What do you think?
Rate this book
World of Mythology
Myths of the Norsemen - Complete Version
A collection of myths that tell of the creation of the world, the deeds of such gods and heroes as Odin, Thor and Siegfried, the machinations of the evil Loki, and more. Entertaining and readable, these tales present the ancient Germanic and Scandinavian myths that have helped shape literature.
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery.
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery.
283 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1895
931 people are currently reading
7989 people want to read
About the author
Hélène A. Guerber
97 books47 followersHélène Adeline Guerber (1859 – 1929), better known as H.A. Guerber, was a British historian most well known for her written histories of Germanic mythology.
Her most well known work is Myths of the Norsemen: From the Eddas and Sagas - George G. Harrap and Co. Ltd., 1908 in London.
Other histories by Guerber include Legends of the Rhine (A.S. Barnes & Co., New York, 1895; new edition 1905), Stories of the Wagner Opera, The Book of the Epic, The Story of the Ancient World, The Story of the Greeks, The Story of the Romans, Legends of the Middle Ages, The Story of the Renaissance and Reformation, The Story of the Thirteen Colonies, and The Story of the Great Republic.
Her most well known work is Myths of the Norsemen: From the Eddas and Sagas - George G. Harrap and Co. Ltd., 1908 in London.
Other histories by Guerber include Legends of the Rhine (A.S. Barnes & Co., New York, 1895; new edition 1905), Stories of the Wagner Opera, The Book of the Epic, The Story of the Ancient World, The Story of the Greeks, The Story of the Romans, Legends of the Middle Ages, The Story of the Renaissance and Reformation, The Story of the Thirteen Colonies, and The Story of the Great Republic.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 243 reviews
January 10, 2019
4 stars - English Ebook -🍃🍃🍃
Quote from the book :
Of Ymir’s flesh
Was earth created,
Of his bonen the Hills,
Of his hear trees and plants,
Of his skull the havens,
And of his boos,
The gentlemen powers
Formed Midgard for Sons of men,
But of his brain
The heavy clouds are
all created.
🌳🌳🌳
I realy like history. Part of that is mythology. So sometimes inbetween novels ect I like to read this kind of books. 🌼🌼🌼
Quote from the book :
Of Ymir’s flesh
Was earth created,
Of his bonen the Hills,
Of his hear trees and plants,
Of his skull the havens,
And of his boos,
The gentlemen powers
Formed Midgard for Sons of men,
But of his brain
The heavy clouds are
all created.
🌳🌳🌳
I realy like history. Part of that is mythology. So sometimes inbetween novels ect I like to read this kind of books. 🌼🌼🌼
July 1, 2020
A few years ago, I had bought this book from Barnes and Noble's online store. I didn't realize until I started reading it and looked at the info on its Goodreads page, this book is actually a reprint from 1909. If I had known that, I would not have bought it.
The book is largely summarizes different Gods and some of the popular Norse stories. However, I would not recommend this book to anybody interested in learning Norse Mythology (maybe if you wanted some nice illustrations).
I wouldn't recommend this book due to it being inaccurate and very outdated. For example on page 237, Guerber states Glut (Gloot) was Loki's first wife, when she actually wasn't. She was the wife to Hálogi, a King of Norway according to the Thorstein Saga (there are other listed inaccuracies such as pointed out by this Amazon reviewer). Also, sometimes what the author writes and what she quotes from other texts conflicted with one another. For example, the author points out that Einheriar, the fallen warriors who are brought to Valhalla by the Valkyries, feast/gorge themselves every night on the divine boar, Saehrimnir. But the quoted passage from Lay of Grimnir, Anderson’s version: “Andhrimnir cooks in Eldhrimnir Saehrimnir: ‘Tis the best of flesh; But few know What the einherjes eat.” I did some looking and the Einherjes that I could find (not the band) were another possible term for the Einheriar.
The use of the authors "some accounts/mythologists/authorities" in relating a tale and never citing where she had garnered the information from, really irked my inner nerd. Each time, I wanted to strangle the book I had to remind myself that a lot of other authors I've read pre-1980's don't believe in the notion of citation.
Another point, that really irks me to no end is: "Loki: God of Evil"... ummm, okay. I have a bad feeling where she is taking this. "At first a god, he gradually becomes 'god and devil combined,' and ends in being held in general detestation as an exact counterpart of the mediaeval Lucifer." Yep, she went there. I actually did some digging. In 1889 this dude, Sophus Bugge, saw Loki as a variant to Christianity, Lucifer (Bugge was trying to connect Norse myths to christian prototypes). Apparently, this idea was popular with Guerber, too. Furthermore, I'm sure other authors were doing this at the time, Guerber allows Christianity to interfere with her work. I lost count of how many times she used "heathen" in her book and somehow pre-Christian people are ignorant because they believed stormy nights and hounds baying on such a night were omens for death cause of the Wild Hunt.
I am not sure if this is due to the times of not differentiating the two or due to lazy research, but Greek and Roman Pantheons are not the same. For the last chapter, Guerber tries to draw similarities between Norse mythology and Greek mythology. It would be more scholarly if she had used the correct Pantheon, instead she discussed Jupiter, Juno, Pluto, Proserpine, etc. which are all Roman, not Greek.
The book is largely summarizes different Gods and some of the popular Norse stories. However, I would not recommend this book to anybody interested in learning Norse Mythology (maybe if you wanted some nice illustrations).
I wouldn't recommend this book due to it being inaccurate and very outdated. For example on page 237, Guerber states Glut (Gloot) was Loki's first wife, when she actually wasn't. She was the wife to Hálogi, a King of Norway according to the Thorstein Saga (there are other listed inaccuracies such as pointed out by this Amazon reviewer). Also, sometimes what the author writes and what she quotes from other texts conflicted with one another. For example, the author points out that Einheriar, the fallen warriors who are brought to Valhalla by the Valkyries, feast/gorge themselves every night on the divine boar, Saehrimnir. But the quoted passage from Lay of Grimnir, Anderson’s version: “Andhrimnir cooks in Eldhrimnir Saehrimnir: ‘Tis the best of flesh; But few know What the einherjes eat.” I did some looking and the Einherjes that I could find (not the band) were another possible term for the Einheriar.
The use of the authors "some accounts/mythologists/authorities" in relating a tale and never citing where she had garnered the information from, really irked my inner nerd. Each time, I wanted to strangle the book I had to remind myself that a lot of other authors I've read pre-1980's don't believe in the notion of citation.
Another point, that really irks me to no end is: "Loki: God of Evil"... ummm, okay. I have a bad feeling where she is taking this. "At first a god, he gradually becomes 'god and devil combined,' and ends in being held in general detestation as an exact counterpart of the mediaeval Lucifer." Yep, she went there. I actually did some digging. In 1889 this dude, Sophus Bugge, saw Loki as a variant to Christianity, Lucifer (Bugge was trying to connect Norse myths to christian prototypes). Apparently, this idea was popular with Guerber, too. Furthermore, I'm sure other authors were doing this at the time, Guerber allows Christianity to interfere with her work. I lost count of how many times she used "heathen" in her book and somehow pre-Christian people are ignorant because they believed stormy nights and hounds baying on such a night were omens for death cause of the Wild Hunt.
I am not sure if this is due to the times of not differentiating the two or due to lazy research, but Greek and Roman Pantheons are not the same. For the last chapter, Guerber tries to draw similarities between Norse mythology and Greek mythology. It would be more scholarly if she had used the correct Pantheon, instead she discussed Jupiter, Juno, Pluto, Proserpine, etc. which are all Roman, not Greek.
August 1, 2018
Physically, this book is gorgeous. There are some great illustrations. Many poetic quotes are included, both from translations of the Edda and later, original works. The material covers the core myths plus the Saga of the Volsungs and some additional tales that come from sources other than the Eddas. The actual stories, however, are marred by the author inserting bits that are, as far as I can tell, her own inventions. Even more problematic is the fact that she feels compelled to tell us what it all Really Means--that is, as seen through a nineteenth-century materialistic filter.
In my view, the stories we call myths can mean more than they appear to, but they don't mean less. It follows that every other tale is most likely not an elaborately coded retelling of the fact that it gets cold in the winter, while in the summer, the weather gets warmer and crops grow. But having once decided that myths are 'explanations of the natural world', your true nineteenth-century mythologist sees them everywhere they look, like a hammer-bearing guy hallucinating a world full of nails. The most egregious example of this peculiar academic fixation might be the story of Vidar. Vidar is, of course, Odin's son, who is said to avenge his father at Ragnarok by tearing the Fenris Wolf apart. In order to pull this off, he's given a shoe made from all the scraps of leather thrown away through the ages. This is the context in which Guerber, without a blush, brings up a theory that since Vidar has only one special shoe, he must be one-legged. From there it's a short jump (for her compatriots) to the conclusion that Vidar personifies a waterspout(!) that quenches the destructive fire that the Wolf no doubt symbolizes. Among other things, this goes to show that these theorizers have never actually tried to force apart the jaws of a supernatural wolf. It would have been better for them, in all sorts of ways, if they had. For one thing, they might have realized that you probably want to avoid stepping into said wolf's mouth with both feet.
All that said, there are nuggets here and there that make this book worth dipping into. For example, Guerber includes a summary of Odin's Ravens' Song (Hrafnagaldr Odins), an Eddaic poem I'd never heard of before. It may be a later work--some place the author in the 1700s--but it's still fascinating to read.
So, a worthwhile book to peruse, but keep your metaphorical salt shaker handy.
In my view, the stories we call myths can mean more than they appear to, but they don't mean less. It follows that every other tale is most likely not an elaborately coded retelling of the fact that it gets cold in the winter, while in the summer, the weather gets warmer and crops grow. But having once decided that myths are 'explanations of the natural world', your true nineteenth-century mythologist sees them everywhere they look, like a hammer-bearing guy hallucinating a world full of nails. The most egregious example of this peculiar academic fixation might be the story of Vidar. Vidar is, of course, Odin's son, who is said to avenge his father at Ragnarok by tearing the Fenris Wolf apart. In order to pull this off, he's given a shoe made from all the scraps of leather thrown away through the ages. This is the context in which Guerber, without a blush, brings up a theory that since Vidar has only one special shoe, he must be one-legged. From there it's a short jump (for her compatriots) to the conclusion that Vidar personifies a waterspout(!) that quenches the destructive fire that the Wolf no doubt symbolizes. Among other things, this goes to show that these theorizers have never actually tried to force apart the jaws of a supernatural wolf. It would have been better for them, in all sorts of ways, if they had. For one thing, they might have realized that you probably want to avoid stepping into said wolf's mouth with both feet.
All that said, there are nuggets here and there that make this book worth dipping into. For example, Guerber includes a summary of Odin's Ravens' Song (Hrafnagaldr Odins), an Eddaic poem I'd never heard of before. It may be a later work--some place the author in the 1700s--but it's still fascinating to read.
So, a worthwhile book to peruse, but keep your metaphorical salt shaker handy.
May 11, 2020
Πολύ καλή και προσεγμένη έκδοση για κάποιον που ενδιαφέρεται για την Νορβική Μυθολογία.
July 16, 2018
I do not remember where I got this book, probably a book fair at a library. My copy is a vintage hardback published in 1895. It has old paintings to represent the various gods and goddesses.
Overall, I liked this book, it was highly informative and thorough in describing the origins of the Norse creation myth, of all the gods and goddesses, whom they married, and their individual fates, along the various stories and adventures each god and goddess took part in. It also narrates the origins of mythological figures such as giants, elves and dwarfs.
If someone wants an almost encyclopediac collection of every Norse God, this is the book for them. Guerber recounts the myths based on the ancient poetry they are derived from and includes several excerpts from those poems.
It includes the Sigurd Saga, in Germany known as the Ring Cycle, the Twilight of the Gods, which is the narration of the end of Norse myth and the dawn of Christianity, and finally a comparison between Norse and Greek mythology.
Reading the Sigurd Saga and also the origins of elves and dwarfs, one understands where Tolkien got his inspiration for his Lord of the Rings saga. The names and myths are very similar.
There may be more exciting versions of Norse myth, but this one certainly has its value, if for no other reason because of the time (the 19th century) in which it was written.
Overall, I liked this book, it was highly informative and thorough in describing the origins of the Norse creation myth, of all the gods and goddesses, whom they married, and their individual fates, along the various stories and adventures each god and goddess took part in. It also narrates the origins of mythological figures such as giants, elves and dwarfs.
If someone wants an almost encyclopediac collection of every Norse God, this is the book for them. Guerber recounts the myths based on the ancient poetry they are derived from and includes several excerpts from those poems.
It includes the Sigurd Saga, in Germany known as the Ring Cycle, the Twilight of the Gods, which is the narration of the end of Norse myth and the dawn of Christianity, and finally a comparison between Norse and Greek mythology.
Reading the Sigurd Saga and also the origins of elves and dwarfs, one understands where Tolkien got his inspiration for his Lord of the Rings saga. The names and myths are very similar.
There may be more exciting versions of Norse myth, but this one certainly has its value, if for no other reason because of the time (the 19th century) in which it was written.
July 20, 2023
A straightforward presentation of the most important elements of Norse mythology, the work is light, and the brevity will be appreciated if you are just dipping your toes in or looking for a refresher.
The work is more than a century old, leading to some dated information (the practice of the "blood eagle" is presented as fact, for instance). Furthermore, there are many generalizations.
I would recommend the Prose and Poetic Eddas if this is interesting, as they are the closest things to source material that we have.
The work is more than a century old, leading to some dated information (the practice of the "blood eagle" is presented as fact, for instance). Furthermore, there are many generalizations.
I would recommend the Prose and Poetic Eddas if this is interesting, as they are the closest things to source material that we have.
December 24, 2011
Despite its age, Guerber’s “Myths of the Norsemen” is one of my all time favorite works on northern legend. I have Norwegian heritage, and as a child always took to heart the stories of Thor, Loki, Odin and the Jotun. As an adult I love picking out Norse mythology in my favorite video games and TV shows- until you know it, you’ll never realize how constantly bombarded you are with it. I never grew out of my interests in mythology, and when I happened across this book in B&N I bought it without hesitation (of course, now I know it’s on Project Gutenberg as an eBook for free).
I’m very glad I did. Guerber is such a great scholar. This book is written in a really comprehensive way, starting with creation myths, and ending with the myths concerning Ragnorak and the times after. Myths are so often entwined, and they offshoot and reconnect in naturally disjointed ways, but this never seems to get Guerber off point, she keeps things consistent and linear. It’s really very helpful.
One of my favorite things is her heavy use of primary sources (well, translated primary sources, close enough). The frequent use of quotes from the Eddas keeps the lyrical beauty alive while she is dissecting the story; she not only tells the story, she explains it and its relation to the people of the North.
It is probably the perfect book if you are looking for an authoritative start to learning about Norse mythology. If Norse mythology is old hat, it might just be that you will learn something new, or in the very least, this book will guide you to some excellent sources for information.
I’m very glad I did. Guerber is such a great scholar. This book is written in a really comprehensive way, starting with creation myths, and ending with the myths concerning Ragnorak and the times after. Myths are so often entwined, and they offshoot and reconnect in naturally disjointed ways, but this never seems to get Guerber off point, she keeps things consistent and linear. It’s really very helpful.
One of my favorite things is her heavy use of primary sources (well, translated primary sources, close enough). The frequent use of quotes from the Eddas keeps the lyrical beauty alive while she is dissecting the story; she not only tells the story, she explains it and its relation to the people of the North.
It is probably the perfect book if you are looking for an authoritative start to learning about Norse mythology. If Norse mythology is old hat, it might just be that you will learn something new, or in the very least, this book will guide you to some excellent sources for information.
July 25, 2022
4 stars - English Ebook
Over the centuries, Northern mythology has exerted much influence on Western customs, language, and literature.
Its principal theme of the perpetual struggle of the beneficent forces of nature against the injurious, and its twin characteristics of dark tragedy and grim humor, tinge much European literature and music, most notably Wagner’s Ring Cycle.
In this volume, a noted scholar of myth and folklore has assembled a rich collection of Northern mythology as preserved in the Eddas and sagas of Iceland. These are perhaps the purest versions of the original myths, thanks to the island’s remoteness and lack of contact with outside influences.
Both grand and tragical, the age-old tales tell of the creation of the world; the heroic deeds of such gods and heroes as Odin, Thor, and Siegfried; the machinations of the evil Loki; the fantastical adventures of giants, dwarfs, and elves; the twilight of the gods; and much else.
Sixty-four marvelous, atmospheric illustrations add an additional dimension of charm.
Had this book years ago and read the living crap out of it. Loaned it out and that was the last time I seen it. Finally decided to stock up my Germanic folk tale section of my personal library and had to have it again. While there is some minor variations with her telling and others, I still love it and it takes me back to the time spent earlier in life learning about my ancestors beliefs!
Over the centuries, Northern mythology has exerted much influence on Western customs, language, and literature.
Its principal theme of the perpetual struggle of the beneficent forces of nature against the injurious, and its twin characteristics of dark tragedy and grim humor, tinge much European literature and music, most notably Wagner’s Ring Cycle.
In this volume, a noted scholar of myth and folklore has assembled a rich collection of Northern mythology as preserved in the Eddas and sagas of Iceland. These are perhaps the purest versions of the original myths, thanks to the island’s remoteness and lack of contact with outside influences.
Both grand and tragical, the age-old tales tell of the creation of the world; the heroic deeds of such gods and heroes as Odin, Thor, and Siegfried; the machinations of the evil Loki; the fantastical adventures of giants, dwarfs, and elves; the twilight of the gods; and much else.
Sixty-four marvelous, atmospheric illustrations add an additional dimension of charm.
Had this book years ago and read the living crap out of it. Loaned it out and that was the last time I seen it. Finally decided to stock up my Germanic folk tale section of my personal library and had to have it again. While there is some minor variations with her telling and others, I still love it and it takes me back to the time spent earlier in life learning about my ancestors beliefs!
September 9, 2018
Since I'm norwegian, I've grown up with the tales of norse mythology (and yes, that's my real last name), and I love them. But pretty quickly into this book, I was annoyed. A lot of the names are butchered (Svart-alfa-heim? Bifröst?), and details were left out of the stories. Lots of random stuff inserted too. There are some nice old illustrations though.
It obviously starts with how the world was created, and then goes on to tell you about all the gods and other creatures and the stories about them. Then we have (parts of?) the Sigurd and Frithiof sagas, which I thought was a nice addition, since I haven't read those before. And of course it ends with Ragnarok, and then compares norse mythology with greek. In the back there's a 50-page index, which makes the book much shorter than you think.
So I'm not sure if I would actually recommend this if you're interested in norse mythology.
It obviously starts with how the world was created, and then goes on to tell you about all the gods and other creatures and the stories about them. Then we have (parts of?) the Sigurd and Frithiof sagas, which I thought was a nice addition, since I haven't read those before. And of course it ends with Ragnarok, and then compares norse mythology with greek. In the back there's a 50-page index, which makes the book much shorter than you think.
So I'm not sure if I would actually recommend this if you're interested in norse mythology.
April 17, 2021
I like illustrated books in which the work of fiction is well enhanced by the colorful strokes of brush. This is one such. This beautifully done hardcover is a compilation of Norse Mythology, tracing the birth of Gods and Giants till they meet for one final time for Ragnarok. Beautifully layering folklores with popular sagas, HA Guerber tactfully weaves a storyline filled with vengeance, base-instincts, love, betrayal and remorse. It is a must read for anyone wanting to explore the nordic culture and wishes to understand the myths and legends of Norsemen through three of the most important sources - Poetic Edda, Codex Regius and Kennings. I would rate it much better than Neil Gaiman’s take on it which is more basic and does not feel as serious an attempt at this piece of our civilisation.
Happy Reading.
Happy Reading.
February 20, 2012
If ever you wanted to know the background to just about every known Norse Myth, then this is your book. So complete is this volume that along with "The Children of Odin" both are used extensively by video game developers as reference.
Dont try and read from cover to cover (at 620 pages it would be quite a read) but I do recommend having it on your coffee table and dipping in and out when you have just finished a book or are bored with telly or with what you're reading.
Dont try and read from cover to cover (at 620 pages it would be quite a read) but I do recommend having it on your coffee table and dipping in and out when you have just finished a book or are bored with telly or with what you're reading.
Read
July 24, 2017Good Popular book about Norse Myths. Being of mostly Norwegian Ancestry, I find these stories great. THESE ARE MY PEOPLE! LOL
I have to admit I'm a bit of a sucker for these Barnes and Noble "Collectible" Leather books. I have no Illusion that they are really "Collectible" but they are rather lovely. LOL
I have to admit I'm a bit of a sucker for these Barnes and Noble "Collectible" Leather books. I have no Illusion that they are really "Collectible" but they are rather lovely. LOL
July 18, 2021
not so much a bundle of stories, but a comprehensive guide for Norse and old european mythology and history. A must have historical reference guide for anyone interested in going deeper in to the roots of north european gods and culture.
April 23, 2024
Майже 5
July 12, 2024
Absolutely loved it! As a fan of Norse mythology, this book has it all. It's extremely packed with details and stories while also dissecting the origins of the gods and their accompanying myths.
November 15, 2023
The magic of the world, its grasping beauty, its creation and the endless phenomena taking place as a whole. A universe in which we ask ourselves about the role that humans play in all of it. It is not without a reason, then, that I feel that unique fondness around mythology, puzzled by how we have lived and understood the schematics of the reality we are embedded within. And after an initial rodeo with Gaiman together with other illustrated books and tipping my feet into academic views with the marvelous Enrique Bermúdez's "Mitología Nórdica", it was about time for me to dive into a proper, extended anthology of the Norse myths. Nothing better than this finely edited work by Helen A. Guerber.
I knew nothing about this book before it was given to me. To me it was a surprise to come across an anthology written by an author of the late XIX early XX century. And this mark is something present all across the piece, on the basis itself of the writing and, overall, the interpretation of the stories told. Other than that, we find ourselves in front of a common anthology: divided into chapters covering main and secondary divinities and other entities besides some core relations critical to the culture and religion of the people, it narrates the main attributes of the characters, their doings and the stories and figures related to them. A complete, multi-layer treatise of the tellings of the Norse peoples developed in a diffuse time-frame, and the echoes through other eras in history.
This work contains an amusing amount of characters, names and stories, to the extend many of them are somewhat ignored or forgotten in other "mainstream" lectures. It is indeed an extremely complete and detailed gathering of the interwoven strings building up this mythology. Accompanying the narrations, we are delighted with beautiful illustrations and poetic citations from different literary sources (original eddas and sagas among them), something that makes the reading more diverse and dynamic. The order of the chapters -or gods- also takes the reader in a crescendo trip through all the main facts and plots, eventually leading us to the dawn of the gods. A very interesting feature is that through all the book, the author intends to explain all myths allegorically in relation to natural elements and phenomena and also follows the lead of the stories surviving after Christianity arrived. With all that, the final chapter glimpses at Indo-European origins and their potential correlations with Greek mythology.
Precisely, it is quite deceiving to me that with all the references, interpretations and proposed relationship of the myths to medieval folk tales, we do not get a single citation or shout-out to the sources of the information. I can understand that the literal identification of myths, conflicts and characters with natural events is a current that thrived in the years this anthology was written. And it might be still an interesting throwback even when today we assume it surpassed. The same goes with the compared mythology chapter; something that, as pointed out, was being born at the time. We may also accept that most of the information must come from the two eddas and multiple sagas, but the poetic citations are not enough, most importantly when some of them come from contemporary literary works. Overall, this ends up affecting the narration itself, where the mention of alternative names, plots or even the loss into the Christian sphere just feels quick and tasteless. Still, the intention of this work was never that of being an exact, academic treatise and it cannot match the expectation of what these kind of books should be in our days.
All things considered, the anthology is honestly fun and overwhelming in a positive manner, though a bit dense at some points if you seek a rather calm, paced reading. A solid Yggdrasil of stories that delights us with the power to branch out into whatever draws our attention, grasping the complexity which these people carried the sense of life with.
I knew nothing about this book before it was given to me. To me it was a surprise to come across an anthology written by an author of the late XIX early XX century. And this mark is something present all across the piece, on the basis itself of the writing and, overall, the interpretation of the stories told. Other than that, we find ourselves in front of a common anthology: divided into chapters covering main and secondary divinities and other entities besides some core relations critical to the culture and religion of the people, it narrates the main attributes of the characters, their doings and the stories and figures related to them. A complete, multi-layer treatise of the tellings of the Norse peoples developed in a diffuse time-frame, and the echoes through other eras in history.
This work contains an amusing amount of characters, names and stories, to the extend many of them are somewhat ignored or forgotten in other "mainstream" lectures. It is indeed an extremely complete and detailed gathering of the interwoven strings building up this mythology. Accompanying the narrations, we are delighted with beautiful illustrations and poetic citations from different literary sources (original eddas and sagas among them), something that makes the reading more diverse and dynamic. The order of the chapters -or gods- also takes the reader in a crescendo trip through all the main facts and plots, eventually leading us to the dawn of the gods. A very interesting feature is that through all the book, the author intends to explain all myths allegorically in relation to natural elements and phenomena and also follows the lead of the stories surviving after Christianity arrived. With all that, the final chapter glimpses at Indo-European origins and their potential correlations with Greek mythology.
Precisely, it is quite deceiving to me that with all the references, interpretations and proposed relationship of the myths to medieval folk tales, we do not get a single citation or shout-out to the sources of the information. I can understand that the literal identification of myths, conflicts and characters with natural events is a current that thrived in the years this anthology was written. And it might be still an interesting throwback even when today we assume it surpassed. The same goes with the compared mythology chapter; something that, as pointed out, was being born at the time. We may also accept that most of the information must come from the two eddas and multiple sagas, but the poetic citations are not enough, most importantly when some of them come from contemporary literary works. Overall, this ends up affecting the narration itself, where the mention of alternative names, plots or even the loss into the Christian sphere just feels quick and tasteless. Still, the intention of this work was never that of being an exact, academic treatise and it cannot match the expectation of what these kind of books should be in our days.
All things considered, the anthology is honestly fun and overwhelming in a positive manner, though a bit dense at some points if you seek a rather calm, paced reading. A solid Yggdrasil of stories that delights us with the power to branch out into whatever draws our attention, grasping the complexity which these people carried the sense of life with.
August 4, 2025
This book was dry dry dry. It took me almost 4 months to get through because of how dry it was, notwithstanding my newfound fascination with Norse mythology. I may not have gotten through it if not for my son being born, giving me an opportunity to pick the book back up and read it aloud to him at bedtime. He must have found the book as dry as I did as it always put him to sleep fairly quickly.
As others have pointed out, there are also inaccuracies, outdated analyses and incorrect conflations with other myths and religions. Despite these complaints and my two star rating, I’m overall glad for the experience of slogging through this book, and I may even recommend it as a collectors item for some, even if you never read the whole thing. For one thing, I agree with everyone remarking on the beautiful illustrations. I also enjoyed the opportunity to get a glimpse into how intellectuals of the late 19th century were communicating about Norse mythology. It was interesting as well as off putting how the author seemed to carry an attitude of Christian supremacy throughout the stories, portraying the missionaries as “civilizing” these “ignorant” pagans, and declaring any communities still holding on to ancient traditions in some form to be “superstitious.” As if Christian rituals are somehow rational by comparison.
As others have pointed out, there are also inaccuracies, outdated analyses and incorrect conflations with other myths and religions. Despite these complaints and my two star rating, I’m overall glad for the experience of slogging through this book, and I may even recommend it as a collectors item for some, even if you never read the whole thing. For one thing, I agree with everyone remarking on the beautiful illustrations. I also enjoyed the opportunity to get a glimpse into how intellectuals of the late 19th century were communicating about Norse mythology. It was interesting as well as off putting how the author seemed to carry an attitude of Christian supremacy throughout the stories, portraying the missionaries as “civilizing” these “ignorant” pagans, and declaring any communities still holding on to ancient traditions in some form to be “superstitious.” As if Christian rituals are somehow rational by comparison.
October 4, 2019
I liked the stories (I'm a slut for Norse culture and mythology), but not so much the presentation.
Compared to Neil Gaiman's delightful telling of the Norse myths, this book is so... dry. It doesn't tell the stories, but sort of just reports them, all matter of fact, without any style or gusto.
What it does have going for it is thoroughness. That's why I picked it up after reading Neil Gaiman's Norse Mythology, because I wanted all the Norse myths I could possibly consume. Gaiman's book just includes a sample.
I did get that, I feel. I probably know all the myths now! I just wish I hadn't felt like I was dragging myself through them!
Compared to Neil Gaiman's delightful telling of the Norse myths, this book is so... dry. It doesn't tell the stories, but sort of just reports them, all matter of fact, without any style or gusto.
What it does have going for it is thoroughness. That's why I picked it up after reading Neil Gaiman's Norse Mythology, because I wanted all the Norse myths I could possibly consume. Gaiman's book just includes a sample.
I did get that, I feel. I probably know all the myths now! I just wish I hadn't felt like I was dragging myself through them!
March 24, 2024
I said I wasn't going to rate mythology, and really, I am not! In this case I'm reviewing how the book was put together. Because let's face it, mythology is pretty fucked up, even though the Norse gods were a little less fucked up than the Greeks. Anyways, the book only has segments of the original texts, which I found a bit disappointing at first. But in the end, it maybe was a smart choice, the old texts are super hard to read, and it was nice to have the stories told to you in plain English. On the flip side, it made it a bit hard to ascertain how correct and true the retellings were.
I also think the last chapter was pretty pointless, of course you'll find various parallels between myths of different regions if you look hard enough. And I know this is a reprint of a text that's from 1909, but you're telling me that no one noticed she wrote "Das Lied des Nibelungen" on the first page? Come on. That one bothered me more than I want to admit.
All in all it's a beautiful book (the cover and binding is stunning!!), easy to read and I think it gives a good overview over the Norse gods and some of their stories.
I also think the last chapter was pretty pointless, of course you'll find various parallels between myths of different regions if you look hard enough. And I know this is a reprint of a text that's from 1909, but you're telling me that no one noticed she wrote "Das Lied des Nibelungen" on the first page? Come on. That one bothered me more than I want to admit.
All in all it's a beautiful book (the cover and binding is stunning!!), easy to read and I think it gives a good overview over the Norse gods and some of their stories.
March 13, 2024
It's physically a beautiful book and that's a definite point in its favour.
As others have said, the book seems to use somewhat inaccurate information at times, or to cite "some scholars" or "some sources" with no specificity. The critiques others have stated, to my mind, are all reasonable. I caught several weird spellings, and I'm not even Scandinavian.
Occasionally throughout the book, Guerber will make some bizarre explanation for a myth - she's particularly fond of claiming that swords represent the sun - and treat it as if it's pure common sense. Because of this, I never took her analyses at all seriously. There are also multiple points where she'll say things like "days obviously represent months" and ended up coming up with about 6 different explanations for winter which all seem unreasonable to assume to be accurate when her comparisons are so frail.
I think it really says a lot if it takes me almost two months to read a book. I'm not exactly sure of when I started reading it, but it was definitely mid January. Typically, even taking more than a week is reserved for absolute bricks of books (like Lord of the Rings), and something that's only a couple hundred pages taking two months is not a good sign.
That said, the chapter that really irked me was the last one, where she compares Greek and Norse mythology (or claims to!) to evidence a common origin. I have a lot to say. tldr; it makes the whole of the rest of the book worse by being so incredibly incompetent.
I'm not being at all conclusive here, but there's just such a long list of ridiculous flaws in her comparison that even a cursory summary of them looks enormous. It literally reads like one of Ben Shapiro's Gish Gallops, where the aim is to say so many things that are inaccurate or ridiculous that any academic critic just gives up.
Firstly, she says she's using Greek mythology but primarily uses Roman terms, which seems minor, until we factor in that the Romans had major splits from the Greek pantheon, and that it does change some of the parallels. For instance, the Greeks had a total of 13 primary gods in their pantheon, and for a parallel to really make sense, one of the Norse gods would need to be ejected, parallel to Hestia, and another ascend, as parallel to Dionysus. Additionally, Athene is a badass warrior bitch, like Brunhild, but she has two Roman counterparts; Bellona is also a badass warrior bitch, but Minerva is a shrivelled old maid. Comparing Brunhild, a badass warrior bitch, to Minerva, when there are two immediate and far better comparisons (one of which belongs to the myths she claims to be analysing!) is absolutely absurd. The only reason I can think of for the conflation is that Pluto specifically has a wealth domain that Hades does not, and her claims about dead people being dwarves can at least obfuscate minimal credibility for a god with links to wealth; did she really sacrifice her entire argument for one tiny comparison?
Many of the comparisons come down to "two obviously not at all parallel Gods both owned x"; Poseidon and Loki are transparently NOT parallels, sheep are not horses, pigs are not chariots. Almost all of her comparisons involve comparing tiny aspects of one god to tiny aspects of several others with no link between these comparisons. Many of the comparisons are simple coincidence; many mythologies feature inter-related Gods, many mythologies have lighter hair representing sun or light gods, etc. Several of her points could be entirely shown as irrelevant by adding that the Christian God also fits the parallel she's making; she's having to derive such broad comparisons that the comparison doesn't even make sense any more. At one point she claims Odin, Var, and Veli are parallel to Zeus, Hades, and Poseidon, when surely Odin, Hel, and Ram are the parallel gods and are very obviously not a trio. Earlier Guerber went out of her way to qualify how large a ship was, but then in her intermythological comparison qualified its size by saying it could carry all of 12 people! Cyclopes are distinctly linked to Poseidon, not Zeus, and have absolutely nothing to do with sacrificing one of Odin's eyes, and a weaponry link is feeble. Ragnarok is in the future while Troy supposedly happened long in the past from the Greek civilisation. These comparisons regularly bring in completely irrelevant points which don't have a parallel, or will even describe how the stories aren't at all related as an explanation for how they're related. There are some genuinely interesting parallels present, but it's a small minority of the supposed parallels that Guerber makes, and they're absolutely swamped in nonsense.
Geurber makes easily demonstrably wrong claims about Greek mythos too; Athene's eyes are described as "χλορος / chloros" in the Iliad which is an ugly yellowish-grey-green colour (and source of the word "chlorine", which is not a compliment), not a "beautiful blue". She randomly sprinkles in just a couple of Greek names, just enough to be frustrating when she's using Roman names for most of the gods (despite claiming she's examining Greek myths...); the worst example is that she specifically switches to using Roman "Proserpine" when she switches away from Roman "Pluto" (which she'd been primarily using) to Greek "Hades" in the same sentence! The Greeks had 5 wind gods which is obviously entirely divergent from a singular bird causing wind. If she's going to parallel tears creating gold to tears creating gold why does she randomly weaken her argument by putting tears creating white or purple flowers in the middle as part of the comparison too?
I feel like it's very telling about the quality of her parallels that Artemis and Ares are barely mentioned, Hestia is not mentioned, Aphrodite and Demeter are frequently conflated, but Hermes is a primary focus. Why on earth would Dionysus be included? He was transparently, even in the myths, a later addition to the pantheon that couldn't have been a common derivative. Heracles was a minor god, why is he getting more focus as Guerber's "proof" than all the goddesses combined? I can see why she's using the Roman names - the Greeks are far too socially progressive for her, judging by who she's ignoring! She talks about Heracles "becoming" a woman as a parallel for Thor dressing as a woman once, which feels like comically absurd phrasing when she's already including Dionysus who was transformed into a little girl as a baby and became a man as he grew and was therefore a god of being transgender (and of gender nonconformity generally)?
The conclusion doesn't even necessarily make sense as a sole possibility if there *were* parallels, because the ancient Norse and the ancient Greeks both honoured travel as cultures, and as sea-faring peoples, it's not at all unreasonable to think that either group could have found influence from the other after forming their own myths. You only need one group to have previously been Greek influenced and then be conquered by Vikings for a lot of Greek influence to spread. I'm saying this while thinking her conclusion that European mythology has a shared origin is correct - she's just made her argument so poorly that I *want* to play devil's advocate.
That's before baring in mind that comparisons like this often exclude enormous amounts of the religious system, ignoring anything that's not convenient wholesale. Guerber gives the convenient excuse that she's only mentioning her "main points" - to which I say why did she include so many absolutely rubbish comparisons then? Surely a better (and more academically plausible) excuse is to say that anything unique must have been derived post-divergence?
The biggest part of all this that frustrates me, however, is Guerber comparing Freyja (spelled Freya for some reason) getting an involuntary haircut from Loki to Zeus' horrific sexual violence. As a sex violence survivor, this is DEEPLY offensive. I cannot take her seriously if she genuinely believes that the singular short-term violation of an involuntary haircut (and it is a violation, I'm not dismissing that) is in any way comparable to multiple women being forced to carry their aggressor's children and being deemed Zeus' "wives" by many accounts. It left me less willing to believe the rest of her argument and made her entire book less credible if she's so out of touch with the comparisons she's willing to make. There are better comparisons already present!
She frames this chapter like it's been her thesis throughout the entire course of the book, despite absolutely no foreshadowing. This chapter being included makes everything else significantly worse. I had naturally been making parallels previously, as well - so the chapter wasn't even needed! If she's this completely incompetent about her analyses and this incapable of basic understanding of what things actually mean and this incredulous about her audience's reading comprehension, I can't believe her for any of her previous discussions - and I was already deeply sceptical! Who on earth decided that the best way to publish this book was to keep this chapter in the manuscript without criticising it?
As others have said, the book seems to use somewhat inaccurate information at times, or to cite "some scholars" or "some sources" with no specificity. The critiques others have stated, to my mind, are all reasonable. I caught several weird spellings, and I'm not even Scandinavian.
Occasionally throughout the book, Guerber will make some bizarre explanation for a myth - she's particularly fond of claiming that swords represent the sun - and treat it as if it's pure common sense. Because of this, I never took her analyses at all seriously. There are also multiple points where she'll say things like "days obviously represent months" and ended up coming up with about 6 different explanations for winter which all seem unreasonable to assume to be accurate when her comparisons are so frail.
I think it really says a lot if it takes me almost two months to read a book. I'm not exactly sure of when I started reading it, but it was definitely mid January. Typically, even taking more than a week is reserved for absolute bricks of books (like Lord of the Rings), and something that's only a couple hundred pages taking two months is not a good sign.
That said, the chapter that really irked me was the last one, where she compares Greek and Norse mythology (or claims to!) to evidence a common origin. I have a lot to say. tldr; it makes the whole of the rest of the book worse by being so incredibly incompetent.
I'm not being at all conclusive here, but there's just such a long list of ridiculous flaws in her comparison that even a cursory summary of them looks enormous. It literally reads like one of Ben Shapiro's Gish Gallops, where the aim is to say so many things that are inaccurate or ridiculous that any academic critic just gives up.
Firstly, she says she's using Greek mythology but primarily uses Roman terms, which seems minor, until we factor in that the Romans had major splits from the Greek pantheon, and that it does change some of the parallels. For instance, the Greeks had a total of 13 primary gods in their pantheon, and for a parallel to really make sense, one of the Norse gods would need to be ejected, parallel to Hestia, and another ascend, as parallel to Dionysus. Additionally, Athene is a badass warrior bitch, like Brunhild, but she has two Roman counterparts; Bellona is also a badass warrior bitch, but Minerva is a shrivelled old maid. Comparing Brunhild, a badass warrior bitch, to Minerva, when there are two immediate and far better comparisons (one of which belongs to the myths she claims to be analysing!) is absolutely absurd. The only reason I can think of for the conflation is that Pluto specifically has a wealth domain that Hades does not, and her claims about dead people being dwarves can at least obfuscate minimal credibility for a god with links to wealth; did she really sacrifice her entire argument for one tiny comparison?
Many of the comparisons come down to "two obviously not at all parallel Gods both owned x"; Poseidon and Loki are transparently NOT parallels, sheep are not horses, pigs are not chariots. Almost all of her comparisons involve comparing tiny aspects of one god to tiny aspects of several others with no link between these comparisons. Many of the comparisons are simple coincidence; many mythologies feature inter-related Gods, many mythologies have lighter hair representing sun or light gods, etc. Several of her points could be entirely shown as irrelevant by adding that the Christian God also fits the parallel she's making; she's having to derive such broad comparisons that the comparison doesn't even make sense any more. At one point she claims Odin, Var, and Veli are parallel to Zeus, Hades, and Poseidon, when surely Odin, Hel, and Ram are the parallel gods and are very obviously not a trio. Earlier Guerber went out of her way to qualify how large a ship was, but then in her intermythological comparison qualified its size by saying it could carry all of 12 people! Cyclopes are distinctly linked to Poseidon, not Zeus, and have absolutely nothing to do with sacrificing one of Odin's eyes, and a weaponry link is feeble. Ragnarok is in the future while Troy supposedly happened long in the past from the Greek civilisation. These comparisons regularly bring in completely irrelevant points which don't have a parallel, or will even describe how the stories aren't at all related as an explanation for how they're related. There are some genuinely interesting parallels present, but it's a small minority of the supposed parallels that Guerber makes, and they're absolutely swamped in nonsense.
Geurber makes easily demonstrably wrong claims about Greek mythos too; Athene's eyes are described as "χλορος / chloros" in the Iliad which is an ugly yellowish-grey-green colour (and source of the word "chlorine", which is not a compliment), not a "beautiful blue". She randomly sprinkles in just a couple of Greek names, just enough to be frustrating when she's using Roman names for most of the gods (despite claiming she's examining Greek myths...); the worst example is that she specifically switches to using Roman "Proserpine" when she switches away from Roman "Pluto" (which she'd been primarily using) to Greek "Hades" in the same sentence! The Greeks had 5 wind gods which is obviously entirely divergent from a singular bird causing wind. If she's going to parallel tears creating gold to tears creating gold why does she randomly weaken her argument by putting tears creating white or purple flowers in the middle as part of the comparison too?
I feel like it's very telling about the quality of her parallels that Artemis and Ares are barely mentioned, Hestia is not mentioned, Aphrodite and Demeter are frequently conflated, but Hermes is a primary focus. Why on earth would Dionysus be included? He was transparently, even in the myths, a later addition to the pantheon that couldn't have been a common derivative. Heracles was a minor god, why is he getting more focus as Guerber's "proof" than all the goddesses combined? I can see why she's using the Roman names - the Greeks are far too socially progressive for her, judging by who she's ignoring! She talks about Heracles "becoming" a woman as a parallel for Thor dressing as a woman once, which feels like comically absurd phrasing when she's already including Dionysus who was transformed into a little girl as a baby and became a man as he grew and was therefore a god of being transgender (and of gender nonconformity generally)?
The conclusion doesn't even necessarily make sense as a sole possibility if there *were* parallels, because the ancient Norse and the ancient Greeks both honoured travel as cultures, and as sea-faring peoples, it's not at all unreasonable to think that either group could have found influence from the other after forming their own myths. You only need one group to have previously been Greek influenced and then be conquered by Vikings for a lot of Greek influence to spread. I'm saying this while thinking her conclusion that European mythology has a shared origin is correct - she's just made her argument so poorly that I *want* to play devil's advocate.
That's before baring in mind that comparisons like this often exclude enormous amounts of the religious system, ignoring anything that's not convenient wholesale. Guerber gives the convenient excuse that she's only mentioning her "main points" - to which I say why did she include so many absolutely rubbish comparisons then? Surely a better (and more academically plausible) excuse is to say that anything unique must have been derived post-divergence?
The biggest part of all this that frustrates me, however, is Guerber comparing Freyja (spelled Freya for some reason) getting an involuntary haircut from Loki to Zeus' horrific sexual violence. As a sex violence survivor, this is DEEPLY offensive. I cannot take her seriously if she genuinely believes that the singular short-term violation of an involuntary haircut (and it is a violation, I'm not dismissing that) is in any way comparable to multiple women being forced to carry their aggressor's children and being deemed Zeus' "wives" by many accounts. It left me less willing to believe the rest of her argument and made her entire book less credible if she's so out of touch with the comparisons she's willing to make. There are better comparisons already present!
She frames this chapter like it's been her thesis throughout the entire course of the book, despite absolutely no foreshadowing. This chapter being included makes everything else significantly worse. I had naturally been making parallels previously, as well - so the chapter wasn't even needed! If she's this completely incompetent about her analyses and this incapable of basic understanding of what things actually mean and this incredulous about her audience's reading comprehension, I can't believe her for any of her previous discussions - and I was already deeply sceptical! Who on earth decided that the best way to publish this book was to keep this chapter in the manuscript without criticising it?
Read
September 7, 2021First of all: beautiful book. My favourite of the Barnes&Nobles collectables that I have.
I loved getting to know more about the Norse gods and their adventures. Do not be mistaken, however: this is a dry read. The days I read it, I usually only read a chapter a day. It didn’t matter to me: I wanted to know more background to the stories I had read in Neil Gaimans Norse Mythology, and this book delivered. I liked how it was explained how certain gods were secretly also worshipped in other cultures and I adored the little pieces of old poetry.
Having read Gaimans book first helped me: it gave me enough knowledge on Norse mythology not to be overwhelmed by all of the different names. The stories that I had already read in Gaimans book were also more enjoyable, since I had read a less dry version of them.
This book will be easily used as a reference and when I want to read up on certain deities. Above all: it looks beautiful on my bookshelves.
I loved getting to know more about the Norse gods and their adventures. Do not be mistaken, however: this is a dry read. The days I read it, I usually only read a chapter a day. It didn’t matter to me: I wanted to know more background to the stories I had read in Neil Gaimans Norse Mythology, and this book delivered. I liked how it was explained how certain gods were secretly also worshipped in other cultures and I adored the little pieces of old poetry.
Having read Gaimans book first helped me: it gave me enough knowledge on Norse mythology not to be overwhelmed by all of the different names. The stories that I had already read in Gaimans book were also more enjoyable, since I had read a less dry version of them.
This book will be easily used as a reference and when I want to read up on certain deities. Above all: it looks beautiful on my bookshelves.
February 14, 2021
Acquistato e letto al remainders a Milano in Cairoli durante il mio primo autunno universitario, allo scopo di leggere qualcosa in inglese per impratichirmi in questo idioma, poiché mi rendevo perfettamente conto che al liceo non mi avevano insegnato nulla.
Come sequenza di miti norreni è decente, ma dal mio punto di vista, abbastanza superficiale.
Ho qualche bel ricordo, comunque, associato a questa lettura, quindi le 3 stelle glie le concedo.
Come sequenza di miti norreni è decente, ma dal mio punto di vista, abbastanza superficiale.
Ho qualche bel ricordo, comunque, associato a questa lettura, quindi le 3 stelle glie le concedo.
December 27, 2024
This book is not the best summary of everything we know of Norse mythology based on modern scholarship. However, history and our relationship to folklore is alive and continuously evolves. This book was written in the late 1800s and illustrates the way Norse Mythology was understood at that time. For this reason, the book is interesting in its own right. Even the eddas were written by christians hundreds of years after conversion. I enjoyed reading this book as a relationship to the past. The past isn’t only in the viking age, it continues with folklore in the 1800s and even to us in this present moment.
April 29, 2025
I have NOT read this entire book so my review is not particularly notable. Just want to check it off my list"reading" list.
This is an accessible collection of Norse mythology contained within a gorgeously radiant hardcover tome, its glimmer equal in part to the epics of our Norse ancestors within.
This is an accessible collection of Norse mythology contained within a gorgeously radiant hardcover tome, its glimmer equal in part to the epics of our Norse ancestors within.
May 19, 2021
I saw some reviews about how this book was boring, and I didn’t find that to be true. I knew some of the basic Norse myths, but I learned a lot of new stories and characters from this book. The last section that compares figures in Norse mythology to Greek mythology seemed shoehorned in a bit, but all in all, this is a good overview of Norse mythology.
May 28, 2022
Thor doesn’t even fight Hulk or decapitate Thanos. SMH my Balder Head.
“The first toast… has been derived.” (42)
Utgard-Loki (75-76)
The Worship of Thor (86-87)
“Frey, or Fro… of the Light Elves.”
Chapter XXI: Balder
Chapter XXVI: The Sigurd Saga
“The first toast… has been derived.” (42)
Utgard-Loki (75-76)
The Worship of Thor (86-87)
“Frey, or Fro… of the Light Elves.”
Chapter XXI: Balder
Chapter XXVI: The Sigurd Saga
September 20, 2021
geweldig om te lezen als je meer wil te weten komen over de Noorse mythologie!
May 18, 2022
Hi. A very good book. Nice stories. It details the characters.
March 5, 2025
First book I’ve finished in a while. Huge crazy ending good stuff.
November 16, 2018
I thoroughly enjoyed Guerber's classic text on Norse mythology. It gets my recommendation to anyone interested in gaining a baseline knowledge on the subject.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 243 reviews