Talk:Thor/Archive 1

Weekday name notes

Add weekday name note? Also add language variations that are base for weekday names, ie Thor-Thursday, Tor-Torsdag, Donner-Donnerstag etc.? And of course, same for Tyr, Odin, Frey. --- OlofE

Removal of disambiguation page

I thought having a disambiguation page on Thor was a bit much; both of the other 'Thor's mentioned are named after the god Thor. I've moved the content of Thor (god) (and its talk page) here, and set it up as a redirect. -- Gaurav 18:52, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Jarnsaxa or Sif

In this page about Thor, it is said that Modi's mother is Jarnsaxa, but in the article about Modi, it is said that Modi's mother is Sif. See discussion on Talk:Modi#Jarnsaxa_or_Sif. Cordially, Alkarex (fr) 15:37, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

To my knowledge there has never been any mention of who Modi's mother is. Jarnsaxa is Magni's mother and Sif is presumably Thrud's mother (but I don't think that has been confirmed). Modi could go either way. ksofen666

---

I cant remember a direct source but i thought Modi and Magni were said to be twins. 03:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thor in modern popular culture

Someone reduced the popular culture section to only comic book refs, is there good reasoning for that? Otherwise, i'll just revert it. -- Logotu 21:52, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• I think it was to reduce clutter, and bring it down to only major references. Previous to the reduction, almost every single mention of Thor was there, which might have been a bit excessive. --Volrath50 06:06, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thor siding with mortals?

Although, I like Thor is much more the god of the common man, often siding with mortals against other gods, I can't remember any story about Thor where he does so.--Wiglaf 21:05, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Giant King who tricked Thor

This giant king was the Utgardaloki mentioned in the earlier paragraph. Those two paragraphs need to be combined, somehow. Peter Knutsen 12:48, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Naming convention vote notice

A new proposal on representation of Norse mythology names is now up for a vote. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 00:51, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Norse mythology template

The template that has been added at the bottom is really good. However the problem is that Thor and other gods are not only exclusively Nordic but Germanic as well. Somehow a better solution needs to be found, otherwise a separate template for Germanic gods would have to be created, however I would like to avoid cluttering and repetition. Any solutions? Gryffindor 23:52, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Picture of Thor

Would it be possible to have a better painting/picture of Thor at the topv? Aside from the historical side of the current picture, Thor seems a little bit... stupid ? I strongly suggest to switch the two pictures on the page with each other. The second one shows a stronger and braver Thor. Bragador 00:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I know of another picture of Thor, I believe that it is found in The People's Encyclopaedia (don't recall the publisher--1950's) Thor would actually prefer that his direct likeness not be known and was in acceptance of the drawing forementioned.216.215.40.1 01:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Revert on 9 March 2006

A serious of more or less controversial claims were added to the article as fact. I reverted the article. I believe these viewpoints should be discussed here before they're added to the article as fact. In particular I strongly disagree with the allegation that only some non-scholars view Odin as the god of aristocrats, this is clearly wrong. Much scholarly literature agrees that Odin was the god of aristocrats and Thor was worshipped more by common people. (Barend 12:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC))

Regarding reversion

I refer you to discussions in the paper entitled Mythology and Mythography, by John Lindow, in Old Norse-Icelandic Literature: A Critical Guide (1985), and also to discussions in Myth and Religion of the North (1964), by E.O.G. Turville-Petre. The former contains many, many more references, it being a survey, and therefore to much that is in German. Which are those scholars who claim what now remains posted? Dumézil does not count. I also must apologize for a bit of a messy job. It was late, and I'm relatively new to this.

Two statements removed.

I have since removed the statements regarding Thor's status and Snorri's portrayal of him, since those two are not well supported, and left it at that. However, the page should have a comparison with the Vedic Indra, which must be left to someone with a better knowledge of the Rigveda than myself.

Problem with son mentioned in the prologue

Lóriði should not be listed as a child of Thor. The prologue tries to give a more or less real world explanation of how the Aesir are not gods thus avoiding heresy with the church. The next part of the prose edda the Gylfaginning delves into the actual relationships of the gods. ksofen666

Please define what you mean by the "actual relationship" of the gods. Gylfaginning was written a couple of hundred years after they stopped believing in these gods, by a christian. If he wrote down several versions of a story, it could be because there were several versions about at different times and different places. --Barend 07:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Gylfaginning went into detail about the myths and explained how most of the more important gods were related. The beguiling of Gylfi is meant to show that the Aesir have tricked king Gylfi into believing the Aesir are the gods that they say they are. This trick is the pretext used to get around the fact that stating the Aesir as gods would be heretical. By making this a deceptive story it shows that the Aesir are not gods thus the Prose Edda is not heretical but the norse mythology is still explored in great detail by Snorri Sturlson. The prologue is meant to give a more plausible and realistic account of the Aesir and how these mortals came to be revered as gods. The prologue however does not fall into the canon of the norse mythology. It clearly contradicts the myths in the latter parts of the Prose and was merely a device used by Snorri Sturlson to explain the myths from a christian viewpoint. ksofen666

Picture of Thor

I am glad that Bragador’s suggestion was taken up and the more heroic picture put at the top. Iceland has a folk history of trolls, and I think the 18th Century Icelandic picture might be a composite figure of Thor represented as a troll.

He appears to be wearing the same nose as this later illustration.

http://www.britannica.com/eb/art-7845

Additional place name in UK believed named after Thor.

Thoresway Nr Market Rasen, Lincolnshire. This village is a valley in the Lincolnshire Wolds and the sound of a thunderstorm is quite impressive. There is another village nearby called 'Thorganby' may also be 'Thor' related.

so much vandalism

I don't know how the vandalism rate on this page compares to Wikipedia articles as a whole, but I know it get very much more vandalism than any other page on my watch list. Does anybody have any thoughts about why? And if we all prayed to Thor and maybe offered a sacrifice or two, could he be induced to strike the vandals with lightning?  Sean Lotz  talk  16:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Útgarða-Loki story may need revising

The short summary of the deception of Thor by the giant Loki does not quite correspond with the story in Snorra Edda. In Snorri's story, Loki is the contender in the eating contest, not Thor. The challenges also happen in a slightly different order than suggested here. Admittedly, the story must suffer for the space allowed, but I think fixing these details would better assist Wikipedia users. -Ian Delvebelow 15:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

myth comment

I gave it mythology project rating of B, the thing I would like to see are clearer references, cited throughout. Goldenrowley 02:15, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Modi's mother...and Thrud's for that matter

Ok this is sort of a pet peeve of mine. The Thor article says Modi's mother is Jarnsaxa. The Sif article says Modi's mother is Sif. In reality neither of the Eddas mention the identity of Modi's mother. The myths say Jarnsaxa is Magni's mother but nowhere do they state Modi is also her son.

For that matter I'm curious as to where the reference to Thrud being Sif's daughter is from. I vaguely remember a reference that both Sif and Thrud were valkyries and then the story about Thor saving Thrud from Alvis the dwarf but I don't remember an actual mention that Sif is Thrud's mother either.

Well, in my "Gyldendals Leksikon om Nordisk Mytology (Gyldendal's Encyclopedia of Nordic Mythology) ISBN 87-02-02643-0", there is a family tree printed in the back, that lists both Modi and Thrud as the offspring of Thor and Sif. I've tried to find better references to their lineage in a translated edition of Snorri's Edda, but it seems to have left out quite a few things, especially kennings. Hope this helps. CatBoris 14:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

You're right about the identity of Modi's mother not being given in the original sources so both articles should be corrected. I think many people just assume that he's the son of Jarnsaxa since he and Magni are often mentioned together, but there's no conclusive basis for that assumption that I'm aware of.

The identity of Thrud's mother as Sif is given in Skaldskaparmal (Faulkes, p. 86):

"How shall Sif be referred to? By calling her wife of Thor, mother of Ull, the fair-haired deity, rival of Iarnsaxa, mother of Thrud."

As far as Sif and Thrud being Valkyries, Thrud is mentioned as a Valkyrie name in a couple of places throughout the Eddas, specifically Gylfaginning and Grimnismal. The reference to Sif being a Valkyrie might come from Skaldskaparmal, where Sif is given as a kenning for Hild (Faulkes, p. 123), daughter of Hogni and a common Valkyrie name. Whether Thrud the Valkyrie and Thrud the daughter of Thor are the same individual is uncertain (to me, at least) but interchangeability of names is fairly common in Norse mythology. Cerdic 13:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

IMHO, if Thrud daughter of Thor *can* be Thrud the Valkyrie they probably *are* one and the same. The reason is that the group of minor goddesses that are called Valkyries, Norns and Disir did not belong to a single race but were a category of supernatural women of jotun, aesir, dwarf (Fáfnismál, Gylfaginning) and human origins (the heroic lays). The three main Norns, for instance, appear to have been of Jotun extraction (Völuspá, Vafthrudnismál), but the youngest one of them, Skuld, was also a Valkyrie (Gylfaginning). I guess that when women of the various races reached Valkyrie/Dísir/Norn status, their respective origins did not matter, since they were female spirits anyway.--Berig 13:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

The lack of a clear distinction between the various groups of female spirits throughout the literature indicates that you're probably right so I'm with you a hundred percent on that, especially since accounts of the Dísir often have them serving in the role of Choosers of the Slain, Skuld being just one example. Many modern scholars also raise the same point. I was just less certain when it came to those Asynjur who happened to be the offspring of other deities, but if we take it to the next logical step then it's not an unreasonable notion. Cerdic 14:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

NPOV

This article should be considered NPOV because it labels Thor as a myth but Yaweh is not labeled as a myth.

I disagree see the discussion of the meaning of mythology. It would be very roundabout to label one article anyting because of what another article says, no article is able to stay completely and absolutely have any control over other articles. Goldenrowley 08:30, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Lord Thunor is a Mighty God, yahweh is but a mere primitive troll, as defined by the Lore. —Ƿōdenhelm (talk) 20:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

suggest

How come this article says nothing about the goat cart he rides through the sky? I'd like to know about the goat cart. Goldenrowley 08:30, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

It's mentioned in the Possessions section. Cerdic 13:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

name

I disagree with the spelling of the god's name. The name of the god in the scandinavian mythology is Tor without an h.ToreLindstrom 00:17, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

English spelling, based on Old Norse. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 20:44, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thor would not mind having a fence or gate.216.215.40.1 01:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Saxon Baptismal Vow

I've just removed a link to a link to a non-existent internal article about the Saxon Baptismal Vow. I am unable to find a version of it online anywhere and would like to know if it contains references to Thor before I go ahead and purchase it. Anyone have anymore information? :bloodofox: 21:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

After a little more digging around[1], it seems that this particular passage does mention Thor, as well as a number of other deities. Further information? :bloodofox: 22:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if this site is reliable, but it says that the vow only mentions Thor (Thunaer), Odin (Uuöden) and Saxnote by name:

“ec forsacho allum dioboles uuercum and uuordum, Thunaer ende Uuöden ende Saxnote ende allum them unholdum the hira genötas sint”

It isn't much.--Berig 17:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

While it isn't much, it's an interesting and telling piece of information. With keywords from what you've linked here, I was able to find a mention by Benjamin Thorpe in his 1851 work entitled Northern mythology : comprising the principal popular traditions and superstitions of Scandinavia, North Germany, and The Netherlands. The text in question can be seen here: [2] :bloodofox: 01:18, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Great! Maybe we should write an article on the baptismal vow.--Berig 19:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. I am still a bit confused about the exact source... What exactly are they pulling the text from? A fragment of information from a book in the Vatican around the time of Charlemagne, it seems? :bloodofox: 20:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and on second thought, I think we need more information on the subject. A qualified guess like "the Saxon Baptismal Vow was a pledge made by Saxons during the christianization of Norhern Germany after Charlemagne's conquest" makes sense. But, I'd like to have a written source that says something similar before I write it.--Berig 17:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)::::::It is important that one must understand that the Thunder comes from the Hammer and not from Thor. To equate Thor as Thunder is a misambiguation. I believe that it is acceptable to have something as interesting as the vow, for historical reasons surrounding the history of the movement of the church throughout Europe and its relation to the Royals and commoners alike, but one could disavow the vow on many points, yet retain a belief in the Church and Thor. 216.215.40.1 19:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

You might place a link to the Codex. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.215.40.1 (talk) 00:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I recant, Thor can emmanate thunder. It is similar to the roar of a lion's heart, yet echoes throughout the valley. You do realize that God desires that none should perish, one should attempt to save All? If Cain be the Devil, would you save your Father? Saxon? 216.215.40.65 19:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Link to Marvel's Thor?

Some time ago, I added to the top of the page For the Marvel character known as Thor, see Thor (Marvel Comics). Someone took it down, so I put it back up, only to have it taken back down again. I left it alone for a while, but now I'm wondering why not have it up there? Thor is a pretty big character in the Marvel Universe, and odds are, when people search for Thor, they are looking for one of two things: the god Thor (which is here), and the Marvel Thor. Doesn't it make sense to have a direct link to Marvel's Thor up at the top of the page? Anakinjmt 15:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

It's on the appropriate disambiguation page. There are a number of "major" things named after Thor and we can't list them all and that is one of the reasons why the disambiguation pages exist. :bloodofox: 01:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I realize we have a disambig page, and that's what it's for. However, and I'm not quite sure how to word this, as it makes sense in my head but putting into words is a little difficult, but is it not a pretty much rule of thumb to put at the top of the article, along with a link to the disambig page, a link or links to the other most popular articles with similar names? For example, if you put in the search bar "Java", you would be taken to the article for the island of Java. Now, at the top, it says the following:

This article is about the Java island. For the programming language, see Java (programming language). For other uses, see Java (disambiguation).

Now, here, it takes you to the island of Java, which makes sense. However, another commonly sought article with the name Java is the computer language. Doesn't the same rule apply here? Just make it like this:

This article is about the Norse god. For the Marvel character, see Thor (Marvel Comics). For other uses, see Thor (disambiguation).

Doesn't it make sense to do that? Anakinjmt 02:05, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

You're assuming that the Marvel comics character is the best known figure to link to by doing this, rather than the disambiguation page. The problem with that is that there are numerous famous things named after Thor and we can't list them all up there. For instance, do you realize how many people would be familiar with this as a Hmong last name? And how many text books feature information about Thor Heyerdahl? It's far more neutral to just link to the disambiguation page on this one, I think. Only in America is Thor, the Marvel comic book character, so well known. :bloodofox: 16:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Bloodofox. Haukur 18:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree too, but we'll see more requests like this since they plan to make a Thor movie based on the Marvel character.--Berig 18:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

While you two are here, what do you say we focus a bit on this page? Thor was such an important deity that this page should be one of the finest when looking for articles on Germanic paganism. I think it's doubly important that we do so before this movie is released as the page will probably see a lot more traffic then. What do you think? :bloodofox: 00:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Might be a good idea. I have been considering adding a section on references to Thor in runestones, which are a usually overlooked source of information. The advantage with runic inscriptions is that the references are uncontroversially pagan.--Berig 10:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. I am working towards a historical structure but not exactly sure how to approach it yet. Since Thor was such an important figure during especially the Viking Age, we should perhaps segment the references up and build the article around a historical time line of references. Then into the late Viking Age sources for a complete article. Once all of the references are collected - and we're aren't far from it - we'll be able to make a cohesive article. :bloodofox: 06:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. Well, obviously the Marvel Thor is better known in America than what Bloodofox mentioned. But, the question is, is he more well known in other parts of the world than what Bloodofox mentioned? The Norwegian guy probably would be more well-known in Norway, but in how many textbooks does he appear in Europe? If he's well-known throughout the rest of Europe, or other English-speaking countries (which is what the English Wikipedia serves), then I understand. So, that's the question. Also, if so, is he as well known as the Marvel comics character, who I would very much argue is a world-known character? Anakinjmt 01:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I think Heyerdahl is pretty famous the world over, especially during his biggest period of influence with all sorts of television coverage, documentaries and many articles. Just as another example, the character of Thor in the Valhalla (comic)|Valhalla books and subsequent high grossing film based on it also extremely famous in areas of Scandinavia, Germany and elsewhere and English is widely spoken in these areas. Better to just leave it all on the disambiguation page. :bloodofox: 06:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

yes, the Danish Valhalla comic books (and the movie) are brilliant. I also think they depict the matter with a combination of humour and seriousness that reflect the eddas, which I like.--Berig 09:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Clear dates

So the earliest mention of Thor is like 12th century? Please add some clarification about when it started (even if estimates) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.135.231.49 (talk) 23:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Hittite God of Thunder, Thar

The first Indo-European speaking people, Hittites had a similar chief god, its strange that its not mentioned here, i would like to add some information but what i know about him is his name and entry of him to greek pantheon (with the name Zeus) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doganaktas (talk • contribs) 02:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Infobox

I have recently installed an infobox in this article, believing it to make the article far easier to understand. Despite this, certain individuals are constantly deleting it, which is simply leading to an edit war, which is something I think we can all agree is unecessary. The Infobox system makes this page far easier to navigate and understand, particularly to people who have little or no grounding in the subject. I have put similar infoboxes in other Germanic deity pages, and I believe that they are essential. Other groupings, such as Hindu deities, have been using these infoboxes for a long time and they are very succesfull.

Whilst I appreciate that the Thor and Odin templates might be considered better than the infoboxes, they are (in my opinion at least), far less aesthetically pleasing, and not so well set out as the infobox system, which is implemented across many Wikipedia articles.

I understand that due to the complex and fragmentary nature of knowledge on Germanic deities, the infoboxes may be somewhat problematic to fill out, but they surely can, and I believe that the time of those in Wikiproject:Germanic paganism chould be put to far better use in filling out the Infoboxes to provide useful and helpful information to readers than just simply deleting them out of personal opinion or a belief that they were not filled out correctly. (Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:09, 27 July 2008 (UTC))

Boxes are suitable for things like statistics and disjoint facts about cities and countries. They're not particularly suitable for pigeonholing deities with. Why shrink a nice lead image to make way for information that's already present in the text in a straightforward way? I think we're better off without those boxes. Haukur (talk) 13:47, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I can understand it is annoying that the images are smaller in the Infobox, but surely this can be corrected. I still think more discussion is needed on this point. (Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:34, 27 July 2008 (UTC))

First of all, the boxes are by no means necessary, and you're the one putting them in everywhere. Second of all, they are extremely misleading, and a lot of the information you're putting into them is simply incorrect, which has zero to do with "personal opinion" and everything to do with simply being flat out wrong (species? "god of..." descriptors are very wrong and misleading, "Tribes" are often unstated and pointless in that all figures became a part of the Æsir after the Æsir-Vanir war, and there are only three known Vanir, etc..). For them to be correct, they require explanation, which the introduction can (and should) give most elegantly and concisely. What this sums up to is that the information is essentially going to need to appear twice in the lead, which is pointless. Further, it's extremely pointless when there's very little to no information about the figure, or an infobox already exists that does the job (Odin/Woden). They may be good for baseball cards, but, all in all, they're not helpful here and they're very redundant - worse yet, they're misleading. They should be removed. :bloodofox: (talk) 16:10, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Whilst I still feel that they may be necessary, I believe that the general concensus seems to be against them, and I shall happily comply with the will of the group and remove them. I apologise if my edits have been a nuisance. Many thanks for your opinions. (Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC))

Thank you :) Haukur (talk) 18:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your grace and understanding, Midnightblueowl. :bloodofox: (talk) 01:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Thunor

Thunor redirects here, article should mention where this term is used. Mathiastck (talk) 22:11, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Thor/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I gave it mythology project rating of B, the thing I would like to see are clearer references, cited throughout.Goldenrowley 03:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC) On second thought, I changed myth assess from B to "start" quality, due to lack of citations/references. sorry Goldenrowley 18:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 18:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 15:59, 1 May 2016 (UTC)