Harbardsljod
and Lokasenna
by Mark Puryear
The purpose of
this essay is to clearly define the relationship between the two Eddaic
poems Harbardsljod and Lokasenna, while at the same time attempting to
clear up some misconceptions surrounding them. It shall be demonstrated
that, for the most part, the reason they have been misinterpreted for
so long is due to the false identification of Odin to Harbard in
Harbardsljod. Once the evidence is shown that leads to the conclusion
that Harbard is Loki in disguise and using one of Odin’s names it shall
be easier for people to see the link between the two lays. As we notice
the points where they meet Harbard’s identity should become apparent,
and may even lead some to wonder why Odin was ever placed in the
position of a hateful, spiteful mocker of the gods and goddesses.
It has been
surmised that Harbardsljod was developed from or inspired by Lokasenna,
given their probable dates of origin and the similarities of their
contents. It may even be possible that the poems were composed by the
same person or by two individuals within the same skaldic circle. We
know that both poems were composed in Norway in the 10th century; i.e.
during the final years of heathendom in that region. Once we examine
closely the episodes that these two poems present we can see that it is
very likely that they both describe the same mythic event.
To begin
investigating their content we must first eliminate the greatest
obstacle between the two poems, that which led to their separation and
misinterpretation: the true identity of Harbard. That this poem,
Hardbardsljod, represents some sort of vulgar domestic dispute between
father and son, a “symbolic” conflict between the noble and peasant
classes is spurious. Even Bellows argues against the authenticity of
this (The Poetic Edda: The Mythological Poems, pgs. 121-2). The only
evidence to support this idea is Grimnismal 49 where Harbard is listed
as one of Odin’s names and Harbardsljod 24, which states, in third
person no doubt: “Odin has all the jarls that in conflict fall, but
Thor the race of thralls.” Nowhere else is such a claim made, that Thor
and Odin split the einherjar between them by class, nor does this imply
any sort of conflict between the two.
It is true that
Harbard is one of Odin’s names, but there is no reason why we could not
assume that Loki once used this name as well. In fact, the very first
strophe of Harbardsljod lets us see that Harbard’s designation is in
itself a falsehood. The name is a kenning for an old man, yet Thor sees
him as a “knave of knaves”, a “youth of youths” (sveinn sveina) and
later calls him a “tot”, a “trifling boy” (kögursveinn, str. 14,
see UGM II pt. 2 pg. 111). So it is definite that the name Harbard
“Hoar-Beard”, though perfectly describing Odin, here falsely represents
the person who claims it.
It is without a
doubt that Odin’s association with Harbard in Harbardsljod had its
foundation in Christian scholarship. It is easy for the Christian
writer, who thinks of Odin as a demon without morals or familial
devotion, to see the Asagod spewing the venomous bile at Thor that we
see in the poem and then have his own son, likewise a demon in their
eyes, return hateful remarks back at him. Rydberg notes in UGM II part
2 pg. 129 “…in a number of Icelandic tales, their Christian authors
have given Odin the character he was thought to have as a demonic
being.” Modern scholars often see Odin here as the cunning trickster
and Thor as the stupid oaf, which also betrays their Christian bias.
With all of this in mind, these authors have no problem seeing Odin as
the one who turned princes against each other “But never reconciled
them” (Harbardsljod 24). One must never confuse a god of war with a
demon of discord and strife.
None of the
incidences mentioned in Harbardsljod can in any way be linked to any
known adventure of Odin’s. However, Rydberg has proven that all of them
either relate Loki’s adventures as known in other sources or allude to
his nature. Since my goal here is to demonstrate the connection between
Harbardsljod and Lokasenna, and Rydberg has already done an excellent
job of interpreting the former in UGM II part 2 pgs. 103-130, I will
only briefly outline the proofs that Loki is in fact Harbard of
Harbardsljod:
-Strophe 8 is a sexual metaphor.
Hildof (Maid-wolf) designates the phallus while Radsey sound) the sound
of “rad”, a sexual union) is a euphemism for a vagina. Thus Harbard is
saying that his penis (Hildolf), whose “home” is a vagina (Radsey
sound) told him to make the boat (an obvious jest). This may have some
connection to Thor’s journey to Geirrod where giantesses, urinating in
the river Vimur (the Elivagar) caused it to swell. Rydberg states that
“one event refers to the other”, i.e. that the body of water that
obstructs Thor’s path in Harbardsljod is the same as that which caused
him trouble before (UGM II part 2. Pg. 111). Loki’s position to make
such a vulgar statement, that of the representative of unbridled lust,
is well attested to.
-Strophe 16, Fjölvar is one of
the frost-giants who led the attack on Midgard during the first
Fimbulwinter (see The Prose Edda, Tröllkonur Nafnapular and UGM II
part 2 pgs. 111-112). This shows that Harbard is an ally of the powers
of frost and an enemy of the gods. “All-green” is an epithet of
Midgard. When Loki-Harbard then claims, in str. 18, to have had sex
with seven sisters who “seek to wind ropes of sand” during this war
this refers to Hymir’s daughters, mentioned in Lokasenna str. 34, who,
just as Gjalp, Greip, Stikla and Rusila are “personifications of the
wild, overflowing rivers that surge through dales, digging riverbeds in
their depths and leaving long, continuous sandbanks, “ropes of sand”,
along their paths to the sea” (UGM II part 2 pg. 112). These maidens
represent the dangers of overflowing rivers and flash floods.
-In strophe 20 Harbard is the lover
of myrd-riders, the Teutonic equivalent of evil witches akin to
Gullveig-Heid in most cases. However, the rest of the strophe leads us
to hypothesize that there may be something more to these myrk-riders.
In UGM I no. 116 Rydberg identifies Hlebard with Thjazi-Völund
(Thjazi and Völund’s identity is proven in no. 115) and states
that the ‘stealing of his wits’ refers to the event when “Thjazi, who,
seeing his beloved (Idun) carried away by Loki and his plan about to be
frustrated (this would be his revenge against the gods in the form of
the first Fimbulwinter, see below), recklessly rushed into his certain
ruin.” The “wand” he gave to Loki was the mistleteinn, the arrow made
of mistletoe that Loki gave to Hödr to shoot at Balder, which
caused the latter’s death.
William Reaves has
postulated that these myrk-riders may be identical to the swan-maids of
Volundarkvida. Rydberg shows that Hervor is identical to Idun, Olrun is
identical to Sif, and Hladgun is the same as Auda. These three maidens
are the lovers of the Ivaldi sons Völund, Egil and Slagfinn.
Hrafnagaldr Odins 8 states that Idun “changed disposition, delighted in
guile, shifted her shape.” Thus these women, who have left the divine
clans to be with their scorned lovers in the Myrkwood
(Völundarkvida 4), may both literally and figuratively be called
myrk-riders. If we then compare their longing to leave the Myrkwoo9d
with other instances in the lore where such longing occurs and
witchcraft, Seidr, is suspected (such as against Frey in Skirnismal)
then it may be possible that Loki had something to do with their
longing, which led to their leaving their “husbands”, the Ivaldi sons.
This may also relate to Loki’s words in Harbardsljod 48 and Lokasenna
54 about his relations with Sif.
-Strophe 24 refers to Loki as
Lokerus, Sifka-Bekki and Blind Bölvise in Saxo’s Historia Danica
and Beowulf. Here he has turned Gudhorm and Hadding against one
another, a conflict which leads to many deaths, and never brought about
reconciliation. This is the same disposition that Loki held when he was
amongst the gods.
-Strophes 30-32 refer to Loki’s
exploits with Idun, when he was sent off to find her. It was then that
he held the linen-white maid after turning her into a nut and flying
off in falcon form. He needs Thor’s help because Thjazi-Völund was
chasing him in eagle-guise towards Asgard. This help Thor gladly gave
for the security of Idun and the Asa-citadel.
-Strophes 40-42 refer to Loki’s part
in Thor’s campaign against Geirrod where he had led Thor astray with
his lies, telling him that “green paths lead towards Geirrod’s home”
(Thorsdrapa 1). Thor’s statement about Harbard offering the war party
“hard terms” refers to this.
Now that proofs of
Harbard’s true identity have been given we shall examine the actual
relationship between Harbardsljod and Lokasenna. To begin with, let’s
look at what Rydberg has to say about this:
“In plan and
construction, (Harbardsljod) closely resembles Lokasenna. The main
figure in both is Loki. Lokasenna places him in the midst of a
gathering of gods and goddesses and thus he gets the opportunities to
give his desire for abuse a multi-faceted workout. But the multitude of
figures there prevents a more thorough characterization of them. The
whole legacy of objectionable incidents, which the ethically perfected
mythology inherited from a time when the gods were more forces of
nature than personalities, is exposed, made worse, garnished with lies
by an enemy of the gods and cast in their face. Harbardsljod with just
its two figures has an incomparably better opportunity to characterize
them and do so in a lively manner.” UGM II part 2, pg. 129.
In investigating
the connection between these two poems it is important to consider
their placement within the Teutonic epic as proven by Rydberg. Such
placement is not difficult when we look at passages that describe
events that have already taken place. For instance, we know that the
episode described in Lokasenna would be placed towards the end, because
Loki describes so many things that have already happened, such as the
slaying of Balder (str. 28), the slaying of Thjazi-Völund (str.
50-51), Thor’s adventures at Fjalar’s (str. 60) and his battle against
Hrugnir (str. 61). Furthermore, as we learn from the concluding prose,
this is the last time Loki interacts with the gods and goddesses before
they capture him and bind him until Ragnarok (see UGM II part 2 pg. 208
#146 & FG pg. 136-7). Upon close inspection of Harbardsljod we also
find that this episode would have to have taken place near the end of
the epic. If Rydberg is correct in assuming that strophe 24 of
Harbardsljod refers to Loki’s role as Sifka and Blind among the
Teutons, when he turned Gudhorm-Jörmunrek and Hadding-Thjodrek
against one another “but never reconciled them”, then it is from this
that we get our key to Harbardsljod’s placement. This episode is one of
the last known the ár alda, the age of mythological events, but
takes place right before the events described in Lokasenna (see UGM II
part 2 pg. 204-205 #s 130 & 132; and FG pages 123-129). Thus, if
Loki is describing this event in Harbardsljod, then his meeting with
Thor on the Radsey Sound must have taken place after Sifka-Blind-Loki’s
treachery against Halfdan’s sons, Gudhorm and Hadding. Consequently,
this would place Harbardsljod in exactly the same time frame as
Lokasenna.
From this we can
conclude that Harbardsljod and Lokasenna are two parts of the same
mythic event. By connecting the two it is easy to see how they can fit
together. Rydberg has noticed that “Hardbard’s task, as the song
expressly points out, is to delay the world-protecting god on his way
home…” However, it is not his journey home that Loki inhibits, it is
his journey to Aegir’s annual mead feast, an event special enough to
have such a poem (or two poems) written about it. Thus, in Harbardsljod
Loki is purposefully delaying Thor, while in Lokasenna Thor is late for
the gathering, With this delay Loki has enough time to abuse the gods
and goddesses and even to kill one of Aegir’s servants before Thor
arrives. The Asagod has had to find his way across the sound to the
meadhall. It is possible that Thor expected to find a ferryman on the
sound, perhaps one of Aegir’s servants, and that Loki presumably killed
the servant to take his boat when Thor shows up.
It is also
probable that Loki remains there for the purpose of deterring Thor from
going to the feast at all. He originally tries to dismay the Asagod by
telling him that his mother is dead (Harbardsljod 4), which, we can
surmise, was meant to make Thor change his course and head straight for
Asgard. It is well known that Thor is an excellent wader whose size
increases with the depths of the waters (Thorsdrapa, Skaldskaparmal) so
Loki could not have initially believed that he would keep the Asagod
from crossing the sound, simply by refusing to ferry him. Then he
discovers that Thor needs the boat to get him across, that he cannot
wade due to the augur (eyes, which he makes into stars? Str. 13) he
carries, so refusing to ferry him then becomes sufficient to hinder
him. This would explain why he later tells Thor that his mother in
alive (str. 56).
If augur really
are ‘eyes’, as William Reaves suggests (cp. ON augua), then we might
consider them to be evidence of Thor’s mighty deeds, to be presented to
the gods at the mead feast. Such a presentation was sacred to the
Teutons as they passed around the Bargarhorn while boasting of their
adventures. This would really be the only reason why he would be
holding them, since we see in Skaldskaparmal and Harbardsljod 19 that
these are to be thrown into the sky to make stars.
Besides the
placement of the two episodes within the epic, we should also consider
the location they take place in. Rydberg states (in UGM I no. 93) that
“Aegir’s Hall is far out in the depths of the sea. The Ocean known by
the Teutons was the North Sea. The author (of Lokasenna) has manifestly
conceived Aegir’s hall as situated in the same direction from Asgard as
Vanaheim, and not far from the native home of the Vanir”. From this
standpoint we should compare the opening prose of both Harbardsljod and
Lokasenna, Harbardsljod states that, “Thor, journeying from the east,
came to a strait or sound”, while Lokasenna informs us that “Thor was
not there (at Aegir’s feast), because he was in the east.”
It should be noted that Aegir’s home
was thought to have been located on the island of Hlesey or Laesö
(Skaldskaparmal), which is situated in the Kattegat strait between
Jutland, Denmark and Southwestern Sweden. So we can see that in both
poems Thor is returning from a journey “in the east”, i.e. Jotunheim,
and that his path brings him to a strait or a sound.
On pg. 111 of UGM
II part 2 Rydberg states that the body of water that restricts Thor’s
path in Harbardsljod is the same as that which stopped him before on
his way to Geirrod’s. Thus, the Rádseyjarsund of Harbardsljod 8
is identical to Vimur of Skaldskaparmal, where giantesses urinate to
make the torrents swell. Elsewhere it is known that Vimur is one of the
names of the Elivagar (FG pg. 204), which is caused to rise when
“Gjalp, Geirrod’s daughter stood astride the river (Skaldskaparmal.
Note that Elivagar, though often called a river, is actually a sea or
ocean so its connection to a strait or sound would not be
contradictory. It is very likely that Aegir’s home, Hlésey or
Hles Isle, was also originally thought to be located on the Elivagarm
the Underworld sea that actually is situated near Vanaheim (see above
and UGM I no. 93). The later placement of his home on Laesö
probably came from the euhemerist movement, where ancient gods became
ancient kings and mythic realms became actual geographic locations.
That Aegir’s hall is probably located in the western domains of or near
Vanaheim comes from Lokasenna 34 where Loki states that Njord was “sent
eastward from here, as a hostage to the gods”.
Considering all
that has been stated here, we should now take a step-by-step look at
the strophes that correspond to one another in each of these poems:
1. In Thorsdrapa Thor is called
“Odin’s grief-thief”, i.e. his joy (str. 15, Odins alfi sodnum). This
stands in stark contrast with strophes in Harbardsljod, where “Harbard”
(Loki) lies to him (str. 4), insults his manner of dress (str. 6),
implies that he is a horse-thief (str. 8), and calls him a coward (str.
26). The entire concept and tone of these strophes mimics exactly the
abuses of Lokasenna from Loki to the gods and goddesses, further
contradicting Odin’s association with Harbard of Harbardsljod.
To this we should compare Thor’s
words to Harbard, where he calls him a weakling (str. 13), womanly
(strophes 27 and 51), a liar and a fool (str. 49). He also threatens to
kill him! (Strophes 27 and 47). Such a threat, given Thor’s past
encounters, should not be taken lightly. That scholars would consider
the benevolent protector of Midgard to be capable of parricide (and
strophes 31-35 show us that Thor does know who Harbard is, see below)
further demonstrates the Christian influence on their investigations
into the ancient Teutonic lore, since from the Christian perspective
both Odin and Thor would be seen as demons. Again, in Lokasenna Thor
calls Loki “womanish” or “unmanly” in a refrain (strophes 57, 59, 61
and 63), while in the same refrain he threatens to take his life with
Mjölnir.
2. Both poems depict Loki as the
representative of unbridled lust, where he boasts of his sexual
exploits with Hymir’s daughters (Harbardsljod 16 and 18, cp. Lokasenna
34), the myrk-riders (Harb. 20), Idun (Harb. 30, see above, and Loka.
17), Tyr’s wife (Loka. 40), Skadi (Loka. 51-52) and Sif (Harb. 48 and
Loka. 54).
3. Harbardsljod 14 and 15 and
Lokasenna 61 refer to Thor’s battle with Hrugnir. In Lokasenna Thor may
be reminding Loki of his words spoken on the sound in Harbardsljod.
4. Strophe 26 of Harbardsljod
describes the exact same event with the same insult Loki uses against
Thor in Lokasenna 60. In fact, the line “ok Þú
Þá Þorr vera” (“and hardly thought you were Thor”)
is repeated in both strophes.
These associating strophes would
allow Thor to confirm the fact that it was Loki on the sound before,
disguised ad using the name Harbard, when he confronts him in Aegir’s
hall. Whether this was considered by the author or authors of
Harbardsljod first or Lokasenna first we cannot know. This would simply
be a confirmation made by the author(s) of the poems, since it is
already made clear in strophes 31-35 if Harbardsljod that Thor knows
exactly who Harbard was, when they reminisce over the event that led to
the death of Volund-Thjazi.
5. Thjazi’s death is referred to in
both poems, when Loki brags about his sexual relations with Idun. We
have already determined that strophe 30 of Harbardsljod describes
Loki’s returning of Idun to Asgard (compare str. 31 “Full fair was thy
woman finding” with what is said in Skaldskaparmal - “saekja etir
Idunni i Jotunheima”, “seek after Idun in Jotunheim”). Hrafnagaldr 19
tells us that Thjazi is a son of Alvaldi. Ivaldi and Alvaldi are
identical (see UGM I no. 123). Thus Thjazi-Völund is a brother of
Idun. So when Loki claims, in Lokesenna 17, that Idun laid her arms
“about thy brother’s slayer” this refers to the same mythic event where
Harbard claims to have “held” (in this case literally, though Loki uses
it in a sexual context) the linen-white maid. This mythic event is, of
course, Loki’s self-serving adventure into Thrymheim to bring Idun back
to her rightful place among the gods and goddesses.
6. Harbardsljod 42 can be interpreted
in the following manner: Loki means to recompense his offense to Thor
with arrows, or with an attack (UGM II, part 2 pg. 117-119). Rydberg
here relates the “hands-ring” which arbitrators (jafnendr) give as the
horn-bow, which forms a circular shape when drawn. The statement is a
reference to Njord-Fridlevus’ attempt to marry Skadi and propitiate the
offended Völund for the competition between his artwork and that
of Sindri, which he lost (see Saxo book 6 and FG pg. 57-60). Njord’s
messengers were killed and later he and his arbitrator (jafnendr or
ljóna) Hödr-Bjorno were attacked by the Ivaldi sons. This
competition between the artists left the Ivaldi sons to turn against
the gods and seek refuge in the Myrkwood (Wolfdales).
In both Harbardsljod 42 and Lokasenna
12 the phrase Baeta baugi “pay a fine with rings” occurs. In Lokasenna
it is Bragi claiming that he will “Baeta baugi” for any offense he has
brought against Loki, and that he will give him a horse and a sword if
he will curb his vile tongue. His “horse” is the set of stones Loki
will lay upon until Ragnarök, bound by the entrails of one of his
own sons, with a sword sticking in his back (UGM I no. 78 and FG pg.
137). Here the phrase refers to the same mythic idea as Harbardsljod
42, that Bragi will recompense Loki’s actions with violence.
7. Both poems end with a curse. In
Harbardsljod 58 and 60 Loki-Harbard predicts that the sun shall vanish,
which we should compare to Völuspá 57, and states that Thor
should go where all the powers of evil will have him. In Lokasenna
(str. 65) he predicts that Aegir’s home shall burn to the ground, which
may be another reference to Völuspá 57.
These proofs demonstrate that without
doubt, there is a clear connection between Lokasenna and Harbardsljod.
This connection has simply been overshadowed by the misconceptions
surrounding the identity of Harbard in Harbardsljod. Once this
misunderstanding is eliminated the relationship between these two poems
becomes so apparent that it can lead one to wonder how such a
relationship has gone unnoticed for so long.
