I am reading the Völsunga saga currently and I've had this mental image of Regin as a dark haired, grimy smith with wild eyes, barrel chested and tree trunk like arms. Turns out he's actually a dwarf. Dödöt. As Völuspá and Reginsmál relate him to the dvergar, I suppose its a given fact and I can scratch my beautifully constructed design and start anew. Baaaah.
Then again, I had been wondering, how Regin could have such a strange family without displaying any of the genetic peculiarities himself. I even wondered, with whom his father had lain to beget an otter and a dragon as sons respectively. But Hreiðmarr is the King of the Dwarves himself, sooooo there you go. These dwarves, I tell you. Crazy shape shifters, the lot of them...

Talking about dwarves: Andvari who loses his gold and the ring Andvarinaut (which he both curses) to Loki, is also a shape shifter, living beneath the waterfall Andvarafors as a luce. For some reason, he reminds me of Gollum.... Oh yeah, he's apparently the equivalent to Alberich, another King* of the Dwarves (or Elves?), as well, who can turn invisible and guards the Nibelungen hoard. BUT! And that's the interesting part: apparently, some scholars see him as the original Oberon, which is the French translation of his name. The more you know *rainbow*.

I still cannot believe Regin is a midget. :(

*sobsobsob*

Anyways, here an illustration from the Ramsund rune carving to cheer me up and to mark a worthy ending to a silly post (I cannot even begin to explain how funny I find Sigurd down there, stabbing Fafnir and all. And that face of the dragon OHGOD WHAT IS AIR):
*I swear, they call anyone rich and important enough to be mentioned in these sagas a king...

I am still fangirling hardcore over the Thor movie and Loki in particular. Nancy, Anne and I went to see it again today, we had such a blast. This movie truely is pure fangirl service, imho.

Nomnomnom. But the best thing? The newly created kinkmeme norsekink! Soooo many awesome prompts and sexy tiems, I can hardly believe it. This fandom? It's going to be one of the finest.

This is all c:

[edit] Super super awesome mythological Loki + Thor + Odin Story: A Game of Shapes !!!! True to character and sources. Aaaaah *instant fav forever*
Also, if you were wondering about Odin's "No, Loki." at the end, here's a little story which explores the meaning behind it. Very IC, imho: Letting Go.

I am merely speculating, of course. Considering virðing/drengskapr (similar to lat. virtus) as the forever unachievable ideal/social system, its origin and power it undeniably had over Vikings, the punishment for cowards does not seem so out of place anymore. The opposite of honor is shame, and what shames a man more if not meeting the ideal - an ideal, that is the ultimate goal of each individual. If a man is less than what he is supposed to be - what is he, then? Something different, the opposite. He must, by default, thus be female (or an animal.) Now, I won't open that Pandora's box today of how women were viewed - mostly because Tacitus' record of that differs a little from later Viking society's standard - and skip right into the actual argument instead:

Perversity, "the man stained with abominable vices", is regarded as severe as cowardice. How do these two coincide? Taking into account that only the receiving partner in a homosexual encounter had to suffer the full penalty of his sordid (or should I say sorðinn? Hurhurhur) act while the active partner is undoubtedly the victor, homosexuality was first and foremost a demonstration of dominance.It was a practice used against enemies and competitors as means of establishing a position within society. There was nothing shameful in using a man like a woman, but certainly in being used, in submitting and becoming less than a man. Simply the accusation of being a coward and thus unmanly, was so utterly shameful, a discredit disrupting not only to the man's equilibrium (helgi), but his kin's, that the Icelandic and Norwegian laws demanded the death (or exile) of the accuser, if it was unfounded.

Due to Tacitus' accumulation, we can easily make the connection between the coward, the unmanly and the sexual deviant. They all denote the same kind of person. It is obvious, then, why they would all be doomed to the same fate as well. Unlike traitors and deserters, whose crime it were to nourish different morals and not a fundamental flaw in their nature. One could even assume, that hanging traitors up on trees for all to see, the meaning becomes "Don't do it", as opposed to the unmistakable message of "Don't be it" when it comes to the second group of offenders.

I am not sure whether anyone has compared Tacitus' account of Germanic life/costume etc with the much later age of the Vikings, but I am sure, I wasn't the first one to follow that train of thought.  Aaaaanyways. What's more important right now... OMG I CAN HAZ?