Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Mike Kay's avatar

A very good piece.

Indeed, when we examine and understand the deep expression of who we are, we cannot help but use the language of myth.

The Armanen futhark itself is a mythic rather than a linguistic system of Runes, yet for all the criticism, and there is quite a bit of that, the Armanen futhark continues to provide an effective system for Rune workers today.

I've been asked to provide a commentary on this Futhark, which is perhaps flattering, but in essence I believe that any who have an interest should pursue it regardless of the thoughts of others.

Thanks for this piece.

Expand full comment
Sectionalism Archive's avatar

Yep, I've wanted to get acquainted to List for a while. His fixation with Kabbalism is a bit strange, albeit, but not uncommon among Western Esotericism.

I have, like List, viewed Norse cosmology as something isomorphic to Platonism, but don't understand the order. Ginnungagap should be The One, methinks. Not sure where Surtur should be, maybe I am expressing a misunderstanding of Norse cosmology. The "All-Father" is certainly the demiurge and acts first through Buri and then more clearly through Odin and his brothers. Meanwhile, not Surtur but Ymir represents "unorganized substance" or "chaos" or whatever you would like to call it. Odin and his brothers make the world through their intellect and with the body of Ymir.

>Meister von List explains that the ancient Germanics had three castes or classes

This, I disagree with. I think that among the Germanics the jurisclerical class was absorbed into the military aristocracy. The Erilaz were both aristocrats and the studiers of the runes. You were expected to be a member of the aristocracy in order to take on these intellectual pursuits but they did not comprise a separate class. It is one of the unique characteristics of the Germanic people compared to other Indo-European groups.

>This letter also shows Christians had no solid conception of the pagan gods, because Indo-Europeans did not worship the semitic devil, which was born from a semitic mind, but instead worshipped natural emanations of divinity first percieved by their ancient ancestors

This is one of the major distinctions between Abrahamism and almost all other religions, I think. It is very clear that the Hebrew figure of Yahweh is largely the same as the Babylonian figure of Marduk or even Anu depending on how you view the two. But the Jews did something most unusual. They adopted the view that the deities of other nations were adversaries to their own deities, "demons" in fact. When the Greeks fought the Trojans they did not imagine Trojan gods fighting Olympians, they imagined the Olympians watching over the entire contest and recognized the possibility that both the Olympian pantheon and the Trojan pantheon could be simultaneously true, legitimate pantheons depending on one's perspective. The Luwian deities of Tiwaz (not to be confused with the Germanic Tiwaz, or Tyr) and Tarhunz clearly delivered to the Luwians (presumably what Trojans were) the same thing that Zeus delivered to the Greeks. They aren't "the same God through different lenses", they are different beings which focus on similar ideas. The forms are partitioned differently between gods depending on one's perspective (which is most clearly demonstrated through the national genius of one's ancestors, as this is the least tainted by ideological modification), but the total set is identical.

There's a good book somewhere on the Germanization of Christianity, but I forget what it's called.

And yes, I decided to not be lazy and actually read this with my eyes instead of listen to it with my ears...

Expand full comment
16 more comments...

No posts