

I do agree there is no honor in war itself. Any one who has been on a combat patrol whether it be on ship, shore or deep in the boonies knows war has no honor in and of itself. At best the only deep honor one finds is that fact you can place your life in the hands of the person who stands next to you and they have placed theirs in your hands. For when it all goes to crap the only person you have is the person next to you and a faith that it's that which brings you home and will be there next to you when the horror's close in upon your mind in the dark of the night.

And yes many times it's all about having their back when the haunts come crashing in and their humanity struggles to hold its sanity and they face the awful question of Why they survived when others died.

[Wednesday]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

" . Does Odhinn collect women and children who have 'bttled' famine and disease and prepare them for Ragnarok by feasting and fighting in Valhalla? No."

Just an aside...Women and children are often casualties of war and I've come to the conclusion that they are the half that Freyja takes off the field.

[thalassa]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

My question to the people who say that there is no honor in today's war is this... was there honor in the war of the Middle Ages? And if they really believe that war in the Middle Ages was honorable, why? Because to me war is war. Whether you're using guns and grenades or bows and swords, what is the difference in honor? Is it more honorable to slay your foe face to face with an axe than shoot him with a gun? Is it more honorable to sail up a river and wage war on the villagers there than to fight an oppressive government?

If we're talking about Viking Age warriors... really? Their war was more honorable than modern war? Okay.

That's part of why I don't believe that the question of who goes to Valhalla is about honor, but about skill in battle.

Honestly, I don't think there is any honor in war (as opposed to individual or group actions in combat), period. Historically, I actually think it was worse than it is today. ...And, I could come up with a giant list of reasons, but right now I'm getting ready for a meeting, lol.

[Heka]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

This has been a fascinating read guys, so thank you.

Now I know I don't know as much as I one day plan to know about all of things Heathen related, but I think I agree with Rae'ya on this one. The whole idea of Odhinn taking his favourites straight from battle is well documented in all manners of fiction as well, so I think it's actually a thing.

I'm willing to be re-educated, but it sounds like the most logical and literal version to me.

Just my uneducated 2 cents!

- - - Updated - - -

You're also all getting me very interested in all the different afterlives! Someone wanna start a thread?

[Rae'ya]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

I think that perhaps everyone needs to revisit what Valhalla actually IS. Valhalla is not some shining heaven for the noble of heart. It's a hall, which is in Asgard, which houses the Einherjar. The name 'Valholl' in Old Norse means 'Hall of the Slain'. The Einherjar are those who have died in battle. They are chosen by the Valkyries and Skuld (who rides with them to make sure that their choices fit with what the Nornir are weaving) and taken to Valhalla. Once they are in Valhalla, they spend every single day fighting, killing each other, being resurrected, feasting and drinking mead. They are preparing for Ragnarok.

Each of the Aesir has their own hall, which is where they 'may' take their sworn folk if they mean enough to them. This actually isn't attested to in any historical source, because the people who worshipped these gods at the time didn't view the gods in the same way that we sometimes do. Nowadays, deities are on a more equal level with us, and we work with them on a more intimate, personal level. We have certain expectations that we personally mean something to them... which didn't really happen, historically.

I'm not an Odhinn's woman. I'm not Asatruar. I am sworn to Skuld and by extension serve the other Nornir. So perhaps I have a slightly different perspective on these gods. Sometimes it seems to me that everyone sees Odhinn as this all wise, all knowing, all benevolent god. I'll agree that he's wise and has engineered himself to be close to all-knowing. But I also see the stuff that his sworn people sometimes overlook... the moral ambiguities, the malevolent things he's done, his all consuming need to divert Ragnarok at any cost, the rape, the lying, the cheating... all these things are attested to in the Lore. Odhinn has gone to incredible lengths to attain wisdom and knowledge. And for what purpose? To find a way to stave off Ragnarok and circumvent the rulings of the Nornir.

People do the same thing with other supreme deities, such as Zeus and Osiris. These gods are not purely benevolent and 'good'. They have their own motivations, their own ulterior motives... and unfortunately the desires of the human race, which doesn't even exist in their Otheworld, is not necessarily at the top of their priorities.

Firstly we had better define what we mean by 'battle.' Do we mean a set piece? Guerilla warfare? Chucking depleted uranium over Iraq? Sending in the drones?

Remember that what we read (and in the AS tradition that's precious little anyway) is a translation. So there are going to be ambiguities and variations. Is a battle the same as a struggle? Maybe, maybe not. Personally, I think struggle - however it manifests - is what matters. But that's just me. I'm not a warrior in the sense I've ever fought or killed anyone (well, I haven't been in a really good scrap since I was about 13 but that's another story) - but struggle? Oh yes, I know about that. And I believe the gods know it too.

To me 'battle' in this context means any conflict where two or more people are fighting for life. You can battle a wild creature and be considered to have 'died in battle' (and lets remember that bears and boars were formidable opponents in the Middle Ages), but I don't think that you can battle tuberculosis and be considered to have 'died in battle'.

I don't agree that battle = struggle in this context. People struggle over a million different things, but that doesn't mean that they will specifically go to Valhalla. In Viking age times, every single person struggled... they struggled to find food, they struggled to keep warm in winter, they struggled to defend their lands, they struggled not to die of simple things like the flu. But struggle is not the pre-requisite for getting into Valhalla. And if we count struggle as 'battle', then everyone who dies of malnutrition in a third world country qualifies, do they not? (Not that they are Heathen or NT, but you get the point).

Do we feel that now that we have a significant portion of people who are NOT in the armed forces that we have to move the marker as to what constitutes battle? That seems to me what modern people seem to be doing... changing the rules because they don't qualify. Are the gods playing along with that? That's the question.

We must also remember context here. We're not just talking about a single line in the Edda which may have been misinterpreted. Does Odhinn collect women and children who have 'battled' famine and disease and prepare them for Ragnarok by feasting and fighting in Valhalla? No.

And I will get to wherever I believe I am going after this life by sheer bloody mindedness if nothing else. Because that's the way I've always lived my life and always will. And Woden knows that too. We have an understanding, him and me.

People who are specifically sworn to a particular god are a bit different... they are generally claimed by that god rather than going to the relevant Land of the Dead. So if you have an arrangement with Woden, then he'll use that to claim you. He may not take you to Valhalla though. And honestly, do you want to spend the rest of eternity feasting and fighting with soldiers before being shipped off to fight at Raganarok? Or are you hoping to end up somewhere where you can continue your service to Woden on a more intimate level? Would you rather go to Valhalla or Gladhsheimr?

As for dying in battle - well, people can be bloody useless in battle. They can get others killed while they themselves survive for a while, only to be killed eventually. Is their any honour in their deaths, or the needless deaths they caused? Look at some of the so-called war heroes who are revealed to be dangerous egotists. Is that what the gods want? What they need?

They don't take every single person who dies in battle. They chose from the slain. And they engineer that particular warriors are slain in this particular battle so that they can have them at the height of their skill. That's the purpose of Skuld and the Valkyries being present at every battle. Odhinn watches his chosen, waits for the opportune moment then has his favourites killed so he can take them at their most useful stage.

And what about unjust wars... is there any honour in those? A soldier may die in the line of duty - but was his/her duty honourable in the first place? Because if it wasn't, then I don't think Valhalla is going to be on offer anyway. Because when we talk about Odin, remember that he discovered the runes, he quested after wisdom as well as martial glory. And there is no wisdom - or honour - in unjust wars.

By this logic do you think that there is no honor in being a grunt? I have two cousins who are grunts... they've never been to war, but they are in the army and will go if they are commanded. Whether or not the WAR is honorable does not necessarily correlate to whether the PEOPLE are honorable. Grunts have a choice to either go where they are sent, or be court marshaled. That's a difficult choice when your passion is to serve your country and protect your people. Surely individual people can still be honorable even if the war they've been sent to fight isn't?

And this, exactly this, is why I could never be Heathen (or a recon of any sort, because I have similar issues with other pantheons as well...and the Abrahamic faith). To me (this will undoubtedly piss someone, somewhere off), this is just the most illogical idea ever--if your purpose is to find soldiers for a big knock-down, drag-out, then dying in battle is pretty much a crapshoot for quality. Just as likely to get the slow guy, the injured guy, the unlucky guy, the less skilled guy as the one that died in some sort of skilled, glorious death of honor. IMO, its obviously not a divine idea, but a human one. Even if the gods plural aren't infallible, one would hope they'd you know, be looking for the best warriors, maybe a few strategic thinkers, etc...with all that eternal time to get smart, that they'd have a bit more foresight and insight into humanity.

Odhinn engineers the deaths of his favorites. He doesn't just take every green unblooded boy who is cut down in battle. He follows the careers of likely warriors, watches over them, protects them, and then has them killed at the height of their skill. I'm not sure if Frejya does the same... I just know that she has first pick and usually takes all the women who are not directly sworn to Odhinn.

This way he's not getting the slow, injured, unlucky useless guys, he's getting the ones who are at their prime, the ones who are at the height of their skill. So he IS being strategic in his thinking and ensuring that he gets the best warriors. To die in bed an old man meant that Odhinn didn't want you. To die of disease meant that Odhinn didn't want you. Because he didn't take the time to have you killed in your prime when you were useful and left you to rot as a burden to your struggling family.

But there can be honor in service. There is honor in protecting our homes, our families, our land, and our ideals. There is honor in standing up for the downtrodden, for seeking to bring justice where there was tyranny, and to try our damnedest to secure equality and freedom for a new generation. There can be honor in combat, in protecting your brothers in arms (whether they are actually male or not), in protecting those that cannot protect themselves---but unfortunately, war itself is just as often a matter of starvation and disease and wanton destruction of the innocent and unlucky (the so-called "collateral damage").

I agree with this. (I don't mean to pull it out of context, I just couldn't quote the whole thing because of the length... I also agree with the two paragraphs that came before this one, but this one was the most relevant).

My question to the people who say that there is no honor in today's war is this... was there honor in the war of the Middle Ages? And if they really believe that war in the Middle Ages was honorable, why? Because to me war is war. Whether you're using guns and grenades or bows and swords, what is the difference in honor? Is it more honorable to slay your foe face to face with an axe than shoot him with a gun? Is it more honorable to sail up a river and wage war on the villagers there than to fight an oppressive government?

If we're talking about Viking Age warriors... really? Their war was more honorable than modern war? Okay.

That's part of why I don't believe that the question of who goes to Valhalla is about honor, but about skill in battle.

[Wednesday]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

My heathen traditions don't incorporate Valhalla (I go for the mountain myth instead) but I think Odin took the fallen soldiers instead of those who died in old age because it was the Norns and the Gods who decide when a life is ended not a lack of skill or intelligence on the soldiers part. A man could be about to defeat his opponent and *that* is when Odin snatches him up. Plus, its a grieving mechanism: "My beloved Bjorn was taken because he was a gift to the gods." Another aspect of it is that the crows would eat and carry away bodies on the battlefield which could be far from home. Where did your MIA father go?, taken to Valhalla by the gods. Even if you don't know where their life was lost and had no body to bury, the gods had seen to his rites.

[Vigdisdotter]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

One of the big areas of conflict I have had with other pagans has been with Odinists/Asatru and concerns the whole "only those who die in battle get to go to heaven/Valhalla" issue.

Like much that is to do with myths, I suspect this is propaganda that served a purpose. Maybe motivating one's worries and discouraging desertion?

And really, being the biggest, baddest warrior out there only goes so far. There's something to be said for a smart tactician figuring out the most effective use of available resources. So the idea that Odin, a god of wisdom and knowledge, only wants what amount to foot soldiers strikes me as odd.

[Optimistic discord]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

One of the big areas of conflict I have had with other pagans has been with Odinists/Asatru and concerns the whole "only those who die in battle get to go to heaven/Valhalla" issue.

To answer the OP, if Odin wants you he will take you.
We are talking about the god who was infamous for having those who should be victorious killed in battle so he could claim them instead of the best of the those who would of died.
It does not help that the concept of honour is a very individual one, and changes from person to person, age to age.
It was perfectly acceptable to cheat, insult, rape, steal..Just avoid being a coward, that was bad.

There is nothing done in todays conflicts that has not been done before, to many people view history with some rose tinted lens that colours everyone with pigments of chivalry and noble savagery and wisdom.

What always annoyed me was that its clear that the worship of Odin was never a mainstream religion that everyone followed, it was a warrior/rich mans cult, with evidence showing that the majority of people followed a more practical approach to religion with elements of reincarnation and ancestor worship.
Hell even later it was changed so that Hel was there to provide homes and equipment for all those who came to her land who died from non-war related causes.
And one thing is clear about our ancestors, they were very pragmatic. If a religion did not benefit them they would and did abandon it.

[Vigdisdotter]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

Very true. It's the ever popular notion of rape, pillage and plunder that fills so many stories of war and struggle. Some endorsed by the author, others more a zing against what is not proper behavior and brings dishonor. One thing is for sure the usage of rape as a weapon to belittle the population has changed over time. Not to say it doesn't still occur on a smaller scale but not part and parcel of the psychological war it used to be.

The interesting thing about the various myths tales one looks at (and not just among the Norse) is how as often as not, they depict both gods and heroes being pretty nasty as an example of what NOT to do and what you shouldn't do it. But these are still god and heroes just the same.

So the whole "honour" in mytholgy/of the gods thing is pretty flexible in my book, and really not something I worry about outside of my own ethical code.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

Seeing as in Odin and Rind's case has resulted in a child...

In any case, stealing isn't exactly "honourable" either. Nor is deception. But you will find all that and more in various myths from an assortment of cultures.

Very true. It's the ever popular notion of rape, pillage and plunder that fills so many stories of war and struggle. Some endorsed by the author, others more a zing against what is not proper behavior and brings dishonor. One thing is for sure the usage of rape as a weapon to belittle the population has changed over time. Not to say it doesn't still occur on a smaller scale but not part and parcel of the psychological war it used to be.

[Vigdisdotter]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

Bolded mine I often wonder if the notion of rape in the Saga's and Edda's is the same as in many Greek writings. Especially the content that rape was not always a sexual act but the stealing or taking of a person or thing away from an area. The story of the Rape of Persephone is about Hades stealing her from her mother not a sexual act for instance. Though at times seduction is listed as a form of rape as it is done via deception.

Seeing as in Odin and Rind's case has resulted in a child...

In any case, stealing isn't exactly "honourable" either. Nor is deception. But you will find all that and more in various myths from an assortment of cultures.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

Have you read the saga's lately? Do you really see a lot of honour there? Do you think rape is honorable? Because Odin is guilty of that one.

The idea that the gods are perfect beings that are put on pedistools honestly baffles me.

Bolded mine I often wonder if the notion of rape in the Saga's and Edda's is the same as in many Greek writings. Especially the content that rape was not always a sexual act but the stealing or taking of a person or thing away from an area. The story of the Rape of Persephone is about Hades stealing her from her mother not a sexual act for instance. Though at times seduction is listed as a form of rape as it is done via deception.

[thalassa]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

Depends on what your definition of 'honor' is. Are those people concerned about the combat techniques, or the reasons for the joining the military, or the reasons for the military going to war?

Othinn and Frejya (remember that she takes a half of the fallen warriors and has first pick) are concerned about physical prowess in battle. They are collecting soldiers to fight for them in Ragnarok. They are collecting the most skilled soldiers, not the most honorable or the most pious or the most inspiring ones.

Lets think back to Viking age warriors shall we... why are the called 'Vikings'? Because they went i vikingr. They didn't stay at home to defend their women and children all full of honor and integrity. They ranged outwards, searching for new lands and new wealth. They traveled, they discovered, they waged war. Those who died gloriously in battle are seated forevermore amongst the ranks of the Einherjar or Frejya's Folk. Those who drowned were dragged down by Ran's nets to her husbands hall. Those who died otherwise are claimed by Hella and will actually fight for the Jotun at Ragnarok, regardless of what their allegiances during life were.

Which brings me to this... those in the military who die in the line of duty are the ONLY ones who are going to Valhalla (or Folkvang). I'm sorry, but no matter how much you may have a warrior's heart or live a 'warrior's life', you are of no use to Othinn and Frejya in Ragnarok. They need soldiers. They take people who die in battle. They don't take people who die of illness or old age or festering wounds, even if they were great warriors... that's why Viking age warriors wanted to die in battle, not peacefully during their sleep.

People think that those of us sitting at home who practice martial arts or who are ready to defend our children with tooth and nail can claim to be 'warriors' and will be admitted to Valhalla or Folkvang. I don't believe that. Not when we're talking about the Northern deities. Yes, they are aware of the evolution of our physical realm and the people within it, but that doesn't change their basic nature. That doesn't change Ragnarok. And Ragnarok is what they are worried about, not our petty ideas of what constitutes 'honor'. Honor isn't going to turn the tide at the end of days.

And this, exactly this, is why I could never be Heathen (or a recon of any sort, because I have similar issues with other pantheons as well...and the Abrahamic faith). To me (this will undoubtedly piss someone, somewhere off), this is just the most illogical idea ever--if your purpose is to find soldiers for a big knock-down, drag-out, then dying in battle is pretty much a crapshoot for quality. Just as likely to get the slow guy, the injured guy, the unlucky guy, the less skilled guy as the one that died in some sort of skilled, glorious death of honor. IMO, its obviously not a divine idea, but a human one. Even if the gods plural aren't infallible, one would hope they'd you know, be looking for the best warriors, maybe a few strategic thinkers, etc...with all that eternal time to get smart, that they'd have a bit more foresight and insight into humanity.

Yeah, sue me...I look for a cohesive internal logic in the illogical!

I've seen quite a few Heathens say things along the lines of "Anybody in the military will not go to Valhalla because there is no honour in today's combat."
I think its not true because I think Odin is an extremely wise god, and because he is wise he understands that the times of war have changed. I'm positive he doesn't expect Heathens to charge in with a bearded war axe to fight the insurgents or any enemies with fully automatic rifles, rocket propelled grenades, armoured vehicles etc. etc.

What are your opinions on this?

I don't have any opinion really of the Odin (or any other Heathen god's take on the matter, see the above, lol) but...I do have an opinion on war and combat and modern military service and honor--as veteran, a (former) military spouse (he's a vet now too, not he's an ex in the military, lol), and a historical reenactor of the American Civil War.

There is no honor in war. Yes, military personnel themselves can be honorable---Monsno's breakdown of the 'type' of people that have been part of the modern military is pretty apt...I might describe it a wee bit differently and maybe slip another group or two in their (draftees and conscripts, for example), but overall, he's right. Their actions...our actions...can be honorable, they can even engage in honorable combat with modern arms....but there is no honor in war, on either side. Yeah, there can be a 'side' that has a bit more 'right' on their side (the Allies in WWII for example, the American Civil War, etc)...but there is no honor in sending our mothers and fathers and sons and daughters to kill another’s mothers and fathers and sons and daughters (or vice versa).

It is a tragic and painful fact that every nation and every generation has seen conflict escalate to war–whether it be to combat a cruel leader seeking to oppress their people (or another’s people), or a hapless legislature sending their might abroad for spurious reasons. Humanity will never be perfect, there will always be someone that is willing to kill in the most heinous of ways to achieve power, and there will always need to be someone willing to take up arms against them. This means that the innocent will die alongside the not-so innocent, and that communities and entire countries will be ravaged, both the people and the land. There is no honor in war, whether or not it is fought for the 'right' reasons or not.

But there can be honor in service. There is honor in protecting our homes, our families, our land, and our ideals. There is honor in standing up for the downtrodden, for seeking to bring justice where there was tyranny, and to try our damnedest to secure equality and freedom for a new generation. There can be honor in combat, in protecting your brothers in arms (whether they are actually male or not), in protecting those that cannot protect themselves---but unfortunately, war itself is just as often a matter of starvation and disease and wanton destruction of the innocent and unlucky (the so-called "collateral damage").

What the gods (of any pantheon) choose to do with that, its for the followers of those traditions to quibble over.

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

Although I would consider myself to be almost a heathen in the Anglo-Saxon tradition, I think I am so far out of keg on this topic that I'm liable to get shot down by the end of this post. However, be that as it may, I think I need to say this anyway.

Firstly we had better define what we mean by 'battle.' Do we mean a set piece? Guerilla warfare? Chucking depleted uranium over Iraq? Sending in the drones?

Remember that what we read (and in the AS tradition that's precious little anyway) is a translation. So there are going to be ambiguities and variations. Is a battle the same as a struggle? Maybe, maybe not. Personally, I think struggle - however it manifests - is what matters. But that's just me. I'm not a warrior in the sense I've ever fought or killed anyone (well, I haven't been in a really good scrap since I was about 13 but that's another story) - but struggle? Oh yes, I know about that. And I believe the gods know it too.

And I will get to wherever I believe I am going after this life by sheer bloody mindedness if nothing else. Because that's the way I've always lived my life and always will. And Woden knows that too. We have an understanding, him and me.

As for dying in battle - well, people can be bloody useless in battle. They can get others killed while they themselves survive for a while, only to be killed eventually. Is their any honour in their deaths, or the needless deaths they caused? Look at some of the so-called war heroes who are revealed to be dangerous egotists. Is that what the gods want? What they need?

And what about unjust wars... is there any honour in those? A soldier may die in the line of duty - but was his/her duty honourable in the first place? Because if it wasn't, then I don't think Valhalla is going to be on offer anyway. Because when we talk about Odin, remember that he discovered the runes, he quested after wisdom as well as martial glory. And there is no wisdom - or honour - in unjust wars.

Now I think I'll go and sharpen mr Penry's axe

[Rae'ya]

Re: Honour in todays combat.

I've seen quite a few Heathens say things along the lines of "Anybody in the military will not go to Valhalla because there is no honour in today's combat."
I think its not true because I think Odin is an extremely wise god, and because he is wise he understands that the times of war have changed. I'm positive he doesn't expect Heathens to charge in with a bearded war axe to fight the insurgents or any enemies with fully automatic rifles, rocket propelled grenades, armoured vehicles etc. etc.

What are your opinions on this?

Depends on what your definition of 'honor' is. Are those people concerned about the combat techniques, or the reasons for the joining the military, or the reasons for the military going to war?

Othinn and Frejya (remember that she takes a half of the fallen warriors and has first pick) are concerned about physical prowess in battle. They are collecting soldiers to fight for them in Ragnarok. They are collecting the most skilled soldiers, not the most honorable or the most pious or the most inspiring ones.

Lets think back to Viking age warriors shall we... why are the called 'Vikings'? Because they went i vikingr. They didn't stay at home to defend their women and children all full of honor and integrity. They ranged outwards, searching for new lands and new wealth. They traveled, they discovered, they waged war. Those who died gloriously in battle are seated forevermore amongst the ranks of the Einherjar or Frejya's Folk. Those who drowned were dragged down by Ran's nets to her husbands hall. Those who died otherwise are claimed by Hella and will actually fight for the Jotun at Ragnarok, regardless of what their allegiances during life were.

Which brings me to this... those in the military who die in the line of duty are the ONLY ones who are going to Valhalla (or Folkvang). I'm sorry, but no matter how much you may have a warrior's heart or live a 'warrior's life', you are of no use to Othinn and Frejya in Ragnarok. They need soldiers. They take people who die in battle. They don't take people who die of illness or old age or festering wounds, even if they were great warriors... that's why Viking age warriors wanted to die in battle, not peacefully during their sleep.

People think that those of us sitting at home who practice martial arts or who are ready to defend our children with tooth and nail can claim to be 'warriors' and will be admitted to Valhalla or Folkvang. I don't believe that. Not when we're talking about the Northern deities. Yes, they are aware of the evolution of our physical realm and the people within it, but that doesn't change their basic nature. That doesn't change Ragnarok. And Ragnarok is what they are worried about, not our petty ideas of what constitutes 'honor'. Honor isn't going to turn the tide at the end of days.