Ocean Keltoi

Reviving Loki

Norse myth is populated with several controversial dei es. None, however— not even the
enigma c Odin— reach the level of Loki. This translates into modern prac ce among pagans, and is
especially true among reconstruc onist movements such as Heathenry, Germanic Polytheism. Heathenry
is a diverse prac ce pulling from several Germanic tradi ons, the most popular among them is Norse
tradi on, inspired mainly by Icelandic works such as the Poe c Edda or Snorri Sturluson’s Edda.1 Among
Heathens, the discussion around Loki has become conten ous over recent years. Across various social
pla orms, in broader Heathen discussion and among various smaller communi es, the problem of Loki
appears, o en as a divisive force.

Even The Troth, widely known as the largest inclusive Heathen organiza on, had, un l 2019,
banned the hailing of Loki at Troth events.2 Hailing Loki’s children, Fenrir and Jormungandr, was s ll seen
as unacceptable even a er this ban on Loki was overturned. This policy regarding Loki’s spicy sons was
not changed un l June of 2023, and even then, the current policy simply leaves out previous men on.
This controversy in Heathenry came to a head with respect to the Troth in 2013 when, despite policy, an
unofficial blot / ritual was held to Loki in the a er-hours of the event. This resulted in many from the
Troth feeling that this ritual they did not see or hear had polluted their experience, and le the
organiza on en rely.3 Even a er this incident, the Troth took six years to reverse the policy. An
addi onal four years passed before the Troth removed language banning the hailing of Loki’s
controversial sons at Troth events.

The interpreta on of Loki in academia has ranged from a chthonic mountain dwarf, a trickster, a
God of Fire, a God of Darkness, to, plainly, Norse Myth’s Satan. This wide variety of scholarly
interpreta ons of a deity with a seemingly contradictory personality has extended into Heathenry. A
general trend appeared among Heathen leadership that focused on nega ve interpreta ons of Loki, and
extended nega ve associa ons to those who find themselves and their prac ce closely associated with
Loki and/or his family. Heathenry has seen fit to create the word ‘Lokean’ to reference, both proudly and
derogatorily, Heathens who have prac ce with Loki. This controversy is further evidenced by the fact the
word ‘Nokean’ exists, which is the word Lokeans and others use to reference those who denigrate
Lokeans or deny them a space to prac ce. Nokeans will typically use at least one of three arguments to
deny Lokeans access to either community or at least expression of their worship within a community.
These arguments are: (1) Loki is evil; (2) Loki contributes to moral decay; and (3) Loki was never
worshipped in history.4 The prolifera on of these arguments in Heathenry has resulted in the
ostraciza on of Lokeans from much of the broader Heathen community. Lokeans, in order to find
community, must some mes hide the fact that they worship a deity central to their hearth cult.5 Within

1
Snorri’s Edda is o en called the Prose Edda.
2
Waggoner, Our Troth: Volume 2: Heathen Gods, 349
3
Grundy, Waggoner, God in Flames, xiv
4
Ibid, ix. Ben Waggoner’s forward to Grundy’s God in Flames provides an analysis of each argument, why they are
put forward, and examples of organiza ons and individuals who use these arguments.
5
Collazo, Steinhauser, Blood Unbound, 14. 1
Heathen culture, no other deity, deity’s family, or prac ce associated with them inspires this level of
controversy and division.

Who is this figure that inspires so much discord among both academics and prac oners? Can
there be a jus fied worship of Loki in modern prac ce? Was there ever a historical venera on of such a
deity? Nothing seems clear about Loki, not his allegiance, his associa ons, or even his gender. Loki,
interes ngly, has a number of myths we can reference in order to learn more about him and his complex
character. This wealth of myths has, to a degree, been a weakness rather than a strength in interpre ng
Loki. We do not get a simple picture of a consistent character through these myths. Instead, we get a
complex character who can seem unpredictable and difficult for prac oners to defend, and yet his
worship persists. We can divide them into myths in which he is seen as a nega ve figure, posi ve figure,
and both a nega ve and posi ve figure.6

Myths of Loki as a Posi ve Figure:

There are a number of myths in which Loki is a predominantly posi ve figure. The famous
dynamic of Loki cleaning up his own messes are not present in these stories, and instead Loki is just
another deity among the family of the Aesir, albeit an unorthodox one.

Blood-Oath with Odin

An especially interes ng myth of Loki is one to which we do not have significant access. This
would be the myth in which Loki and Odin “blended their blood together.” What this blending of blood
meant specifically for Odin and Loki is largely lost, but may have some similarity to the oath-brotherhood
ritual sworn in The Saga of Gisli Sursson. The blood oath ritual that sets the stage for conflict in Gisli’s
Saga involves four men mixing their blood in the turf, swearing they would avenge one another as if they
were brothers. This does not mean they are now a part of the same family, with inheritance and other
func ons, but seems to be focused on their loyalty to one another and their commitment to vengeance
should wrongs befall one of them. Conflict arises when one of the blood brothers withdraws from the
oath moments a er it is made. A shadow comes over the brothers and conflict precipitates from there. 7
Some have taken this similarity to mean that the oath between Odin and Loki is an oath of ‘blood
brotherhood’, but this may be an overstatement. We do not know the nature of the oath between Loki
and Odin beyond what is stated, and brotherhood is not men oned.

Loki made a reference to this ritual in the Lokasenna, which seems to have been performed by
himself and Odin. The ritual involved what seems to have been a symbolic oath, saying that they would
not imbibe in beer unless it was brought to both of them. Or, at least, Loki says that this oath was made
by Odin. It is unknown if Loki made the same or similar oath, but it can be presumed that he did. Odin, in
light of the reminder of this oath, invites Loki to sit and speak his words of blame. 8 Whatever myth

6
Shjodt, The Pre-Chris an Religions of the North: Volume III, “Loki”, 1251-1263 contains this delinea on of Loki
myths separated into these categories of posi vity and nega vity.
7
Quinn and Regal, Gisli Sursson’s Saga, 11.
8
Larrington, Poe c Edda, “Lokasenna / Loki’s Quarrel 9-10”, 82.
2
originated this oath between them likely puts Loki in a posi ve light. We do not, however, have access to
this myth, as it was lost to me.

Thor in a Wedding Dress

Another myth that not only shows Loki in a posi ve light but shows his cunning and intelligence
is the story of retrieving Thor’s hammer as told in the Thrymskvida (Thrym’s Poem). This story is typically
represented as a comedy, but has a number of interes ng events, most famously the fact that Loki
helped Thor disguise himself as Freyja in a ploy to retrieve his lost hammer. During this myth, Loki
shapeshi ed into a maiden and is referred to as a feminine character while in this form. Thor, however,
retains his masculine kennings while in a wedding dress, and is referred to as the Husband of Sif. Thor
retains his masculinity while Loki becomes feminine, despite both appearing and dressing as women. 9
With Loki’s help, Thor regained his hammer and then proceeded to kill all the giants present in his usual
way.

This myth best represents the friendship aspect of Thor and Loki’s rela onship. When Thor is
missing his hammer, he goes to the cleverest one he knows, Loki. Others are recruited as part of the
solu on, but the one who s cks by his side and helps him through the end is Loki. It turns out that this
clever God is the one who can be depended upon to come up with unorthodox solu ons to fix an
impossible problem. This is something he consistently does throughout myth. Thor’s strength can be
relied upon, but it cannot solve every problem. Some mes, cunning is required.

Loki vs Logi

There is also the story in Snorri’s Edda in which Loki is again a companion of Thor in the land of
the Jotunar. Here he stood against Utgarda-Loki’s servant, Logi, in an ea ng compe on. Thor and his
friends, including Loki, failed to win their compe ons against the Jotun, who generally represent
unyielding forces of nature, including Logi (wildfire), Jormungandr, the ocean itself, old age, and thought.
This was revealed to Thor by the end of the myth and Utgarda-Loki disappears. Loki remained commi ed
to Thor’s aid throughout their me in Utgarda-Loki’s realm.

There remains the curious rela onship between Loki and Utgarda-Loki with respect to the
similarity of their name and their associa on with decep on. It is, however, unknown if any rela onship
exists between the two. They do not recognize one another in the story, and Loki does not side with
Utgarda-Loki at any point in the narra ve.

Loki the Creator

Finally, there is the curious possibility of Loki’s associa on with the crea on of humanity. The
Voluspa contains an account of the crea on of mankind by a trio of dei es: Odin; Hoenir; and Lodurr.
The same trio is spo ed later in Snorri’s Edda prior to the kidnapping of Idunn, except the trio is Odin,

9
Larrington, Poe c Edda, “Thrymskvida / Thrym’s Poem 24, 26, and 28”, 96.

3
Hoenir, and Loki. Loki has a number of kennings and names, including the name Lopt, which can be
translated as Skywalker,10 that show up throughout Eddic wri ng. These kennings and names are casually
used to replace his name, as is o en the case with Odin and Thor. Lodurr could easily be one of these
names for Loki. Rudolf Simek points out that the strongest evidence for connec ng Lodur and Loki is
within the kennings for Odin, among which is “Lopt’s friend”, and Lodurr is referred to in an analogous
posi on in rela on to Odin in kennings.

Lodurr has been defended as being a fer lity deity unto himself, unique and independent from
any other deity. He certainly would not be the first deity to which we have scant men on and nothing
more. Another interpreta on of Lodurr is that he is iden cal to Freyr, another fer lity deity that could fill
the same role.11 The iden fica on of Lodurr as Loki is certainly interes ng considering Lodurr’s part in
the crea on of mankind, which is the gi of blood, the warmth and vitality of life.12 Academics and
modern Lokeans alike have argued that this is a fit for Loki, whose humor and rebellious spirit certainly
fits as the deity who gave humanity their warmth.

A further wrench is thrown into this dynamic if one takes the approach of simplifying the various
trios involving Odin. There is Odin, Hoenir, and Loki at the introduc on of the Idunn myth. There is Odin,
Vili, and Ve in Snorri’s myth of the crea on of mankind, and there is Odin, Lodurr, and Heonir in the
Voluspa’s crea on of mankind myth. Snorri quotes from the Voluspa, so he was likely aware of that trio,
and yet represents those involved as “Bor’s sons” in his retelling.13 If we agree that Lodurr and Loki are
the same, it is possible that Hoenir and Loki are iden cal to Vili and Ve, at which point Loki would not
only be involved with the crea on of mankind, but would be Odin’s brother involved in the crea on of
Midgard and the slaying of Ymir, which would certainly explain some of the complica on regarding Loki’s
rela onship with the rest of the Gods.

Myths of Loki as a Nega ve Figure:

Loki appears in a number of myths where it can certainly be argued that he is a more nega ve
than posi ve figure. I’ll briefly go over them here. However, some make a weaker case than others for a
nega ve Loki, and I am compelled to give some commentary explaining why.

Thor vs Gerriod

The first among these nega ve myths is the story of Thor’s ba le with Gerriod, which begins
with Loki bai ng Jotun by flying into their realm with a falcon form as borrowed from Freyja. The Jotunar
were angered that Loki has appeared in their court. Their leader, Gerriod, ordered one of his minions to
capture Loki. In a glorious representa on of a medieval version of an internet troll, Snorri states that Loki
intended to let the Jotun go through the en re process of climbing up into the ra ers to retrieve him

10
Waggoner, Our Troth: Volume 2: Heathen Gods, 351.
11
Simek, Dic onary of Northern Mythology, 190.
12
Larrington, Poe c Edda, “Voluspa 18”, 6.
13
Snorri Sturluson, Faulkes, Edda, 13
4
before just casually flying off. This backfires and Loki was captured and starved for three months before
finally promising to bring an unarmed Thor back with him into Gerriod’s court.

Convinced by Loki to come visit Gerriod, Thor stopped with Grid, the Jotun mother of Vidarr the
Silent by Odin. Grid, knowing the treachery of Gerriod, equipped Thor with her own girdle of might, iron
gauntlets, and her staff. Thor then entered the court of Gerriod accompanied by Loki, but Thor withstood
the tricks employed by the Jotun in a empts to overwhelm his strength. Thor alone and without Mjolnir
is s ll Thor. The Jotun host a empted to kill Thor by throwing a mass of molten iron at the God of
Strength. Thor caught it with his borrowed iron gauntlets and hurled it back. Gerriod, who had hidden
himself behind a pillar, was struck with the molten iron which went through the pillar and into him. This
is, of course, a er Thor broke the backs of Gerriod’s daughters who had a empted to kill him by
crushing him against the ceiling.

The accusa on that this is a nega ve myth about Loki seems predicated on the idea that
somehow Thor cannot take care of himself. Loki had found himself in a bind, caught between the
dishonor of breaking his word and the dishonor of manipula ng Thor. He sided with his word, as is
consistently the case with Loki. It seems that Loki put his faith in Thor’s ability to overcome the challenge
and accompanied him throughout the process. Loki never protected Thor in this story because he lacked
the opportunity to do so. Thor overwhelmed his opponents in both of the two versions of this story
preserved by Snorri. Further, the concept of Loki luring Thor unarmed into Gerriod’s court is only
supported by Snorri’s personal summary of the myth. In the Thorsdrapa, Thor simply had his hammer
and used it to defeat Gerriod and his minions.14 This would suggest that Loki, inten onally or not, may
have forgo en to men on that Thor needs to show up without Mjolnir, or that Thor ignored that part of
the request. The summary of this myth seems to be less one in which Loki tricks Thor, but rather one in
which Thor saves Loki.

A third version of this legend is recorded by Saxo Gramma cus, in which a group of explorers
found the a ermath of Gerriod’s destruc on. Thorkil, aware of the legends of Thor, taught the group
that Thor had driven a molten ingot into the vitals of Gerriod and had killed his daughters with
thunderbolts, sugges ng that Thor had his hammer throughout this ordeal. In this version, Loki is not
men oned at all, nor is the promise of Thor arriving unarmed. What is preserved is the fact that Thor
overwhelmingly defeated the court of Gerriod. As we can see, Loki’s contribu on to this myth varies
between each telling. Therefore, it is difficult to establish a nega ve presence of Loki as authen c, or
even beyond Snorri’s imagina on.

Loki Hates Goats

The next example of a nega ve myth suggests that Loki is responsible for the maiming of Thor’s
goats. This accusa on exists without context in Hymiskvida, which is another story that may have
historically been a Thor and Loki companionship adventure, but it exists now as a Thor and Tyr
companionship adventure. At the end, Thor’s goat collapses, half dead, and credit to this event is given

14
Snorri Sturluson, Faulkes, Edda, 81-86. This is where Snorri’s summary and the Thorsdrapa is located in the Edda.
The second to last stanza of the Thorsdrapa a ests that Thor destroys the Jotun “with bloody hammer”.

5
to Loki.15 The mo va on for this may be that earlier in the poem, Thor kills (or at least strikes)
Jormungandr, Loki’s son. This would make the ac on an understated but jus fied act of vengeance,
especially appropriate if Jormungandr is simply maimed rather than killed.

However, this is all put into ques on by Snorri’s telling of the myth, in which Loki accompanies
Thor, but the one responsible for the maiming of the goat is not Loki but the peasant boy Thjalfi. Thor
kills his goats and cooks them for a peasant family and lays out the skins, telling the family to throw the
bones onto them. His inten on is to then take the skins, wrap them up, and then revive his goats by
blessing them with his hammer. The result is a limping goat, explained by the fact that Thjalfi had
cracked open a bone to suck out the marrow, compromising the magic. 16 Loki seems unrelated to the
event in this story, which seems to be referencing the same incident as the Hymiskvida. The Danish film
Valhalla: The Legend of Thor (2019) provides and elegant solu on to this discrepancy by depic ng Loki
advising Thjalfi to crack the bones and eat the marrow, but this is not represented in the wri en sources.

The Death of Baldr

The most famous of the nega ve depic ons of Loki is the death of Baldr myth as told by Snorri
Sturluson and possibly referenced in the Lokasenna. This myth is one of the most discussed in the
academic history of Norse mythology and seems to be a pivotal event in the broad mythological
meline. The por ons which concern Loki happen a er Baldr appears to have been made invincible. The
Gods were taking great joy in the game of throwing all kinds of objects, including weapons, at Baldr and
watching them simply bounce right off. Loki disguised himself as a maiden and learned from Frigg that
she had made every item in the universe promise to never harm Baldr. Frigg also explained to the
maiden that she had not made mistletoe swear the oath because it was too young.

Loki, no longer in disguise, took advantage of this informa on and went to pluck from the
mistletoe. And then, in his infinite wisdom, somehow managed to make a sharpened weapon out of
mistletoe. He then found The Blind God, Hodr, and convinced him to join in on the fun. He directed Hodr
to Baldr, pointed him in the right direc on, handed him the mistletoe, and then Hodr joined in on the
game. However, the mistletoe was Baldr’s single weakness in this state, and the mistletoe missile killed
Baldr there on the spot. This moment paralysed Asgard as a legal quandary has now appeared: A son of
Odin had killed a son of Odin in a place of frith, a sacred place of peace, and as such, no one could take
vengeance. The Gods could do nothing but weep.

It is a er this that the funeral of Baldr takes place, and the rider Hermodr was sent to Hel to
broker for Baldr’s revival. Hel, the Goddess of Death and the daughter of Loki, informed Hermodr that if
all things in the universe weep, then Baldr could yet live again. The Aesir immediately take ac on, and
sent riders out with requests. Everyone and everything in the universe wept, with the excep on of a
Jotun named Thokk, said by Snorri to be Loki in disguise, who refused to weep. She sat in a cave, and
when she was requested to weep for Baldr, she responded, “Thokk will weep dry tears for Baldr’s burial.
No good got I from the old one’s son either dead or alive. Let Hel hold what she has.” 17

15
Larrington, Poe c Edda, “Hymiskvida / Hymir’s Poem 37”, 79
16
Snorri Sturluson, Faulkes, Edda, 37-38.
17
Snorri Sturluson, Faulkes, Edda, 48-51 contains the story of the death of Baldr.
6
 The Death of Baldr narra ve is told differently by Saxo Gramma cus, the Danish historian wri ng
around the same me as Snorri Sturluson. His euhemerist narra ve is far more detailed. He casts Hodr
as the protagonist and Baldr as the villain. This version depicts them as Danish warlords figh ng over
land and Nanna. Who, interes ngly, is depicted by Snorri as Baldr’s do ng wife. In Saxo’s narra ve,
however, she refused Baldr, and was commi ed to Hodr. Loki is not men oned at all. Hodr instead
received advice on how to kill Baldr from magical forest maidens, who also supplied him with
equipment.18 This complicates ma ers as the story is not without its parallels in Icelandic Myth, as Vali
took vengeance on Hodr for the death of Baldr, not Loki. In the Voluspa, it is said that Vali “never washed
his hands nor combed his hair, un l he brought Baldr’s adversary to the funeral pyre.”19 In Saxo’s
narra ve, Bo, his version of Vali, entered a duel with Hodr and kills him, but suffered mortal wounds
himself and died shortly therea er.

Loki’s responsibility for the death of Baldr is thus put in ques on based on the varying stories.
However, the Lokasenna seems to make reference to this event. While speaking in conflict with Frigg,
Loki drops, “for I brought it about that you will never again see Baldr ride to the halls.” 20 Now this could
be a reference to Loki’s part in the death of Baldr, or it could easily be a reference to his refusal to weep
for Baldr. Either way, the Lokasenna implies that Loki bears some responsibility related to the death of
Baldr, either for the death itself, or for keeping him dead.

Now the ques on remains as to whether or not this is actually a nega ve. Loki, as we’ll see in
future myths, seems to be strongly associated with balance. It is en rely possible that Loki’s mo va on
was offense at the imbalance created by Baldr’s invulnerability. We do not, however, have access to
Loki’s mo va on, and this is assuming, of course, that any “pagan version” of the myth included Loki at
all.

Loki Talks Shit

This leads us into the Lokasenna itself, which has been referenced a number of mes already.
The basic structure of the myth is that Loki gets involved in a war of words with most of the Aesir. The
introduc on to the myth has what is probably the most clearly nega ve ac on of Loki, which is when
praise is given to Aegir’s servants, he kills one named Fimafeng. Fimafeng’s addi on to the myths
appears to be very late, as he is only men oned in the Lokasenna and nowhere else.21 The lateness of
this addi on to Loki’s character inspires ques ons as to its authen city. It’s hard to jus fy that such an
ac on by Loki would have contributed to a historically nega ve view of the deity if the vic m of his crime
is a deity that did not appear in the mythology un l long a er the prac ce of Heathenry had been
nominally banned from public life.

The Lokasenna con nues a er this preamble and Loki approaches the hall in which the Gods are
celebra ng. He debates his entry with Eldir, who stands at the door. Upon entry, Loki convinces Odin that
he is oathbound to hear him out. Odin allows Loki to sit, drink, and speak his “words of blame” to the

18
Saxo Gramma cus, Fisher, and Davidson, Saxo Gramma cus : The History of the Danes : Books I-IX, “Book III”, 69-
79 contains Saxo’s telling of the Baldr narra ve.
19
Larrington, Poe c Edda, “Voluspa 34”, 8.
20
Larrington, Poe c Edda, “Lokasenna / Loki’s Quarrel 28”, 85.
21
Simek, Dic onary of Northern Mythology, 82-83.
7
Gods. What follows is a war of words with the Gods. Odin and Loki call each other perverts, the details of
their insults cause us reading later to associate them both with Seidr. Bragi is accused of cowardice. Loki
accuses a variety of Goddesses of infidelity, including Sif and Idunn. He also weirdly accuses Njordr of
having been used as a pisspot by the daughters of Hymir. Some of these accusa ons have references
elsewhere in myth, some do not. Confirma on remains to be found on Njordr’s status as a toilet.

Odin’s accusa on against Loki furthers the complexity around Loki in regards to gender and
sexuality. Certainly, going to the underworld and ge ng impregnated as a cow likely deviated from the
cultural norms of medieval Scandinavia. Loki’s insult back to Odin may be an a empt to bring him off his
high horse, showing that he too deviated from the cultural norms of the day. This seems to be the case
for much of the Lokasenna. The Gods a empt to engage with Loki, but Loki knows their secrets, and
makes the point that none of them are any be er than he. The Gods all have their own nega ve
associa ons, and Loki holds them to account. Is he perfect? No. But he never claims so. Is this really a
nega ve myth, or is this just a myth where Loki’s honesty is impolite? Truly, the Lokasenna is a boon to
Lokeans, as it secures Loki’s place as a rebellious truthteller, and reveals that any point made against Loki
has a counterpoint among the rest of the Gods. Has Loki made mistakes? Sure, but this does not make
him unique.

The Lokasenna finally ends at the appearance of Thor who threatens Loki with his hammer if he
does not quit his performance. Loki responds that for Thor, he will leave, if for no other reason than he
knows that Thor will deliver on his threats, implying that the other Gods would not be so bold. A er he
leaves, the Gods chase him down and punish him. His famous binding is represented here as punishment
for his words in the Lokasenna22 rather than the death of Baldr as Snorri states.23 Even Loki’s punishment
seems to be a place of inconsistency. Though they disagree on the reason, the Poe c Edda and Snorri’s
Edda both describe a similar scene. Loki’s sons are disemboweled and Loki is bound with their guts.
Skadi places a poisonous snake over him. Sigyn, Loki’s wife, stands next to him with a basin to collect the
poison that drips onto him. When the basin fills and she must go to empty it, the poison drips onto Loki
directly and he writhes in pain, causing earthquakes.

Saxo’s Bound Utgarda-Loki

This leads into another legend which could, maybe, be about Loki. Saxo Gramma cus seems to
omit Loki from his mythic narra ves, which raises ques ons around the authen city of Loki in the first
place. Explana ons have been offered, sugges ng that Saxo’s agenda of demonizing the Gods leaves
li le room for Loki, at least given his place in some narra ves such as the death of Baldr.24 An antagonist
among the Gods suddenly becomes a protagonist in Saxo’s telling, as evidenced by his sympathe c
depic on of Hodr. Unfortunately, Saxo never tries his hand at a sympathe c Loki, but he does represent
something that may or may not be Loki in Book VIII of his narra ve.

Saxo covers a story involving two journeys into what seems to be the underworld. They contain
hallmarks of otherworldly adventure, and give a sense of a demon-infested labyrinthine world

22
Larrington, Poe c Edda, “Lokasenna / Loki’s Quarrel”, 92.
23
Snorri Sturluson, Faulkes, Edda, 51-52.
24
Schjodt, The Pre-Chris an Religions of the North: Volume III, “Loki”, 1255.
8
reminiscent of Blizzard’s Diablo. The expedi ons are led by learned adventurer Thorkil, men oned above
in rela on to his knowledge of the Gerriod legend. The expedi ons themselves take some horrific turns,
and many of the men on the adventure meet the end of their lives in ways that call to mind the 80s
slasher genre. The inspira on for the second expedi on is that King Gorm,25 in his old age, wanted to
understand what his a erlife might be as a worshipper of Utgarda-Loki. Gorm had made an offering to
Utgarda-Loki for a safe return home on the first expedi on, and Utgarda-Loki had granted good weather,
securing safe passage. Thorkil is compelled to go on a second journey to this haunted realm with another
group of men, many of which will be led to their doom.

In the depths of caves beneath the earth, they come across the bound figure of Utgarda-Loki, a
huge creature draped in fe ers. He is kept in a repulsive chamber crawling with snakes. Saxo describes
his “rank-smelling hairs” that were “as long and tough as spears of cornel wood.” 26 Thorkil takes one of
these hairs with him as proof he had completed the journey. Immediately a powerful stench covers the
room and snakes leap from the walls firing venom. The Vikings would raise their shields and rush to the
exit, but the demonic snakes would fly over them and spit their venom from above, killing many of the
men. Only five men would escape the caves and embark with Thorkil for the journey home. Of those,
three would die on the journey home from the effects of the poisonous gas.

Saxo takes this moment to turn Thorkil into a proto-Chris an of sorts, saying that while the other
men prayed to their idols, Thorkil reached out to the “God of the Universe” for calm weather, pouring
liba ons during his prayers. His pe on would be answered, just as Gorm’s was when he prayed to
Utgarda-Loki. Thorkil would finally make it home, but when Gorm discovered the nature of his account,
he sought to have Thorkil assassinated before he could be readily informed. Thorkil learned of this and
le his bed early in the morning, replacing his body with a log. The King’s men would a ack a log in a
bed instead of the wise Thorkil. Rather than take his revenge, Thorkil appeared before the king and
simply spoke that he would pass on his duty of revenge and just tell the king what he found, which was
that he had been worshipping a horrid beast. During Thorkil’s telling of this story, Gorm fell dead from
the descrip ons alone. Thorkil, to erase any doubt of his words, produced the foul-smelling hair he had
taken as proof. The hair released its poison in the hall, causing the death of several bystanders. 27

This legend is certainly curious, and may or may not be about Loki. Utgarda-Loki appears in
Snorri’s narra ve as a character dis nct from Loki himself. Loki is even present and aids Thor against
Utgarda-Loki. It’s possible that Utgarda-Loki and Loki were at some point the same en ty, but eventually
split off, crea ng dis nct personali es in myth. Utgarda-Loki’s name means “Loki of the Outer World”
and could make reference to some sort of “Mirror world” version of Loki who is far more malicious.
Perhaps there is an unknown legend of Utgarda-Loki’s origin that is somehow caused by Loki, likely by
accident. Curiously, this could also mean that the Loki who is bound is not Loki but Utgarda-Loki. Saxo’s
reference to Utgarda-Loki is also curious, because the existence of an outer-world Loki implies the
existence of a “non-outer-world Loki”. This would mean that even though Saxo never men ons Loki, he
certainly implies his existence.

25
The King Gorm in this narra ve is not Gorm the Old, but may have been a reference to him.
26
Saxo Gramma cus, Fisher, and Davidson, Saxo Gramma cus : The History of the Danes : Books I-IX, “Book VIII”,
269.
27
Ibid, 270.
9
 This legend from Saxo is some mes used as evidence that the worship of Loki is a nega ve, as
the true nature of Loki, even if he answers prayers, is that of a horrifying beast. However, this is taking at
face value the narra ve of Saxo Gramma cus, a man who depicts Odin as an amoral manipula ve
wizard, Baldr as an arrogant man-child and a jealous lover, and Thor as a brute who looks down on
humanity. Saxo’s narra ves, therefore, are worth a cri cal reading. It’s safe to say that any Heathen
reading Saxo should probably not take his accounts at face value, as his bias is overt. His agenda was very
obviously to preserve Danish tradi onal stories and history while shaming its pagan past.

Father of Monsters

Another aspect of Loki typically tossed into the nega ve is that he is the father of monsters. This
assignment is generally given to him through the children that he has with Angrboda, whose name
means ‘the one who brings grief’28 and is likewise o en referred to as the mother of monsters. The
offspring of Loki and Angrboda are Jormungandr, the Midgard Serpent, Hel, the Goddess of Death, and
Fenrir, the world-ending wolf who is des ned to kill Odin (and perhaps Tyr). The worship of these three
dei es, as well as their mother, have created a similar amount of controversy as Loki himself. The
implica on of this as a nega ve aspect of Loki is predicated on the nature of the parents determining the
nature of the children. Snorri states that the children are of concern due to the nature of their mother,
and s ll more because of the nature of their father.29

There are problems with this line of thinking. Firstly, Hel does not seem to create any threat in
the remainder of the narra ve beyond the domain she is assigned by Odin as the Goddess of Death. Her
part in the Baldr narra ve expresses her dominion over the finality of death, not the act of death. She is
reasonable and even gracious in providing a possibility in overriding Baldr’s death. Jormungandr is
a acked by Thor before his culmina on at Ragnarok, in which they kill each other. Fenrir is arguably
wronged by the Gods simply for being a large wolf before he breaks loose and takes his revenge. This
dynamic is not missed by modern prac oners who might understand Jormungandr as a force of nature
who responds to aggression from humanity (or its protector in Thor). They might see Hel as a death
matron, more of a maternal guardian and caretaker of the ancestral dead than any sort of evil force.
They might see a li le of themselves in Fenrir, an en ty who is harshly judged and punished for his
iden ty. They might iden fy with his struggle and even have understanding for his desire for revenge. If
Jormungandr, Hel, and Fenrir are meant to reflect the nature of their parents, then perhaps we should
give Loki and Angrboda a closer look. In fact, understanding the jus fiable rage felt by their children may
give context to Loki and Angrboda.

An interes ng analogue for Angrboda might be found in The Saga of King Hrolf Kraki in the form
of Bera, the mother of three children by their father, Bjorn, who is cursed as a werebear. Bera is also
cursed by the same woman who cursed and arranged the death of Bjorn by feeding Bera the cooked
bear meat of her deceased lover. Because of this secondary curse, two of Bera’s children had
deformi es, but because the curse wasn’t properly completed, the third, Bodvar, was unaffected by the
curse. Despite the effects of the spell cast on Bera, all three of these children, Elk-Frodi (who was half
elk), Thorir Houndfoot (who had the feet of a hound), and Bodvar Bjarki (A legendary warrior with a

28
Simek, Dic onary of Northern Mythology, 16.
29
Snorri Sturluson, Faulkes, Edda, 27.

10
spirit bear form) all have heroic adventures.30 Bera is the mother of monsters, and those monsters share
the nature of their father and mother, and they are heroes.

Ragnarok

Finally, there is Loki’s representa on in Ragnarok. In the myths themselves, much of the
cataclysmic destruc on in Ragnarok is not the cause of Loki but rather Fenrir and Surtr. Loki is present
but as part of a series of duels between rival dei es. Fenrir defeats Odin, who is in turn defeated by
Vidarr. Thor and Jormungandr defeat each other. Surtr defeats Freyr. Garm (possibly also Fenrir) and Tyr
defeat each other. Loki and Heimdallr defeat each other.31 Loki is obviously on the side of this fight that
does not involve the Aesir, and he is the only deity counted among the Aesir who fights against them. It
may be understandable that Loki would fight on the same side as two of his children, Fenrir and
Jormungandr (Hel is absent). Snorri says that Loki arrives with “Hel’s own,” sugges ng an army of the
dead, but in the Voluspa, he arrives with the Sons of Muspel.32

E. O. G. Turville-Petre, a scholar of skaldic poetry, remarks that the Ragnarok legend seems to be
a combina on of Chris an and Pagan legends. He notes that the destruc on of the world by fire seems
to have Chris an influences, while the earth sinking into the sea has some Cel c inspira on. Fenrir’s
consump on of the sun may be pagan, while the falling of the stars could be Chris an. Chris an
influence can be seen in the decline of morals and the breaking of the bonds of kinship as part of the
leadup to the end of the world. Fenrir’s associa on with a fall of society is referenced in the Hakonarmal
as well as the Eiriksmal, but this Fenrir does not seem to be bound as is the Eddic Fenrir. The Ragnarok
legend seems to be a Frankenstein’s monster of legends, both Chris an and Pagan, that formed the
Voluspa and related legends.33

Part of this combina on of legends seems to be a series of rivalries that we find elsewhere in
myth, especially that of Thor and Jormungandr and that of Loki and Heimdallr. Thor and Jormungandr’s
rivalry are referenced several mes throughout Snorri’s Edda as he quotes other skaldic poets. The
rivalry between Loki and Heimdallr is referenced briefly in the available fragments of Ulf Uggason’s
Husdrapa as preserved by Snorri. In this rivalry, they are described as in contest over the “sea-kidney”
which is likely Brisingamen, Freyja’s necklace.34 These and other rivalries (Freyr and Surtr, Tyr and
Garm/Fenrir) were likely combined into the Ragnarok legend as we know it, which exists as a product of
Chris aniza on. Whatever “pagan version” of this myth that exists lies in fragments sca ered across
other poe c works, none of which men on Loki.

30
Byock, The Saga of King Hrolf Kraki, 35-41.
31
Snorri Sturluson, Faulkes, Edda, 54-55 lists out the duels of Ragnarok.
32
Larrington, Poe c Edda, “Voluspa 48”, 10.
33
Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion of the North, 281-285.
34
Snorri Sturluson, Faulkes, Edda, 77.
11
 Myths of Loki as a Posi ve and Nega ve Figure:
There are a number of myths involving Loki that cannot be clearly categorized in a posi ve or
nega ve light, even at a surface level glance. Loki’s complexity gets even more frustra ng with legends in
which he seems to be both the hero and the villain. This is reflected best in four major myths.

Making Asgard Great Again

When the Gods first constructed Midgard and began their se lement of Asgard, it was decided
that they needed to build a wall. A builder offered to construct them such a fortress that it would
withstand frost giants and all manner of threats. The payment he requested was a marriage to Freyja
and to have possession of the sun and the moon if he could complete the project in three seasons on his
own; otherwise, there would be no payment. The Gods, thinking this feat was impossible, held a
mee ng. The Gods struck a bargain with the builder that he could have what he demanded, but only if
he was able to complete the project in a single winter, but that he should receive help from no man. The
builder countered that he would like the use of his steed. Loki, presumably seeing that this was in
keeping with the wording of the deal, suggested that this be allowed.

Turns out, this builder’s stallion was insanely strong, and performed twice the deeds of strength
as the builder. It looked like the master builder was about to actually successfully pull this off, and the
Gods would have to deliver on their promised payment. Weirdly enough, it was Loki who is villainized for
this rather than the Gods for seeking to get free labor. Whatever the case, Freyja was not happy, and the
Gods put it on Loki to solve the issue, otherwise they would kill him. Loki created a solu on by turning
himself into a curvy sexy mare and luring the stallion away from the jobsite. The builder ran off trying to
catch his stallion, but the stallion had other, far more pressing interests. The next day, not as much
building was done, and it became clear that the builder would be unable to complete the task.

The builder went into a rage and it was revealed that he was actually a mountain giant. The Gods
canceled their oaths and called upon Thor, who came rolling in with Mjolnir and, in the words of Snorri,
paid the Giant’s wages by smashing his skull with Mjolnir and then laying him to rest in Niflhel. A er this,
Loki returned with his new child, a foal, Sleipnir, making Loki the proud mother of an eight-legged
horse.35

This story reads as if the Gods are trying to wiggle out of their responsibili es, but Loki is the one
who solves the problems and comes back with an eight-legged horse as a gi for Odin. This legend may
have been subject to aspects of Chris aniza on, but the spirit of Loki’s motherhood to Sleipnir fits his
character.36 The Gods come out of this story looking more nega ve than Loki, but this could also be an
aspect of this process of Chris aniza on. Anyone who has worked construc on and dealt with a client
who wants to get out of payment likely won’t view this legend with the Gods in a posi ve light. Loki’s
solu on, however, is both fair and underhanded. It fits the term of the bet, but isn’t exactly the most
honest way of going about achieving victory. Loki is known to bend the rules but keep to his word, and in

35
Ibid, 35-36.
36
Schjodt, The Pre-Chris an Religions of the North: Volume III, “Loki”, 1260.

12
this case, it works out to the favor of the Gods. The wall was built, and the Jotun paid for it. And Odin got
a horse out of the whole situa on.

Tragedy of O er

The trend of “Loki gets the Gods into a situa on and then gets them out of it” con nues with
this legend of Loki and O er. Odin, Loki, and Hoenir are out and about, chillin’, and Loki finds an o er
ea ng a salmon. Loki throws a stone, killing the o er. Loki was quite pleased. With one throw, he caught
both an o er and a salmon. The trio then went to visit a farmer, and come to find out, the o er was the
farmer’s son. The iden ty of the o er and the fact that Loki had killed him was revealed, and the three
dei es were taken prisoner by the farmer and his other sons. The Aesir offered a ransom for their lives.
The terms decided upon were that the sum should be enough gold to both fill and cover the o er-skin
from the farmer’s deceased son.

Odin sent Loki out to handle the task. Loki found a dwarf in the form of a salmon, captured him,
and ransomed his life for all the gold he has in his cave. The dwarf agreed and took a substan al amount
of wealth out of the cave, but tried to hide a gold ring up his arm. Loki, a cra y one himself, no ced this
and demanded the ring as well. The dwarf went along with it, but cursed the ring to bring misfortune on
its possessor. Once Loki returned, they filled and covered the o er-skin with gold. Odin liked the ring and
took it for himself in the process of payment, but O er’s father no ced that a whisker was not yet
covered, and so Odin covered it with the ring. A er this, the debt was considered fulfilled, and the
farmer kept a cursed ring. If Odin had made excuses to keep the ring, he would have also inherited the
curse.37

Assigning nega ve proper es to this myth with respect to Loki seems strange, as this is a
situa on in which Loki accidentally creates a problem, and then solves the problem largely of his own
voli on. A cri cism of Loki is o en that his livelihood is threatened before he solves a problem. This too
is a situa on in which it is life or death for Loki, but the threat is not only on him, but on others as well.
Loki takes responsibility for an ac on that uninten onally created a problem, and comes up with the
solu on. One could easily argue that his solu on was not exactly ethical, considering that he imprisoned
and ransomed the wealth of a dwarf. This would be a reasonable cri cism, but Loki would hardly be an
excep on among the Gods for this kind of deed.

Sif’s Bad Hair Day

Unfortunately, the only legend in which Sif plays a major part is a legend in which she is
subjected to a prac cal joke from Loki. Sif was known for her long, beau ful hair. Loki, in a prank that
would only be considered appropriate by certain prankster Youtubers, decides to shave her head. Thor,
not a fan of the “it’s a prank bro” jus fica on, threatened to break every bone in Loki’s body unless he
swore to fix the issue. Loki’s solu on in order to make things right is to commission the dwarves Brokk
and Eitri to create a head of hair for Sif. They did so. Problem solved.

37
Snorri Sturluson, Faulkes, Edda, 99-100.

13
 The dwarven brothers also created the ship Skidbladnir, and the spear Gungnir. Loki decided to
take this whole situa on a bit further and bet the dwarves his head that they could not make three more
items as amazing as these. The dwarves set about with the a empt to outdo themselves, and Loki
harassed them a bit in an a empt to win the wager. He u lized his power as a shapeshi er to bite one of
the dwarves as a fly while he was working the bellows. Out of this round came Mjolnir, Gullinburs , and
Draupnir. The golden hair for Sif would indeed be a solu on to the prank gone wrong. The dwarven
crea on gra ed onto her scalp and would con nue to grow as gold from her head. Ul mately, when the
other items were presented to the Gods, Mjolnir, which was from the second round of crea ons, was
deemed the best of the gi s.

This resulted in Loki losing the bet, but when the dwarves decided to make good on their wager,
Loki added the s pula on that they had to catch him. Thor handled this part and brought Loki back to
the dwarves. Loki said they could have his head and not his neck, ensuring that it would remain a ached
to his body. The dwarves then decided to sew Loki’s mouth shut instead. Another solu on would have
been to cut off his head at the jaw, but that’s not how the story goes.38

The assignment of nega vity to Loki here is somewhat understandable. Certainly, the prank on
Sif is inappropriate. But, it is hard not to recognize that Sif and the other Gods comes out ahead in this
legend. This is another case where Loki creates a problem but then solves the problem. In this case, Loki
creates a solu on simply by making a request. The situa on only gets complicated when he bets his
head that the dwarves cannot outdo themselves. Loki is guilty of making a bad bet and then ge ng held
to account by Thor. It is also worth poin ng out that this is the legend in which we find the origina on of
Mjolnir. So, the very existence of Thor’s famous hammer is owed to Loki.

Curious Apples and Shi ing Nuts: The Kidnapping of Idunn

This myth starts with Odin, Hoenir, and Loki out on a journey together. They find a valley of oxen,
kill one, and proceed to cook the animal. They find, however, that the ox refuses to actually cook. An
eagle si ng above claims responsibility for this anomaly and says that if he gets his fill of the ox, then
he’ll allow the oven to work. The three Gods agree to this and allow the eagle to have its fill. The eagle
immediately takes two hams and both shoulders of the ox. Loki doesn’t appreciate this and hits the
eagle with a pole.

Even though the eagle was promised to eat his fill, it seems that he takes all the best parts in the
process. This is something that Loki may have seen as an abuse of the deal. Interes ngly, smacking the
eagle doesn’t actually violate the oath, as the eagle s ll ate his fill. Loki demonstrates throughout the
myths that he is a deity who appreciates the specificity of oaths and deals, be that when he makes them
or when they are made with him. Even s ll, this is where Loki creates a problem that he has to figure out
how to solve.

The eagle decides to fly off, taking the pole and Loki with him. The eagle made Loki’s me in the
air very inconvenient, banging him into stones and dragging him through trees. Loki offered a truce to
the eagle where they could work out a deal. The eagle agreed that he would stop if Loki would lure
Idunn out from the protec ve walls of Asgard with her apples. Loki is forced to agree and delivers on his

38
Ibid, 96-97.

14
promise, luring Idunn out with descrip ons of interes ng apples that she would probably think are
worth having. He says that she should bring her apples for comparison, and she excitedly goes with him
on this adventure. She was likely rather upset when instead she was met with the Jotun, Thjazi, the true
iden ty of the eagle. Thjazi would then snatch Idunn away to his home.

Unfortunately, Idunn’s absence meant that the Gods lost their agelessness and began to grow
old (what this means for Odin’s depic on as an older man is unknown). The Gods held Loki to account
and the Gods threatened him with death and torture if he did not fix the situa on, and so Loki (deep
breath) figured out a solu on. He asked to borrow Freyja’s falcon form and went to fetch Idunn. He
found her alone, chillin, in Thjazi’s abode. Thjazi was out on a boat, so the ming was good. Loki turned
Idunn into a nut and brought her home. Thjazi returned home and was most displeased with the fact
that Idunn was missing and chased Loki in his eagle form.

The Gods saw Loki’s precarious situa on and sprang to ac on, construc ng a pyre. Loki
an cipated the solu on and used his superior mobility as a falcon to fly close to the fire and dodge at
the last moment. Thjazi’s eagle form was unable to avoid the flames, and his wings caught fire. This
resulted in Thjazi crashing into Asgard in flame and glory. The Aesir nearby would kill Thjazi, and thus
Loki solved the problem he created.

Shortly therea er, however, a new problem arose from this drama, as Thjazi’s daughter, Skadi,
arrived in full armor seeking revenge. The Gods decided to fix this problem by promising Skadi a husband
among the Gods, but she had to choose her husband by the appearance of their feet. For whatever
reason, Skadi accepts this proposi on and picks the best damn feet she can find, which happen to be
Njordr, rather than Baldr like she had hoped. Skadi’s terms also included that the Gods had to make her
laugh. The solu on for this was le to none other than Loki, who strapped his tes cles to a goat and
struggled to get away, both he and the goat made quite a bit of hilarious noises in the process. A er a
few moments of this, Loki flopped into Skadi’s lap, causing her to laugh. Finally, Odin put Thjazi’s eyes
into the sky as stars in compensa on.39

This is a situa on in which Loki created a problem that compounded on itself. Idunn’s absence
created a problem beyond the peril of only Idunn. A er he is held to account, Loki enlists favors from the
Gods in order to create a solu on and is then instrumental in bringing about the solu on. We also see
another example of Loki’s shapeshi ing abili es working on others around him. The same powers of
shapeshi ing used on Idunn to turn her into a nut may have been used on Thor in the bridal disguise
situa on. Further, he aids in the solu on of secondary problems created by his ac ons as well. Because
of Loki, Skadi joins the Gods. Though she, perhaps reasonably, held on to a grudge, as she is the one who
places the venomous snake over Loki’s head in both the Lokasenna and Snorri’s Edda.

A consistent theme throughout these myths is Loki’s respect for his word. Loki makes promises
and then delivers on them. He likewise holds others to their word with him. Others seem to be aware of
this aspect about him and take advantage of it. Thjazi, Gerriod, and others who force Loki into
unfortunate situa ons by forcing him to make a promise are exploi ng loyalty to his word, and crea ng
situa ons in which they can extract promises out of him. The ending of the Lokasenna is arguably the
Gods breaking a promise to Loki in which Odin grants him permission to speak his words of blame.
Though a er Loki delivers on his end, the Gods are upset, and violate their oath by punishing him. Loki, a

39
Ibid, 59-61.

15
deity who takes his word seriously, would no doubt be offended by this, which may explain his place in
Ragnarok.

Is Loki the Devil?

Loki, and indeed Lokeans, will some mes receive within the Heathen community a response
that is similar to that of Satan and Satanists among Chris ans, though the dynamic is much different.
Lokeans, for one, believe in the existence of Loki and worship him as an external force, whereas Satanists
are largely atheis c and do not share this view of Satan, instead viewing him as an avatar for the
rebellious self and individual freedoms. A similarity in the dynamic is that both seem to have been
adopted to represent social fringes, and the aid of a confidence within those social fringes in response to
oppressive a tudes of the majority. An interes ng difference is that Lokeans are s ll Heathens, whereas
Satanists would not consider themselves Chris ans.

Parallels s ll exist between Loki and Satan that are undeniable. Both are rebels who fight against
their former allies at the end of the world, both are fe ered un l the end of the world, both have
tradi ons of fathering monsters, both are depicted as residing in a sort of hell. What are to be made of
these commonali es? Some take these similari es to mean that we should view Loki as a Norse Satan,
an evil force that is to be avoided.

This similarity is substan ally explored in Anna Birgi a Rooth’s Loki in Scandinavian Mythology in
her search for an authen c Loki. While her conclusion of Loki as a spider deity never took hold within
academia, some of her observa ons regarding the evolu on of the character of Loki are worth further
discussion, especially within the context of the view of Loki in modern worship. It seems likely that Loki is
a major vic m of the Chris aniza on process of Norse Myth. The parallels between Loki and the devil
may be inherited aspects of his character rather than authen c to a pagan image of Loki.

The most direct evidence of the Chris aniza on process of Loki, according to Rooth, is
represented in Saxo’s narra ve regarding Thorkil and the bound Utgarda-Loki. Whether or not Saxo
meant to represent Loki or Utgarda-Loki is unknown; however, the placement of the Lokean bound
figure in a Hellish landscape cannot be overlooked. Saxo’s Chris an agenda of demonizing the Gods may
have taken effect here, impor ng the fe ered devil from Revela on40 and placing him within the
narra ve of a king and his misplaced worship of a horror. Thorkil converts to Chris anity upon seeing for
himself the true nature of pagan worship, whereas the pagan king dies, and is presumably sent to Hell
for his worship of the devil known as Utgarda-Loki.41 In fact, strangely, this argument is some mes
replicated by modern Heathens as evidence against Loki worship.

This isn’t the first me in his text that Saxo demonizes the Gods. He spends a significant amount
of me in the first book of his narra ve discussing how the Gods are actually just wizards and that
ancient peoples, including the Romans, were fools for having worshipped such en es.42 He takes

40
Revela on 20:1-3 NRSV.
41
Rooth, Loki in Scandinavian Mythology, 81-82.
42
Saxo Gramma cus, Fisher, Davidson, Saxo Gramma cus : The History of the Danes : Books I-IX, “Book I”, 19-20,
25, 26 are quick examples of Saxo se ng the tone regarding his perspec ve on pagan worship. For Saxo, all pagan
worship is folly, not just that of Utgarda-Loki.
16
several opportuni es to demonize the Gods, framing them in the worst light possible: Thor is a brute and
a henchman of the Gods; Odin is an amoral deviant; Frigg is en tled, promiscuous, and disloyal; and
Baldr is arrogant and jealous. If modern Heathens are to rest their case for the nega ve aspects of Loki
worship on the commentary of Saxo Gramma cus, it seems to be an argument so overtly in bad faith
that it can be dismissed out of hand.

For Saxo, there was no permissible pagan worship. All of it was folly or gullibility resul ng from
manipula ve wizard-men. The reason why the worship of Utgarda-Loki is presented as a folly is because
it’s pagan, not because it’s Utgarda-Loki, or regular inner world Loki for that ma er. Those u lizing Saxo’s
story here as an argument against Loki worship would be missing that Saxo is contras ng it with the
newfound Chris an faith of Thorkil, who is meant to be presented as an early Chris an in Heathen lands
revealing the haun ng reality of pagan worship, even though their prayers may be answered. The story is
ul mately Chris an propaganda, and reveals li le, if anything, about the nature of Loki himself.

In fact, the concep on of the bound figure may itself be a point of Chris an influence. The same
passage in Revela on raises ques ons about the binding of Fenrir. Snorri’s story of the binding of Fenrir,
while referenced in the Lokasenna, seems to be a late development and may not be authen c as a pagan
myth. Rudolf Simek states in his Dic onary of Northern Mythology that while the sword in Fenrir’s
mouth seems to be from older sources, it appears that Snorri took a myth of Tyr losing his hand and
combined it with another myth or folktale in order to make the binding of Fenrir.43 As already
men oned, the Hakonarmal44 and Eiriksmal each reference an unfe ered Fenrir. The Eiriksmal,
especially, suggests that the wolf is wai ng for an opportunity to a ack at any moment. It’s possible that
these binding legends may all be ar facts of Chris aniza on. This Chris aniza on process seems to have,
consciously or unconsciously, selected certain en es for extreme demoniza on and put them through
stories to create parallels with the Chris an Satan.

Rooth’s notes in her search for an authen c pagan Loki that this dynamic may have
overwhelmingly affected Loki. She traces aspects of the evil Loki to foreign influences— many of which
Chris an— including the concep on of Loki as the father of monsters, which she associates with the
medieval concepts of the Sons of Cain, or the cursed offspring of fallen angels.45 Even the mistletoe
narra ve for the death of Baldr may be inauthen c, as Rooth points to the Irish Myth of the death of
Fergus as a likely influence, no ng overwhelming similari es in the story beats including the poin ng of
a blind figure toward the target with a branch of sacred type of tree sharpened into a spear to kill a
foster-brother through decep on.46 This creates further ques ons beyond the absence of Loki in Saxo’s
narra ve. Another issue is that the mistletoe itself may be a misunderstanding, and instead reference
the name of a sword.

Both Turville-Petre and Rooth comment on the Chris anized aspects of the Voluspa and the
Ragnarok legend generally. Beyond Turville-Petre’s men on of the stars falling from the sky and moral
decline as part of Chris an influence, Rooth details the release of Fenrir and Loki through the fe ered
monster trope, the sounding of Gjallarhorn, the arrival of Muspel’s sons, the destruc on of the world by

43
Simek, Dic onary of Northern Mythology, 80.
44
Snorri Sturluson, Hollander, Heimskringla, 127.
45
Rooth, Loki in Scandinavian Mythology, 162-175.
46
Ibid, 110-114.
17
fire, and, finally, the arrival of a godhead who rules in eternal peace.47 This further suggests that while
there may have been a story or series of stories that later inspired the itera on of the Ragnarok myth
currently in our possession, this preserved version of the story seems to have been significantly altered
through Chris aniza on. The Hakonarmal and Eiriksmal suggest a safe associa on with Fenrir and some
kind of social collapse, but this may not be a world-ending collapse. Conclusions about both Fenrir and
Loki from the Ragnarok legend have to be significantly tempered in light of the high likelihood that the
myth is largely a synthesis created through Chris aniza on.

Rooth’s work is not without cri cism. Her approach at mes seems relentless in stripping away
aspects of Loki preserved by storytelling, leaving us with very li le to work with. In fact, her process
takes what seems to be a highly complex deity and eliminates his complexity as foreign influence,
concluding therefore that that Loki is a ‘spinner’ deity associated with spiders.48 While Loki may or may
not be historically associated with spiders, this leaves us with a pile of unanswered ques ons as to how
or why Loki a ained all these complex a ributes. The quest for an ‘authen c’ Loki may have a
combina on of problems at its founda on. Even if we can paint nega ve aspects of Loki as ar facts of
foreign influence, it is s ll reasonable to note that there may have been an underlying reason that Loki
was the target of such influence.

This also raises the frustra ng ques on of what an ‘authen c’ Loki even is in the first place. Even
modern Heathens will be obsessed with the idea of separa ng out the ‘Pagan’ version of the stories from
the ‘Chris an’ version. The unfortunate reality is that Chris aniza on of these legends was likely very
slow, and took place over the course of centuries, and may have even predated the Vikings. Is the Viking
Age Loki one that could be considered authen c? The Loki of that me period may have already been
significantly affected by Chris an influence. Interac on between Germanic cultures and Chris ans goes
back several centuries, and the transmission of ideas between them with subtle and uninten onal
influences is en rely possible. One idea of the origin of the ill-natured Loki goes back to legends
Prometheus and the bound giants of the Caucasus with the sugges on that the Goths were the
intermediary of this evolu on during the Migra on Period. A er this interac on, the belief of the bound
ill-natured Loki would eventually get absorbed into Old Norse Tradi on.49 This would mean that an
‘authen c’ ‘pagan’ Loki might be a Pre-Migra on understanding of the deity, making the pursuit of an
authen c Loki with any significant detail a needlessly frustra ng fool’s errand.

Turville-Petre notes that the theory of the Gothic connec on might be too complicated to be
acceptable, and that it seems more likely that Loki simply inherited the ‘fe ered devil’ trope from
Chris anity. This may have, in part, been inspired as a reflec on of the Christ-like quali es put onto
Baldr, who also seems to have been affected greatly by Chris aniza on. In this case, the Icelanders
would have made the connec on with earthquakes independently from the Caucasus.50 This would
seem to be a more readily believable narra ve, and, fortunately, a hopeful one for those seeking a Pre-
Chris an Loki. However, the Pre-Chris an Loki may s ll be a fool’s errand, as the manuscripts containing
legends of Loki were recorded centuries a er Iceland’s ban on public Heathen prac ce.

47
Ibid, 85.
48
Schjodt, The Pre-Chris an Religions of the North: Volume III, “Loki”, 1268 contains a short discussion of Rooth’s
work along with that of several other scholars.
49
Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion of the North, 145.
50
Ibid, 145.
18
 The process of demoniza on between Snorri and Saxo may have had subtly different
inspira ons. The fe ered devil trope seems to have the same origina on from Satan and his binding un l
the ba le in Revela on. The influence of Irish storytelling on Icelandic lore may explain the difference in
the context surrounding Saxo’s fe ered Loki and Snorri’s fe ered Loki. The Icelandic tradi on of
storytelling may owe much to the significant presence of the Irish wives and slaves among the Viking Age
Icelanders.51 This would give explana on to the apparent Irish influence on par cularly nega ve stories
of Loki such as the death of Baldr. Ireland had, at the me, been significantly Chris anized, which may
have contributed further to the demoniza on of Loki, AND seems to have taken a slightly different flavor
than Saxo’s narra ve. Saxo’s fe ered Utgarda-Loki is a direct demoniza on, subs tu ng the devil for
Utgarda-Loki in a Hellish landscape. Snorri’s fe ered Loki is punished for ac ons that appear influenced
by Irish legend, resul ng in a more subtle demoniza on.

This demoniza on is par cularly present in other, later, folklore of Loki. Saxo and Snorri seem to
depict one stage of the demoniza on of Loki that became more extreme over me. Some later stories of
Loki give mo va ons to him that bear resemblance to Lucifer or Beelzebub, and might place him as a
servant of Odin that does his bidding rather than as an equal. This seems to show both that Loki’s name
was widely known and remembered, but also that his character was likely ripe for demoniza on.52
Earlier images of Loki, however, seem to present a kinder character. Among the oldest surviving skaldic
poems, we see preserved kennings for Loki such as Raven-God’s (Odin’s) friend, Hoenir’s gracious friend,
and Thor’s confidant.53 Rudolf Simek notes that these kennings, taken from Haustlong, may point to a
more posi ve role for Loki in earlier myth.54 This role, may have been that of Lodurr, who is one of the
creators of humanity and possibly one of the creators of Midgard.

The likely truth to the historical reality of Loki’s representa on in myth is a mul plicity of
tradi ons and images around him across various cultures, kingdoms, and even towns. These images of
Loki likely also had variety throughout me. What we have today is a snapshot of a mangled image of
Loki through mul ple Chris anized lenses. This has resulted in several academic images of Loki ranging
from a spider deity, to mountain dwarf, to trickster, and so on. Given this mul plicity in images of Loki in
academia, it stands to reason that there should be a mul plicity of Loki images in modern prac ce.
However, one that casts him as the devil or some sort of evil force is probably the least likely of these
images. This means there is simply no value or jus fica on to crea ng a dynamic in Heathen
communi es that forbids the worship of Loki or shames anyone who engages with this deity.

Reconstruc ng and Reviving Loki

Modern Heathens are typically rooted in some varia on of Reconstruc onism, which is,
basically, that as polytheists, we seek to reconstruct or rebuild an ancient tradi on. The primary
mo va on of this is to emulate the spiritual connec on of our ancestors with the Gods in order to
recreate that same spiritual connec on for ourselves. Therefore, history is of primary importance to the
modern Heathen. The scant evidence we have of prac ces is a plague upon Heathenry, as we o en find

51
Richards, Vikings: A Very Short Introduc on, 100.
52
Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion of the North, 145.
53
Waggoner, Our Troth: Volume 2: Heathen Gods, 352 discusses this, and points to Simek’s research.
54
Simek, Dic onary of Northern Mythology, 315.
19
ourselves a emp ng to reconstruct prac ces off of vague descrip ons made by Chris ans wri ng
some mes hundreds of years a er the events they describe. In spite of this, Heathens endeavor to learn
as much as we can about our past in order to bring this ancient faith back to life in a modern
reconstruc on. This aspect of Heathenry feeds into a cornerstone of the Loki debate, which is the
ques on of a historical cult of Loki.

Whether or not there is evidence of a historical cultus for Loki is a controversial subject. It is
common to find scholars who point out that there is no such evidence.55 The reasons given range from a
lack of placenames to the controversial character of Loki himself lending to that of one who is not
worshiped, with comparisons being made, interes ngly, to Satan. This comparison is different than one
above to Satanism, however. In this case, the point is made that Chris ans believe the devil is real, and
that there is much Chris an iconography referencing the devil. This does not reveal that Chris ans
worship the devil. Only that he holds an important func on within the faith’s mythological storytelling.56
Indeed, scholars of Norse Myth do agree that Loki was, in fact, important. The nature of that
importance, however, is debated. Perhaps he was a drama c figure, whose place in ritual was limited to
mythic storytelling.57

Among the more ridiculous reasons to hold that Loki was not worshipped among the Norse is
the lack of legends in which he engages with humanity. If this standard is to be applied, then the Norse
worshipped very few dei es. Further, it’s not even true if one holds that Saxo’s Utgarda-Loki was, in fact,
Loki, as this en ty answers King Gorm’s prayers. This process seems akin to shoo ng oneself in the foot
given the fact that there exists such a limita on on wri en records associated with the Gods and that
those wri en records seem to have significant elements of Chris aniza on. Considering this, we should
be amazed that we have any legends of the Gods interac ng with humans. Such as it is, we have a
handful of stories of interac ons with the Gods, but not many, and they’re not always posi ve. The Saga
of King Hrolf Kraki contains an interac on with Odin which has an overall posi ve effect on the story,
but, within the narra ve itself, Odin is dismissed as an evil spirit.58 Imagine if this had been one of the
few surviving myths of Odin— we might have modern Heathens discussing the “demonic Odin” who
some mes grants victory but is likely an evil spirit given Hrolf Kraki’s cau on in actually accep ng his
gi s.

Any material ar facts that could be archeological evidence of a Loki cultus are inconclusive and
could conceivably be assigned to the venera on of other mythic characters, or are merely a depic on of
Loki in a fashion that does not lend to venera on. Unfortunately, the ar facts we find in the dirt do not
magically inform us of their historical use. Loki is depicted in the iconography Ulf Uggason references in

55
Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion of the North, 126 is but one example of a respectable scholar saying without
ambiguity that Loki was likely never worshipped nor was there a Loki cultus.
56
Schjodt, The Pre-Chris an Religions of the North, “Loki”, 1263-1264 is a recent work that gives a summary of
reasons for the belief that Loki had no religious cultus.
57
Grundy, God in Flames, 33.
58
Byock, The Saga of King Hrolf Kraki, 56-58 describes the first mee ng with Odin in which he offers advice that
grants King Hrolf victory against the evil Freyr worshipping King Adils. 68-69 describes Odin offering King Hrolf
weapons, but the king refuses. Odin’s temper flares as the king had offended him. The king’s party leaves, but
realizes it was probably Odin and returns. They find that Odin has disappeared. King Hrolf concludes that Odin was 20
an evil spirit. The Chris an scribe decided not to depict King Hrolf accep ng weapons from demonized Odin, even
though earlier the Alfather had granted advice that had allowed King Hrolf victory. Subtle demoniza on enters
even the narra ves that might be used as evidence to support a celebrated cultus.
the Hausdrapa, and yet this is not u lized as evidence for a Loki cultus. There is widespread late folklore
and folk prac ces of Loki as a spirit associated with fire, nets, knots, and spiders,59 and yet for whatever
reason this is not evidence of Loki worship. Even direct wri en records of someone worshipping what
might have been Loki are, for whatever reason, considered dismissible. Saxo Gramma cus’ King Gorm is
referenced as making offering to the bound Utgarda-Loki, with results, and yet there is no evidence for a
Loki cultus. Gorm does not seem to be worshipping Loki unless one is making the argument against Loki
worship. One may have ques ons as to whether this claim of a lack of evidence is actually the result of a
lack of evidence or the result of some bias giving an overwhelming cau on against the conclusion of a
Loki cultus.

History, however, is fickle, and the limita ons we have when observing the past can reasonably
give us pause when it comes to making a defini ve statement to the existence of a Loki cultus. There
does seem to be significant evidence of Loki worship. But that evidence is inconclusive and difficult to
interpret. This is why there can be that reasonable pause in saying whether or not there was a Loki
cultus. However, this dynamic goes in both direc ons. History can be hypothesized in mul ple ways, that
of a history without a Loki cultus, and that with a Loki cultus. Taking a lack of placenames and ar facts as
defini ve that no such cultus existed is to eliminate several dei es unjus fiably from historical worship.
Further, this does not seem to be reasonable jus fica on to shame or even dismiss the modern worship
of such dei es. Sif, the wife of Thor, is a deity for which we have no evidence of a historical cultus, and
yet modern heathens worship her and give offering to her. This prac ce among Heathens is hardly
controversial. The same can be said of Hel, Baldr, Sol, and many others among the Gods. For these
dei es, we might say that what is not yet found cannot yet be discussed, but that this cannot impede our
spirituality. We may then provisionally discuss what a historical cultus may have involved, and work to
reconstruct it for our modern prac ce. The same must be said for Loki.

The likely reality of any historical venera on of Loki is, as previously discussed regarding Loki and
myth, a varia on across me and place. This is not unique to Loki; in fact, this is what we seem to see
with every other deity. Through placename evidence, we see unequal distribu ons of Tyr, Odin, Njordr,
Ullr, and Freyr, all of which seem to have been worshipped as localized high Gods. This varia on in
localized status was likely coupled with varia on of localized myth and tradi ons. Loki doesn’t seem to
have been a candidate for a localized high God, but he does seem to have varia on when it comes to
locality and me period where he may have been worshipped, or at least existed as a part of legend.
Several factors may affect one’s view of that distribu on across me and place. As men oned, later
folklore and folk prac ces contain a variety of implica ons about the complicated nature of Loki. These
prac ces are widely distributed and suggest an enduring presence of Loki. Whether or not one accepts
the connec on between Loki, Lodurr, and either Vili or Ve might affect their view on the nature of Loki
and which ar facts may pertain to him. Perhaps Loki did have some venera on as a deity associated with
crea on mankind and/or Midgard. The character of Loki, too, may have had significant varia on. As
referenced above, the earlier itera on of Loki may have been a more posi ve expression of a deity than
the one we have portreyed within available records. The difficulty of pu ng together one coherent or
consistent image of Loki with the available informa on may be because there is no single coherent
image of Loki across history. There likely should be li le surprise in the shapeshi ing Loki possessing
such an interes ng variety of faces.

59
Heide, Loki, the Va e, and the Ash Lad: A Study Combining Old Scandinavian and Late Material, 71-72, 91.

21
 A major argument against the existence of a historical Loki cultus extends beyond evidence of
folklore, folk prac ces, or historical references to worshippers. Instead, the argument rests on the
func on of religion in the first place, which is that it typically is upholding social norms. 60 Loki seems to
violate boundaries of social norms as an essen al aspect of his character. Therefore, the likelihood of an
organized cultus around Loki is unlikely. This argument, even to a Lokean, might be reasonably
agreeable. Even if an organized cultus is unlikely, however, it is en rely reasonable to posit individual
worship of Loki. Turville-Petre explains the lack of Odin placenames in Iceland with a rather convincing
argument that Icelanders disliked the worship of Odin due to his associa on with the throne of Norway.
In spite of this, there are famous Icelandic heroes such as Egil Skallagrimsson and Viga-Glum who are
described as worshippers of Odin.61 Just because there were no placenames or temples does not mean
that there were no worshippers. Just because the worship of a par cular deity did not support the local
social order does not therefore conclude that there were no worshippers.

In modern applica on, the fact that a deity seemed to violate a social order of medieval Iceland
does not therefore mean that worshippers today should not worship that deity. The Heathen community
would likely dismiss the argument that a Heathen reconstruc ng an Icelandic prac ce should therefore
not worship Odin due to the lack of placenames and the likelihood that Icelanders did not have an
organized cultus around Odin. Such an argument would be seen as ridiculous. Modern Heathens are not
prac cing in Viking Age Iceland; we are prac cing today in our present locali es. The poli cal forces that
influenced Viking Age Icelanders to avoid Odin do not have the same bearing on Modern Heathens.
There are, however, other poli cal forces that might influence us to give Loki a second look, which will
be expanded upon in the next sec on. If there was, ul mately, a historical prac ce related to Loki, it
likely looked very much like the prac ce of Viga-Glum or Egil Skallagrimsson toward Odin. Loki worship, if
it existed, would likely be a personal pursuit and an excep on to a family or social order, and may have
been part of the spirituality of those who filled a similar social space within their society as Loki among
the Gods. These would be people who violated social norms, and perhaps lived on the fringes of society,
perhaps even separate from it. Interes ngly, this seems to have found a reflec on among modern
Lokeans.

We seem to regularly find that ancient peoples were far more religious than we typically
imagine. The excava on of Pompeii had an evolu on of the realiza on of importance of certain finds.
Ini ally, what were later discovered to be shrines to the Lares (Roman house Gods / Spirits) were largely
ignored, and le to the open air to be ransacked by the climate. This was due to a lack of realiza on of or
interest in their importance to understanding the Roman religious past. Further examina on of this
evidence has given to the realiza on that religious prac ce encompassed nearly every aspect of Roman
life.62 The case of ancient Heathens is likely similar. Many of the ar facts that we have of Heathen culture
contain some aspect of spirituality. This comes in the form of what are likely images of the Gods from
myths, to animis c references to land-spirits or perhaps animal guardians of some kind. The everyday
life of Heathens, like the Romans, was likely permeated by the Gods and local spirits. Though some idols
of the Gods have survived the weathering of me and are miraculously in our possession, many idols,
especially related to personal prac ce, are likely lost to me. Any personal idols or objects of worship
made out of wood have likely decayed. Due to the fact that wood is a par cularly accessible and easily

60
Waggoner, Our Troth: Volume 2: Heathen Gods, 364.
61
Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion of the North, 64-70.
62
Flower, The Dancing Lares & the Serpent in the Garden, 145.
22
manipulated material, it is the most likely candidate for icons of household or personal worship,
therefore representa ons of such spirituality are unlikely to be found. Even if they were found, they
would be subject to the same difficul es of interpreta on as other ar facts, par cularly those related to
Loki.

This means that if historical venera on of Loki largely took the form of personal or maybe
household prac ce, there would be low expecta ons of finding evidence to support it. Frustra ngly, this
means that any theory of a historical personalized prac ce related to Loki may be impossible to ever
confirm. However, in the interests of the modern Reconstruc onist Heathen, the coherence of this idea
becomes par cularly interes ng. Because it offers a route of imagining what a possible historical Loki
prac ce may have looked like, what a possible historical Lokean might have been like, and what
direc ons could be taken in reconstruc ng, reviving, or even crea ng such a prac ce today. This is where
(as is usually the case) the crea vity of the modern prac oner comes into play. Most of today’s
Heathenry is rooted in the imagina on of the modern prac oners. Heathens holding some standard of
requiring prac oners to historically jus fy every aspect or even most aspects of their prac ce by
demonstra ng its likely historicity would mean the end of our modern prac ce. Heathen blots, even
performed by the most stringent of Reconstruc onists, involve significant imagina on. Thus, the
reconstruc on, or be er, the revival of a Lokean spirituality, is le to the modern prac oners to explore
and define.

Imagina on and the Revival of Loki within the Heathen Community

The revival of Loki in modern prac ce may be the step Heathenry needs to achieve escape
velocity from certain toxic aspects of Reconstruc onism. Much of the focus within the overall Loki
debate in Heathenry comes down to whether or not venera on of Loki is a historical behavior.
Ul mately, for the modern prac ce of Heathenry, this doesn’t ma er. Firstly, as we can see, the fact of
the ma er as to whether or not there were historical prac ces related to Loki is unclear, and cannot be
se led with any real sa sfac on. Secondly, even if no such historical prac ce existed, modern prac ces
venera ng Loki do, in fact, exist. Heathenry is, at the end of the day, defined by the prac ces of modern
Heathens, therefore Lokean tradi ons and prac ces are part of Heathenry.

Central to the conflict between Nokeans and Lokeans seems to be a percep on of legi macy.
Reconstruc onist Heathens tend to root this legi macy in a percep on of historical veracity, be it real or
imagined. O en this percep on of a historical Heathenry has to do more with the individual’s
perspec ve on history than any effort toward examining history in good faith. In fact, the individual’s
percep on of history may outweigh any argument or historical evidence against that percep on. This is
actually quite normal and has been especially the case for the Vikings over the past few centuries, as
history has enjoyed mul ple cultural visions of the Vikings. Among them, roman c images of the
primi ve precursors to modern great civiliza ons, inspiring images of na onalism. At the same me, in
England, the Vikings would be painted as the barbaric other when compared to the more civilized Anglo-
Saxons. Later, the Nazis would adopt a more sinister version of the Vikings, seeing them as the Nazi’s
racial forebears and the early medieval example of the master race. This fic on mixed with Norse
mythology, Wagner, and German peasant culture became the Nazi image of Aryan culture. This
corrupted image of the Vikings and Norse myth con nues today to influence neo-Nazis and Folkish

23
subsec ons of Heathenry.63 Each of these images were based on a perspec ve of history that resonated
with each group. Conveniently, the image that resonates with one’s own roman c narra ves and poli cal
desires is the one they considered most likely to be true.

Confirma on bias is a hell of a drug, and Heathenry is steeped in it with respect to a range of
subjects, such as Loki venera on, kneeling in prayer, prayer in and of itself as a concept, and even
whether or not ancient Heathens saw the Gods as Gods at all, much less having any prac ce related to
them. A significant sec on of Heathenry seems to view the Gods atheis cally, and believe for whatever
reason that this is the historical nature of the religion. For many of these people, their perspec ve is set
in stone, and no amount of nuance, historical evidence, or discussion of how to look at history will shi
their view. Modern Heathens may view the Gods atheis cally, they may not kneel during prayer, they
may not pray at all, and they may believe for whatever reason that a prac ce with Loki is a bad thing to
do, but these are not views that can reasonably be enforced as norma ve in Heathenry through some
kind of historical dogma sm.

Nokean Heathens who rest their cri cism on their vision of historical truth seem to be of the
posi on that because a number of scholars claim that there is no historical evidence of a cultus centered
around Loki, that therefore a modern individualized prac ce— or worse, incorpora on of that prac ce
into a community se ng— is illegi mate. This aspect of the debate is captured in Jennifer Snook’s
American Heathens in which someone objects to Lokean tradi ons by saying that they are instead
rooted in a Neopagan view, rather than a Heathen one. The sen ment is that these are Neopagan beliefs
masquerading as Heathenry. This is expanded upon, saying about Lokeans that, “It is their demand to be
included in the Heathen fold, while insis ng that those Neopagan beliefs not be subjected to historical
evidence.”64 This is a common sen ment even in my own experience as a Heathen content creator and
community leader. The idea of modern UPG or SPG between Lokeans influencing modern Heathenry is
the creeping progress of Neopagan beliefs corrup ng Heathenry and turning it into a new age fluffy
bunny tradi on with li le or no regard for history is pervasive. Instead, the reality is that the tradi on is
influenced by imagina on. This threatens the “purity” of Heathenry as a reconstruc on of an ancient
tradi on emula ng the spiritual connec on of our ancestors with the Gods.

This purity, however, is an illusion. The very concept of a purity of reconstruc on seems to
suggest that we only access informa on about heathenry from historical references, which is obviously
not true. Heathenry is a prac ce reconstructed in large part out of modern imagina on. Blots and rituals
prac ced by modern Heathens may have historical inspira on, but their content is largely a product of
modern imagina on. This is a necessary component of any serious effort toward reconstruc on,
especially considering how much the historical image of our tradi on is lost to me. A more accurate
representa on of Heathenry’s rela onship with history would be to say that Heathenry is a modern
tradi on heavily inspired by history. Different prac oners will find themselves influenced by that
inspira on in different ways. Some Heathens, like myself, find themselves immersed in books searching
for the best possible answers to historical ques ons about how our ancestors prac ced, while others
may find themselves exploring almost en rely by experimenta on through experience. Both of these

63
Richards, Vikings: A Very Short Introduc on, 117-133 contains a thorough examina on of o en ahistorical
influences of the Vikings on culture through the recent centuries.
64
Snook, American Heathens, 76-77.
24
approaches are good approaches to Heathen spirituality, and any complete approach to Heathenry
involves a balance of both. Individual prac oners will find different balances to their liking.

Limi ng Heathenry to available historical sources seems to place an undue limita on on what
must be a living spiritual tradi on in order to have any spiritual value or contribu on to a prac oner.
There is a certain spirituality to historical research, and that research can enrich modern prac ce. Having
a ritual structure inspired by medieval leechbooks and poetry can certainly enhance the theatrical nature
of ritual and give it a historical vibe. This process, however, depends on input from the prac oner and
their imagina on. The natural extension of this process is new rituals built out of what the prac oner
has learned from this process, gradua ng from the training wheels of historical texts in to filling the gaps
le by what history has preserved. If the modern Heathen limits themselves to only prac cing that which
can be rooted primarily in history, the result will be an incomplete, stagnant prac ce. Instead of a living
tradi on, it is a corpse. The prac oner drags this corpse around and celebrates its ability to walk. At
some point this becomes a hindrance rather than a benefit. Modern imagina on is required for a living
tradi on to adapt and evolve. Any effort toward inclusive Heathenry has aspects of this dynamic built
into its structure. By selec ng which aspects of history are valuable to reconstruct and which are not,
Heathens engage in imagina on. Inclusive Heathens imagine a modern spirituality inspired by aspects of
history, but does not reconstruct everything from the past. Inclusive Heathens have opted not to
reconstruct the harmful social dynamics around ergi, or thralldom, to put forward two obvious examples.
This decision fundamentally changes— reimagines— the culture of the religion for a modern
understanding of morality, rather than the moral understanding of medieval raiders.

Commi ng to the stagna on of a prac ce rooted only in what can be historically demonstrated
is an image of Heathenry that lends itself more easily to atheism than polytheism. We would an expect
that someone engaging with the history of the Heathen world atheis cally might conclude that any
prac ce related to a modern venera on of these Gods should be restricted to the available verifiable
informa on from history. A polytheist, however, should be expected to see things a li le differently. If we
are to see the Gods as real and external to the prac oner, it should be obvious that modern prac ces
are going to be influenced by modern UPG, and especially modern SPG. This does not mean that all
instances of UPG or SPG are therefore legi mate. The Heathen community s ll takes part in evalua ng
prac ces and whether or not they are acceptable. A er reasonable analysis, prac oners and
communi es may adopt new tradi ons sourced from the ac ve community engaging with ac ve Gods.

History gives us the expecta on that this will happen, as tradi ons and beliefs of every religion
vary throughout me. Heathen spirituality has demonstrably varied through the centuries, as the
spirituality of the Migra on Period varies from the spirituality of the Viking Age. Varia on even existed
among the popula ons in these me periods. A good reconstruc on will have an understanding of and
an allowance for modern evolu on of prac ce and perspec ve. The moral evolu on that we see broadly
within inclusive Heathenry is an example of this. Even Folkish Heathens engage in an imagined
reconstruc on, only their version, by design, is one which reinforces their racist ideals. The imagina on
itself is not a good or a bad thing, it is simply a realis c part of bringing an ancient spirituality into the
modern world. What one does with this imagina on is important, and is the responsibility of the
prac oners.

Heathenry will vary into the future because it has never stagnated at any point in its existence.
The desire for a singular, unchanging tradi on in Heathenry seems to be related to the Chris an

25
background of our culture. Some of us seem to think that a religion should remain unchanging through
me. This, however, is never how Heathenry has func oned: not today, and not in its ancient past. Even
tradi ons such as Chris anity that desire not to change over me s ll manage to change over me.
Reconstruc onists will not be the excep on to history, and they should know be er.

A polytheis c explana on for this varia on across me would be that the Gods themselves are
dynamic. Clearly, this would be coupled with social varia on and the shi ing of what is important to
humanity, which has a significant part to play. Polytheists generally lack the belief that the Gods are
unchanging and instead hold that the Gods are ac ve with dynamic characters who are involved in the
world. Loki seems to be a primary example of this. His mixture of kennings implies a complex and
changeable set of rela onships with the Gods. The evolu on of a tudes toward Loki over the centuries,
from a polytheist perspec ve, would have to do with both the change in social a tude toward Loki as
well as the ac vity and change of Loki himself. Loki, the shapeshi er, seems to be the most adaptable of
the Gods, so it should be no surprise that a tudes toward him shi through me. As different issues
become more important to humanity, different Gods may become more relevant. Today, a myriad of
issues associated with Loki are heavily discussed and it should be no surprise that more people are
drawn to Loki, or that Loki is more ac ve.

As far as the social explana on, Carolyne Larrington explores some of these mo va ons in her
text The Norse Myths that Shape the Way We Think. She pinpoints the dawn of this shi in perspec ve
to the 1970s with the publica on of the novel Eight Days of Luke, which gives a sympathe c portrayal of
Loki as a troubled youth through the character of Luke. From there she describes a number of other
sympathe c representa ons, each of which depic ng Loki’s “ques ng intelligence, easy charm, sexual
a rac veness, and relaxed rela onship with ethical ques ons that turn him into a favorite an -hero.”65
Loki has also become a queer icon in recent decades, and his representa ons usually contain some
aspect of sexual and gender ambiguity, reflec ng his representa on in myth.66 Marvel’s Loki within
Marvel’s cinema c universe seems to be a go-to representa on u lized by Nokeans to discredit Lokeans.
And yet, this itera on of Loki reflects the same complexity as other representa ons, lending to the
fanfare around the character. All in all, Marvel’s cinema c representa on of Loki’s character is not far
from myth. There are a few obvious revisions, such as the framing of Loki as Thor’s brother and Odin’s
adopted son, but otherwise the character of a close companion of Thor with complex mo va ons does
not deviate far from myth. If anything, Marvel’s Loki may be far more prone to villainous behavior than
the Loki of myth. Larrington concludes that Loki is emblema c of the classic American Hero, “the
wisecracking lone wolf, who answers to no one and sets out to shape his own des ny – for good or ill.”67
This descrip on likely captures what Lokeans see in the deity central to their hearthcult.

The consistency in Loki’s representa on as a complex character in fic on, not totally hero nor
villain, brings to mind his complexity in myth. Any representa on of Loki in fic on as a pure villain would
be a disservice to the character and would likely be viewed as a fundamental misunderstanding of the
source material. Likewise, Heathens who frame Loki as the villain seem to have a misunderstanding of
the character, and fail to appreciate Loki’s complexity. As a result, Lokeans receive the blame for
Nokean’s seeming lack of ability to understand their own myths. Lokeans, in their apprecia on for a deity

65
Larrington, The Norse Myths that Shape the Way We Think, 142.
66
Ibid, 143-146.
67
Ibid, 152.
26
that may or may not have been worshipped in history, recognize mul ple aspects of the nature of
religion, spirituality, and Heathenry that seem to be missed by the Nokean camp: the Gods are real and
dynamic; religion changes over me, both now and throughout history; and that Loki is a complex
character for which any oversimplifica on is a disservice.

The acceptance of Lokeans within a Heathen community tends to indicate, at least with some
consistency, whether or not a Heathen group or organiza on is actually inclusive. In Ben Waggoner’s
preface to Stephan Grundy’s defense of Loki en tled God in Flames, God in Fe ers, Waggoner notes
several organiza ons and their respec ve a tudes on Loki worship within their communi es. The Asatru
Folk Assembly’s founder Stephen McNallen, does not permit horns to be raised to Loki in his presence.
The Circle of Ostara has a mixture of claims in their public statement on Loki and his “brood” that seem
to hit every note in the far-right conspiracy playbook, including represen ng Jormungandr as an
an semi c metaphor for interna onal finance. Theodism, a version of Anglo-Saxon Heathenry that
employs thralldom, believes that hailing Loki will bind the en re gathering in bad luck. Author Mark
Puryear of the folkish Norroena Society, represents Loki as an example of what he views as degeneracy,
saying that the Gods had to exile him for his harmful crimes of homosexuality and promiscuity.68

Men oned in the introduc on of this paper was Ben Waggoner’s ar cula on of three arguments
o en used by Nokeans in order to discredit Lokean tradi ons. These arguments are: (1) Loki is evil; (2)
Loki contributes to moral decay; and (3) Loki was never worshipped in history.69 As we can see, these
arguments are far more intertwined than separate. The idea of the evil Loki feeds into the concep on
that he contributes to moral decay, which provides a jus fica on for why he was never worshipped in
history. The further extrapola on of this argument would be that if Loki ever was worshipped in history,
especially in a personal cultus as described above, it was by people who consented to worshipping an
evil God, and/or were afflicted by moral decay. Therefore, it does not ma er whether or not Loki was
actually worshipped in history. What ma ers is that certain prac oners have a moral objec on to Loki
worship.

Looking closer at the idea that Loki contributes to moral decay, this concept seems to be the
conclusion of an argument assuming the evil Loki, which seems to be an oversimplifica on of myth. This
feeds into the concept that Loki was never worshipped in history, which is irrelevant on two fronts. The
first front is that even if Loki was worshipped in history, it would be assumed that these worshippers
were deviants and miscreants. This results in a circular argument that is only jus fied within itself. The
assump on of evil and the nature of moral decay create a vicious circle between each other. The
ul mate result is a ques on-begging circular argument with no real rela onship to modern worship.
Furthermore, modern Lokeans don’t seem to agree that Loki was evil, nor does this really bear out in the
evidence, so the premises to the argument are false anyway. The second front is that regardless of
whether or not Loki was worshipped in history, he is worshipped now, and this worship is a part of
modern Heathen culture. Modern Heathens simply have the op on of whether or not they accept this
fact and what they do with it. The accusa on of moral decay comes down to the reality that some
Heathens have a preference against behavioral trends present in Lokeans. So, what are these objec onal
behavioral trends?

68
Grundy, Waggoner, God in Flames, x-xii.
69
Ibid, ix.

27
 Snook’s American Heathens describes how the characteriza on of Lokeans over the years has
been reflec ve of conserva ve cri cisms of changing culture, especially in the United States. Lokeans are
characterized as “morally ambiguous, self-centered, and sexually deviant, an image parallel with that of
teenage delinquent up to no good.” This comparison would even extend to images of Goths in bondage
pants. Behavioral cri cisms of Lokeans would o en lean into Twilight references, the vampire series
popular with women and tweens in the early 2010s. This framing would feminize and infan lize Lokeans,
framing them as childish, whiney, and inauthen c. Lokeans, including men, would also be referred to as
“fangirls” of the deity. Given the significant crossover of queer Heathens and Loki venera on, the
mo va on of framing Lokeans as effeminate becomes clear. This strategy of feminizing, especially men,
as a mode of dismissal is and has been a common conserva ve tac c “since the 1970s to disparage
people, beliefs and behaviors” found to be a threat to established social roles.70 The moral decay in
ques on seems to be the fact that there are LGBTQ Heathens who exist at all. Func onally, the problem
with their existence is their femininity, the implica on being that femininity is a nega ve because it is
feminine. I would argue that the framing of this as “moral decay” is simply bigotry in the form of sexism
and queerphobia and nothing more.

Lea Svendsen in her text Loki and Sigyn gives a chronology of the Lokean controversy, poin ng
out that Nokean sen ments rose prominently in 1997, and seem primarily restricted to American
Heathenry. Several organiza ons, including the Northeast Heathen Community and the Troth, would
ins tute bans on Loki worship in order to keep the peace between rising fac ons in Heathenry.71 The
broader effect of this strategy seems to have been the placa on of queerphobia in Heathenry in the
hope that the issue would simply work itself out. Poli cal mo va ons within Heathenry generally do not
dissipate. They instead need to be met head on, as we have seen with the Folkism debate. Divisions may
take place as a result, but modern Heathenry has no need for bigotry.

Svendsen points out, with hope, that mes seem to be changing with more Heathen
organiza ons relaxing their previous a tudes on Loki. Bans have been generally li ed, especially among
inclusive Heathen groups and organiza ons. She writes, “We owe, in no small part, some of this progress
to the LGBTQ+ community. Pagans and new heathens who iden fied as trans or bi or otherwise queer
were drawn to Loki in growing numbers.”72 Now it can be argued (and it is true) that there are other
figures in Norse Myth who may be considered gender non-conforming on some level. Odin is an obvious
example. Njord and Skadi, too, are candidates. The fact is, however, that queer Heathens are drawn in
large part to Loki. A ban on discussion about or worship of this deity is, if nothing else, feeding into the
culture and efforts of queerphobia within Heathenry. Such a ban, therefore, has no place in an inclusive
organiza on.

Heathenry generally values applying lessons from the past to our modern experience. It follows
then that lessons from the recent past should be especially important. We should endeavor not to
repeat the mistakes of the last decade, much less the last millennia. A Heathen organiza on that has
banned the worship of Loki for the nominal reason that there was no historical cultus is massively
oversta ng their case and likely has some secondary agenda. Modern Heathenry is not simply about
reviving the religion of the ancient past as it was— as modern Heathens we have opted against

70
Snook, American Heathens, 74-75.
71
Svendsen, Loki and Sigyn, 65-66.
72
Ibid, 70.
28
thralldom, human sacrifice, and a myriad of other prac ces we now understand to be harmful. When we
consider as Heathens what to revive, bringing back pressures and mo va ons that would have
condemned a prac ce related to Loki seem unjus fied at best, and bigotry at worst. As inclusive
Heathens, it would seem reasonable that bigotries of the past should remain in the past.

This does not mean that every blot or event needs to involve Loki, nor does it mean that every
Heathen needs to include Loki in their hearthcult. Just as inclusivity of LGBTQ people does not mean that
every person needs to be LGBTQ, inclusivity of Lokeans does not therefore mean that every Heathen
must be a Lokean. Polytheists worship many Gods, but not every God is worshipped by every polytheist.
Heathen hearthcults rarely include every Heathen God. Some individuals will worship Loki, some may
not. Reasons may range from not feeling a connec on with Loki to simply not desiring a rela onship with
Loki. Lokeans themselves will o en put forward that Loki can be a challenging deity to worship, and
some may not wish to engage with such a God. Others may have no reason at all, and just do not feel
any need to explore a prac ce with Loki. The same can be said of the rela onships that Heathens have or
do not have with Odin, Thor, Hel, Freyja, or Ullr. Any inclusive Heathen organiza on or community should
be able to recognize the diversity of Heathens, and foster an inclusive environment that maximizes
tolerance. That community will include Heathens who worship many Gods, and it will include Heathens
who centralize Loki in their hearthcult: Heathens who are Lokean.

29
 Book Hoard

Byock, Jesse L, trans. The Saga of King Hrolf Kraki. Penguin Books, 1998.

Collazo, Bat. Blood Unbound. Edited by Bat Collazo. The Troth, 2021.

Flower, Harriet I. The Dancing Lares & the Serpent in the Garden : Religion at the Roman Street
Corner. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2017.

Grundy, Stephan, and Ben Waggoner. God in Flames, God in Fe ers: Loki’s Role in the Northern
Religions. The Troth, 2015.

Larrington, Carolyne, trans. Poe c Edda. Oxford University Press, 2014.

———. The Norse Myths That Shape the Way We Think. Thomas & Hudson Inc., 2023.

Richards, Julian D. The Vikings : A Very Short Introduc on. Oxford University Press, 2005.

Rooth, Anna Birgi a. Loki in Scandinavian Mythology. Lund: C.W.K. Gleerup, 1961.

Saxo Gramma cus. Saxo Gramma cus: The History of the Danes: Books I-IX. Edited by Hilda
Roderick Ellis Davidson. Translated by Peter Fisher. 1979. Reprint, Suffolk, UK: D.S. Brewer, 2008.

Schjødt, Jens Peter. The Pre-Chris an Religions of the North : History and Structures. Edited by
Jens Peter Schjødt, John Lindow, and Andrén Anders. Vol. 3. Brepols, 2020.

Simek, Rudolf. Dic onary of Northern Mythology. Woodbridge D.S. Brewer, 2007.

Snook, Jennifer Stephanie. American Heathens : The Poli cs of Iden ty in a Pagan Religious
Movement. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Temple University Press, 2015.

Snorri Sturluson. Edda. Translated by Anthony Faulkes. London: Everyman, 1996.

———. Heimskringla : History of the Kings of Norway. Translated by Lee M Hollander. University
of Texas Press, 2015.

Svendsen, Lea. Loki and Sigyn. Llewellyn Worldwide, 2022.

Thorsson, Ornolfur, ed. Gisli Sursson’s Saga and the Saga of the People of Eyri. Translated by Judy
Quinn and Mar n S Regal. Penguin Books, 2003.

Turville-Petre, E. O. G. Myth and Religion of the North: The Religion of Ancient Scandinavia. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Wiston, 1964.

Waggoner, Ben. Our Troth. 3rd ed. Vol. 2. The Troth, 2021.

30