Perhaps it is best to begin with the basics: the Vo\u0308luspa\u0301<\/em> is a text. It is a poem that has come down to us in a book of other poems. The Elder Edda<\/em> is a collection of verse written in Old Norse. To Charles Dunn, a scholar who wrote the introduction to Terry’s version of the Edda<\/em> in 1990, the poems have multiple layers of history. \u201cFor the most part they are survivals typical of oral culture of the tenth century, but we know them only as they were written down by antiquarian Christian scribes in the thirteenth century\u201d (xvi). But even this vision of the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em> is simplistic. It is not simply a text, but several. Dunn writes that \u201c[t]he oldest extant manuscript of The Elder Edda<\/em>, the Codex Regius, was compiled in Iceland at a date no earlier than 1270\u201d (xvi). There is also another version of the text from another codex, the Hauksbok, which includes a unique passage which will later prove controversial for the text’s interpretation (\u00d3lason 35).<\/p>\n Debate abounds as to when we should situate the text, as well as who wrote it, and why. According to G\u00edsli Sigur\u00f0son, who contributed an article to P\u00e9tursson’s book, the oral origins of the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em> are not in dispute: \u201cmost people have accepted the notion that V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em> is the product of an oral tradition\u201d (45). The result of this, however, is not nearly as clear. Dunn uses oral origins to speculate authorship and method of creation: \u201cthe reciter (who possibly sang to musical accompaniment) composed his lines, like most oral performers, on the basis of customary formulas and tied them together in stanzaic units\u201d (xxiii). P\u00e1lsson writes that, rather than a male poet, \u201cit seems more likely that the poem was created by a poetess who was herself a practising sibyl\u201d (14). Others take issue not only with the conclusions drawn by such enterprises, but on their foundations. Sigur\u00f0son begins with an assertion that the text cannot be ascribed to one poet at all: \u201cFirst we have to abandon the notion of an original poem composed by an individual author just before the year 1000\u201d (45). How do we make sense of this poem, with its convoluted textual history and debated present among scholars that nevertheless has had an outsized impact in our English-speaking culture?<\/p>\n The scholarly narratives about the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em> are vast; perhaps the only thing that matches the complexity of the literature surrounding the text is complexity of the poem’s own narrative. Most agree that the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em> depicts a creation myth, then a brief period of prosperity before launching into successive descriptions of violence and finally the apocalypse, Ragnar\u00f6k, capped by a brief vision of a re-founded world. Schematizing this narrative has proved difficult. V\u00e9steinn \u00d3lason, who contributed a chapter on the temporality of the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1 in the same volume as P\u00e9tursson and Sigur\u00f0son, suggests a four part structure: \u201ca) creation; b) events following upon creation and leading to ragnarok; c) ragnarok itself; and d) a new beginning\u201d (27). P\u00e1lsson, on the other hand, elects for a more complex seven-part structure (11).<\/p>\n The existence such strictures imply that the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em>‘s borders are loose. Modern scholars jump to make sense of it, to define it. Even for the professionals, the obscurity the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em> presents is intimidating. But such a challenge can also represent an opportunity. \u00d3lason writes that the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em> \u201cforces us to fill the many gaps in the picture, to interpret, and even to find a place for ourselves in the story\u201d (26). This exhibit will follow a similar method. Rather than provide a schema for readers of the poem to make sense of it for them, we will instead provide contextual material, weaving between material and text, to bring the world of the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1 into sharper focus, to illuminate some of its more frustrating (and exciting) complexities.<\/p>\n We’ll begin with a discussion of what is among the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em>\u2019s central features: its narrator. Though the text moves across ages and subjects, discusses gods, conflict, and reconciliation, contains the beginning of the world and its end, it is linked by a single voice, that of a female prophet, or volva. P\u00e1lsson argues that the speaker is a being of significant power: \u201cV\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em> is narrated by a woman who never falters in her mastery of its vast, arcane subject: the ultimate fate of mortal gods and men. She is the earliest female voice in Old Norse known to us\u201d (15). Such abstract depictions are illustrative, but beg further questions. How real was this figure? What might her life have been like?<\/p>\n The National Museum of Denmark website has a brief exhibit<\/a> on the grave of a woman, found in Fyrkat, Denmark. The exhibition suggests the woman may have been a seeress, and gives evidence that she was buried with henbane. The herb, \u201c[t]aken in the right quantities… can produce hallucinations and euphoric effects\u201d (\u201cA seeress from Fyrkat?\u201d). Could this substance have played a role in the time-bending structure of the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em>? The woman also seems to have had money and status, with rare and valuable items on her person, including silver and bronze (\u201cA seeress from Fyrkat?\u201d). It is interesting to note that the woman was also buried with a nondescript metal rod:<\/p>\n Metal rod from burial at Fyrkat 4, DK. The purpose of the rod is not immediately apparent. Metal was a relatively rare commodity in the Viking Age. In a high class grave, the presence of an ambiguous object\u2014clearly smithed on the right side\u2014draws notice. The online guide terms the object \u201cmysterious,\u201d and suggests that it was a ritual object, a magic wand (\u201cA seeress from Fyrkat?\u201d). Given the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em>‘s oral origins, it was experienced as performance before it was experienced as text. Might the metal rod have played a role in the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em>‘s recitation? We can only speculate, but an invitation to do so may well be one of the most important commodities the V\u00f6lusp\u00e1<\/em> has to offer.<\/p>\n \u00ab Previous<\/a> | Home<\/a> | Next \u00bb<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Origins, Texts, and Transmission: The Scholarly Debate So, what is the Vo\u0308luspa\u0301 to us today? \u201cVo\u0308luspa\u0301 is probably the most internationally famous poem in the Old Icelandic corpus,\u201d writes scholar Pe\u0301tur Pe\u0301tursson, \u201c\u2014and perhaps the most disputed\u201d (Pe\u0301tursson, xiii). To some, the Vo\u0308luspa\u0301 is important enough to heap on superlatives. Hermann Pa\u0301lsson, who edited and<\/p>\nThe Structure<\/h6>\n
The Sibyl<\/h6>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/makingvikings\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/359\/2023\/05\/Fyrkat-4-Metal-Rod-scaled.jpg\")
<\/a>
Iron. L 99 cm.
(source: NMC<\/a>)<\/p><\/div>\n