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.
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...
https://youtu.be/Q6sNFXGsc6g?si=VcvuppKW1bg5RJ2p Sigmar Academy just released a good video that explains some of your first paragraph. Guido von List gets the hierarchy down wrong. The All-Father is generally conceived of as being the One, rather than some primordial giant.
Von List was heavily influenced by Theosophy and Masonry. This bleeds into his work to a large extent. The purpose of this article was not to necessarily defend List and his views, but to try and explain them from my own perspective. Some areas I focused on because I liked, even if I don't necessarily agree with them.
For example, the three classes of ancient Germany. I think he is likely wrong there and that those are just tribes or by-names for tribes, as Tacitus mentions some tribes List claims are castes. I particularly agree with your statement concerning nobles being tied to runes and priestly duties, as that is well attested to. It is not unique to them though, the same is true for Celts and Indo-Aryan Hindus. In their mythologies, kings are often priests, or serve a similar role to priests, much like the Norse and Germanic. Odin is both king of the gods and king of the runes. The Dagda is both king of the gods and king of the Druids. So on and so forth.
Poetically though, three castes sound cool and Indo-European so.
The kalandar-brotherhoods as well - I doubt those. I have more than a spoon of salt, I've got a jar. Same with a good chunk of his folk etymology. It's all very mythopoetic and I love that, but it's not real etymology.
I think Guido von List was just the first of many new pagan esotericists, and since he was one of the first, then it would make sense he would resemble the non-pagan esotericists of his day, including the Theosophists and masons.
If you are wanting to translate something by List, please consider translating his first work, a fiction story called "Carnutum" I have looked high and low for an English translation and cannot find one. I will need to look more into Hauer and Frenssen. Thanks for the comment!
I'll look into it. Hauer was involved with the Deutsche Glaubensbewegung. One of his books (Germany's New Religion) has been translated, but there are many more. Frenssen was a popular novelist who also wrote a number of aphorisms and a book about his Pagan beliefs (Der Glaube der Nordmark). Others of interest include Hermann Schwarz, Ersnt Graf zu Reventlow, and Ludwig Fahrenkrog.
If you decide to devote yourself to this great work of translation, please contact me. I would be glad to assist in any way, my kindred has been talking about paying someone to translate Carnuntum.
I'd greatly appreciate a review from the Academy on the book - for purposes of expediency, I had to give an over-arching review. I think you could do better!
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.
You should go ahead with the commentary, I think there needs to be more supporting pieces for Meister von List.
Thank you Aidan.
Perhaps I will.
I agree - the Armanist futhark stands alone on its own merit, it reaches deep into the folkish spirit.
Irmunsul all the way!
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...
https://youtu.be/Q6sNFXGsc6g?si=VcvuppKW1bg5RJ2p Sigmar Academy just released a good video that explains some of your first paragraph. Guido von List gets the hierarchy down wrong. The All-Father is generally conceived of as being the One, rather than some primordial giant.
Von List was heavily influenced by Theosophy and Masonry. This bleeds into his work to a large extent. The purpose of this article was not to necessarily defend List and his views, but to try and explain them from my own perspective. Some areas I focused on because I liked, even if I don't necessarily agree with them.
For example, the three classes of ancient Germany. I think he is likely wrong there and that those are just tribes or by-names for tribes, as Tacitus mentions some tribes List claims are castes. I particularly agree with your statement concerning nobles being tied to runes and priestly duties, as that is well attested to. It is not unique to them though, the same is true for Celts and Indo-Aryan Hindus. In their mythologies, kings are often priests, or serve a similar role to priests, much like the Norse and Germanic. Odin is both king of the gods and king of the runes. The Dagda is both king of the gods and king of the Druids. So on and so forth.
Poetically though, three castes sound cool and Indo-European so.
The kalandar-brotherhoods as well - I doubt those. I have more than a spoon of salt, I've got a jar. Same with a good chunk of his folk etymology. It's all very mythopoetic and I love that, but it's not real etymology.
I think Guido von List was just the first of many new pagan esotericists, and since he was one of the first, then it would make sense he would resemble the non-pagan esotericists of his day, including the Theosophists and masons.
Oh, I don’t know this channel. It looks small but good content for listening. Maybe I’ll add it to my roster of shit I listen to at the gym
Wonderful report, Aidan.
Firstly, thanks for the links to THE NIBELUNGENLIED (Gutenberg text) and to Wagner’s Der Ring des Nibelungen.
This is a fascinating new topic for me – thanks for drawing me deeper into it, and to Zach for recommending this book to read.
Wagner was truly celestially inspired.
Zach mentioned Sigmar Academy, and you may have done so also, previously in a comment. Zach is scheduled to interview him in the coming week.
• The Secret of the Runes by Guido Von List [Book Study] - Sigmar Academy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytd932O8KJg
Turn AI voiceover on nigga
Why, nigga?
I’m lazy and would like to listen to this in the car
I'll look into it, thanks for the suggestion.
I have been meaning to translate some material by List and other folkish Pagan authors - J. W. Hauer and Gustav Frenssen in particular.
If you are wanting to translate something by List, please consider translating his first work, a fiction story called "Carnutum" I have looked high and low for an English translation and cannot find one. I will need to look more into Hauer and Frenssen. Thanks for the comment!
Actually, I may have an original copy of Carnuntum somewhere.
I'll look into it. Hauer was involved with the Deutsche Glaubensbewegung. One of his books (Germany's New Religion) has been translated, but there are many more. Frenssen was a popular novelist who also wrote a number of aphorisms and a book about his Pagan beliefs (Der Glaube der Nordmark). Others of interest include Hermann Schwarz, Ersnt Graf zu Reventlow, and Ludwig Fahrenkrog.
If you decide to devote yourself to this great work of translation, please contact me. I would be glad to assist in any way, my kindred has been talking about paying someone to translate Carnuntum.
Wyrd at work?
I'd greatly appreciate a review from the Academy on the book - for purposes of expediency, I had to give an over-arching review. I think you could do better!