KVASIR SYMBOL DATABASE

SACRED TREE & HOLY GROVE

YGGDRASILL, MíMAMEIÐR, HoddmÍmis HOLT, THOR’S OAK, etc.

Entry by Joseph Hopkins with art by Rim Baudey for Kvasir Symbol Database at Mimisbrunnr.info, March 2020. Updated September 2023.

Description

A single tree or a group of trees—a grove—designated by a group to be of a particular religious significance, often described in primary and secondary sources as holy and sacred (or equivalent terms).

Dating

References to sacred trees and holy groves occur throughout the ancient Germanic record, reaching from the earliest mentions of the ancient Germanic peoples by their Roman neighbors and over a millennia later into the Christianization of the North Germanic peoples. Conceptually related notions of trees continue to play a notable role in the folk belief and practice of the Germanic peoples after Christianization. In records of the religious narratives of the ancient Germanic peoples, which primarily survive in the North Germanic corpus (broadly known as Norse mythology), trees consistently play a central role in both a figurative and literal sense.

Sources

While readers will benefit from using this entry as a starting point on the topic of historical sources on sacred trees and holy groves, for readers seeking in-depth discussions on the topic, the Kvasir Symbol Database recommends starting with a combination of Dowden (2002 [2000]), Cusack (2011), and Andrén (2014).

Additionally, English Wikipedia offers a solid if incomplete tertiary overview of the topic, which also makes for an excellent springboard to further reading. Where possible, we’ve linked to quality English Wikipedia articles on topics we discuss here, but readers new to the topic stand to benefit from acquiring the handbooks outlined by a Mimisbrunnr.info guide here.

TERMS AND PLACE NAMES

Before diving into an overview of the historic record, it’s worth taking a few paragraphs to discuss words used by the ancient Germanic peoples to talk about sacred trees and holy groves. Used throughout this entry, the modern English word grove makes for an interesting etymology, a word history that hints at certain limitations of the written record: While it derives from Old English, no words in other Germanic languages are known to be related to it, and yet it cannot be convincingly connected to any other tongue outside of the ancient Germanic family. The word has no secure Indo-European root (see analysis in OED 2020). It first left an ancient mouth somewhere, somehow, but where and when, we cannot know. The historic record leaves us to wonder.

However, terms for sacred places in ancient Germanic culture were once widespread and well-known by the native speakers who used them, but teasing out details with the historical record that comes down to us makes for a philological challenge. Most of such words can only be described with confidence as referring to a ‘sacred place’. Broadly speaking, it appears that the ancient Germanic peoples employed a constellation of terms for sacred spaces, including groves. Yet since we almost always lack heathen accounts of pre-Christian belief in a Germanic language up until the North Germanic corpus, and because Christian sources tend to be quite hostile to ‘paganism’, the linguistic picture we get is unfortunately pretty blurry.

Toponyms (meaning ‘place names’, the formal study of which is toponymy) can afford some level of insight. For example, the Old Norse and Old English noun holt—identical to archaic modern English holt, meaning ‘a group of trees’, cognate with German Holz, which means the same—can simply mean a common wood or forest. Yet when combined with a deity’s name, such as a regional name for the god Odin, the implication is a space for activity associated with the deity, and so a sacred grove may have existed there (Consider, for example, Onsholt ‘Odin’s Holt’ in Valby, Denmark). As another example, the same can be said of descendants of Old Norse lundr, which, when combined with a deity name, implies a holy site in a wood, a sacred grove (such as in the Swedish Fröslunda, meaning ‘Freyr’s grove’). That said, a survey of toponyms also provides limited insight: Place names can and do change—we lack, say, a Viking Age map of the region, and without comparative data from which to draw secure conclusions, analytic problems can and do occur.

Other terms more straightforwardly denote sacral activity from the ancient Germanic record, such as Old Norse word vé and Old English wíh (from Proto-Germanic *wīxan, via Orel 465: 2004) both meaning ‘holy place’. These elements appear in place names and in the historic record regarding religious practice. Unfortunately, we are frequently unable to draw firm conclusions regarding them today.

TEXTUAL RECORD

While analysis of general terms that may be used to refer to groves by the ancient Germanic peoples may leave readers wanting, the textual record is fortunately much more straightforward.

Roman Era

The first clear mention of sacred groves among the ancient Germanic peoples occurs in Roman senator Tacitus’s books Germania and Annals (1 CE). While Tacitus’s sources remain unknown to us today, and while it appears that at the time the senator injects his ideals and opinions over the reality of the historic record, Germania contains some of the earliest mentions of Germanic deities on record, and at times evidences material otherwise known to us from much later sources or the archaeological record.

In Germania, Tacitus repeatedly mentions that ancient Germanic peoples placed great emphasis on groves. For example, the senator famously states the following about the beliefs of the ancient Germanic peoples:

They consecrate woods and groves and they apply the names of gods to that mysterious presence which they see only with the eyes of devotion. (Rives trans.; 1999: 42)

Earlier in Germania, Tacitus mentions that “they actually bring with them in certain images and symbols taken from the sacred groves” (Rives, 1999: 41). Readers encounter mentions of specific groves, such as the Grove of Nerthus (from Proto-Germanic *Nerþuz) and detailed descriptions of the customs surrounding the Grove of the Semnones. Notably, Tacitus holds the Semnones to be the oldest group of ancient Germanic peoples, and says that the Semnones believe that they originate from the grove (Rives 1999: 57).

The senator also mentions that human sacrifice occurs in the grove, a great taboo in the Classical world frequently attributed to them by those outside of it, but exactly how seriously or literally this claim should be taken where it occurs is questionable (for example, see discussion in Dowden 2002 [2000]: 179-188).

In Annals (IV, 26), Tacitus briefly mentions the destruction of the Grove of Baduhenna, a goddess etymologically linked to the Mothers (and herself , figures venerated by individuals in Germanic areas under Roman occupation (for a rare overview of this topic in English, see Simek 2007 [1993]: 26, 204-208).

At the time, veneration of sacred trees and groves was common in both the Germanic and Classical worlds (and throughout the rest of the world, it appears), and so Tacitus would have thought the practice to ultimately be a familiar one. (For a brief overview of sacred trees and groves in the Classical world, see Cusack 2011: 27-55)

Continental Germanic record

Over half a millennia later, we again hear about the emphasis the ancient Germanic peoples placed on sacred trees and groves. But the world had changed, and the context is different: Imperial Christianity has arisen from and consumed the Classical world, and continues to persecute those who have not embraced the new order beyond Classical borders, who they now deem to be “pagans”. The cultural process of interpretatio (literally ‘interpretation’—in short, seeing one’s gods in the deities of another culture) has radically changed, and groves are now a target upon which to wage religious warfare. As classicist Ken Dowden succinctly puts it:

Groves are among the most universal features of Indo-European and indeed any pagan religions and they are among the features of paganism most detested by urban Christians. (Dowden 2002 [2000]: 91)

Adherents of the indigenous religion(s) of the Classical world were openly persecuted under the new regime, and this process continued into areas bordering the Classical world, including among the ancient Germanic peoples.

For rulers like Frankish king Charlemagne who came to power during this era, Christianization manifested as a means to conquer neighboring peoples, exterminate their native beliefs, and crush all opposition. As historian of religion Carole Cusack puts it:

Christian missions had acknowledged the potential of the state to enforce religious “conversion” since the church had become intimately bound up with the later Roman Empire through the conversion of emperor Constantine. Monotheism is in essence universalizing and intolerant. When monotheism encounters relativist beliefs, its instinctual tendency is to deem them “wrong” and to eradicate them. (Cusack 2011: 105)

According to Christian tradition, Anglo-Saxon missionary Boniface (born Winfrid) symbolically targeted an oak dedicated to Thor (Donar in Old High German) and had a church built from its remains somewhere around today’s Hesse, Germany. Exactly how much of the Boniface legend in particular is true and how much is embellished or propagandized is unclear (the story displays particular folklore motifs common in similar tales), but the emphasis on the sacred tree motif shines through the complications. Years after Boniface’s death, Charlemagne targeted the Irminsul (Old Saxon ‘great, mighty pillar’), which seems to have also been a sacred tree or tree-like pillar. (See Cusack 2011: 94-112 for a solid overview.)

No doubt that, sooner or later, the rest of the Germanic groves met the same fate as those of the Classical world, namely destruction or repurposing. However, concern among the Frankish colonial infrastructure was high that veneration of sacred trees and groves would continue, and so today we know from the Saxon Capitularies that veneration of sacred trees and holy groves was expressly forbidden by the new order and enforced with severe penalties (for discussion, see Cusack 2011: 111-112).

Nonetheless, two truly remarkable examples of narratives from continental Germanic paganism survive into the modern period, the so-called Merseburg Charms (sometimes referred to as the Merseburg Incantations). The second of the charms (MZ II) discusses a group of gods headed to a wood or holt (Old High German Holz), which may be a sacred grove or perhaps the cosmic sacred tree (see discussion regarding the motif of gods returning to their seats at Yggdrasil daily and Hoddmímis holt below). For more discussion on this topic, readers can find an illustrated, annotated translation of this charm on Mimisbrunnr.info here.

Old English record

The Old English record provides readers with a curious poem by the name of Dream of the Rood, which, in a flagrant display of syncretic animism, consists of a sentient tree recalling the death of Jesus on the cross. Given the intense emphasis on sacred trees in Germanic paganism and historic Christianization strategies of adaptation and alteration, some scholars have sought a pagan precursor in the poem, and compared it to quasi-Christianized, syncretic pieces such as the Old English Nine Herbs Charm. (For discussion on this topic, including a potential reconstruction of a pre-Christian Dream of the Rood, see Cusack 2011: 129-130, and the rest of the chapter for other examples of Old English veneration of particular trees).

North Germanic record

For an excellent and recent overview of the topics briefly touched upon in this section, we recommend reading Chris Abram’s chapter on this topic called “Tree-People and People-Trees” (2019: 84-102).

Over a millennia after Tacitus’s descriptions, readers finally receive insight into how sacred trees and groves were perceived from the tongues of those who venerated them: Numerous poems and narratives of the heathen Germanic peoples survive into Old Norse, the language of the North Germanic peoples from around the Viking Age. And although most of the Old Norse record regarding the beliefs of the North Germanic peoples stems from sources that have come down to us from Iceland—a rocky, volcanic, and comparatively barren land—all roads in the corpus still lead to trees. Iceland may not be associated with lush landscapes, but when readers are finally allowed insight into the minds of the heathen Germanic peoples, the landscape the sources paint is vibrant, colorful, and complicated—all things are alive (a concept today known as animism), all manners of creatures interact, and the world described is both alien and familiar to modern readers, sometimes abstract and sometimes quite concrete.

In what we today call Norse mythology, central to all existence is the great sacred tree sometimes referred to as Yggdrasil (Old Norse Yggdrasill), which is described as lush, immense, and teeming with creatures and entities. Humankind not only traces its origins from trees, but also frequently compares itself to them by way of poetic references. The gods are themselves anchored to the tree, forming a procession each day to return to it and hold counsel there from their ‘seats, thrones of fate’ (Old Norse rǫkstólar), as mentioned in Grímnismál and Glyfaginning, and a reference to the process is repeatedly employed as a refrain in Vǫluspá (cf. Larrington 2014: 4.6, 5.9, 7.24, 7.26, & 52-53, Faulkes 1995 [1987]: 17).

In the poem Vǫluspá, a seeress memorably describes the great sacred tree as follows:

I know an ash stands,
it’s called Yggdrasill;
a glorious and immense tree,
wet with white and shining mud;
from there dew falls to the dales,
forever standing green over Wyrd’s Well (Urðarbrunnr). (Hopkins translation, 2020)

Humankind itself derives from trees, and traditional Old Norse poetry frequently refers to man and woman with tree-terms. According to scholar Christopher Abram:

Trees have an important role in this complex, multibranched system of diction, for whenever a tree word appears in a skaldic stanza, its audience knows at once to expect not a leafy source of nuts or firewood but a person. The idea that “tree” equals “person” is one the most commonplace images of this artist idiom. By extension, any tree, any name of a tree, or any word for tree potentially can stand in for any human figure. (Abram 2019: 96)

According to Gylfaginning, a trio of gods once found two items of driftwood on a beach, and from them created the first man and woman, Ask (‘ash tree’) and Embla (etymology unclear). The three give them three gifts of animation, essentially giving them life. As Abram observes:

Driftwood became an increasingly important source of building material and firewood in Iceland as the native forests disappeared, and so the happy accident of the creation of human beings seems to have an Icelandic flavor to it: medieval Icelanders were accustomed to producing something useful out of flotsam and jetsam. (Abram 2019: 94)

Later in Vǫluspá, readers also encounter a reference to humankind surviving the environmental collapse of Ragnarǫk by seeking shelter in Hoddmímis holt, another name for the central sacred tree. Readers will recall Tacitus’s reference to the belief among the Semnones that they originated from a grove. Humankind’s renewal from Hoddmímis holt, a cluster of trees, appears to be a closer match to the beliefs of these ancient Germanic peoples described by Tacitus. Perhaps an early Germanic version of the human creation narrative consisted of gods giving life to trees in a grove, creating the first humans at the center of cosmos.

(Outside of Hoddmímis holt, other names for the cosmic sacred tree in the Old Norse corpus include the closely related Mímameiðr—meaning ‘Mími’s tree’—Fjǫlsvinnsmál and the etymologically unclear Læraðr, found in Grímnismál and Gylfaginning.)

Elsewhere in Vǫluspá, we learn that at the base of the tree dwell three norns, a variety of supernatural female entity. These beings are associated with wyrd, a Germanic concept roughly comparable to today’s understanding of what we call fate. (To be clear, the Old Norse term for this concept is urðr, which stems from the same Proto-Germanic origin as Old English wyrd, but the symbol database refers to this concept broadly by its Old English form). A reflex of this notion appears to occur in the famous Vǫlsunga saga, wherein the god Odin places a sword into a great tree called Barnstokkr and so seals the fate of the family line of the Vǫlsungs. Similarly, Odin, a god associated with death, wisdom, and the gallows, receives the knowledge of the runic alphabet by way of hanging nine nights from the tree (Hávamal), begging the question of whether readers should understand it as a gift from the tree or the result of the process of hanging from the ‘ultimate’ gallows—the central cosmic tree.

In the 11th century, before German chronicler Adam of Bremen mentions a sacred tree by a temple at a location now known as Gamla Uppsala (Swedish, meaning ‘Old Uppsala’). Adam describes an immense tree by a well, and fixates on a favorite topic of medieval Christian authors and their Classical forebears alike: Claims of human sacrifice (see discussion in the Germania section above and for why these descriptions should be taken with a grain of salt, as Dowden asks, “was there human sacrifice, or was this something civilised people say barbarians do … ?”, see discussion in Dowden 2002 [2000]: 179-188). Adam’s ultimate sources remain unknown, but archaeological record of the area suggests a much less dramatic reality for the area (for some fairly recent commentary on this, see Abram 2011: 69-70).

While no doubt sacred trees remained common among the North Germanic peoples, Adam’s description of the tree at Uppsala may have been a physical sacred tree, but could also potentially have been narratives from pagan belief converted to reality, a variety of ‘rationalization’ that occurs fairly commonly among various writers such as Saxo’s Gesta Danorum. Whatever the case, as scholar Ken Dowden says, “behind the column Irminsul and trees at Geismar [Thor’s Oak] and Uppsala, surely looms a mythic prototype, an Yggdrasil, the world-ash of the Norsemen” (Dowden 2000: 72).

Archaeological record

While no Bronze Age or early Iron Age Northern European script is known to us, numerous rock carvings from the period survive into today. These images provide limited insight into the beliefs and values of the peoples who inhabited the area at the time. One motif that occurs repeatedly is that of a tree. According to archaeologist Anders Andrén, these tree depictions may represent the concept of the sacred cosmic tree:

The question [of] whether these pictures represent an idea of the world tree is difficult to answer, especially since it goes together with the larger problem of the general meaning of the rock carvings … The only thing that might indicate cosmic trees are certain features in the depiction and composition. All the rock images of trees seem to depict coniferous trees, probably spruce or yew, and a possible background for this selection is that coniferous trees were uncommon during the Bronze Age. Therefore, they were perceived as very special—evergreens in a landscape otherwise dominated by deciduous trees with vegetation that followed the changing seasons. (Andrén 2014: 45-46)

Andrén highlights that some rock carving images depict a person standing on top of a tree, “a motif with direct contemporary parallels in central Europe”. Some depict a bird in the top of the tree—perhaps a type of grouse (Tetraoninae)—much in line with the description of a rooster on top of Mímameiðr in the Old Norse corpus (Andrén 2014: 46) and similar to the great trees depicted on the Överhogdal tapestries (compare images accompanying this article).

A concept of tree-ness—as archaeologist Fredrik Fahlander puts it—appears to have existed in Bronze Age Northern Europe beyond rock carvings, extending to barrow burials and into ritual. According to Fahlander:

During the Early Bronze Age in northern Europe, tree-ness become articulated in henges, burials, and rock art in ways that differ from earlier periods. The wooden trunks and palisade of Holme I and II and the oak logs in Bronze Age burials all encompass a certain degree of tree-ness. The bark which is necessary to keep trees alive was left on the poles and trunks which also were endorsed with constant access to water. The emphasis of tree-ness is thus not primarily understood in symbolic terms or through arboreal metaphors, but on the real properties and agencies of trees. The manner in which dead bodies are placed inside “trees” in the form of hollowed-out logs is echoed in representations of human-tree hybrids in the contemporary rock art. This suggests an ontology in which distinct categories of nature and culture do not fully apply. From such a perspective, it can be argued that that humans and biotic entities such as trees were not considered ontologically distinct, but could form hybrids or draw on each other’s animacies. (Fahlander 2018: 382)

It appears that early depictions of gods among various peoples, including the Germanic peoples, was that of a sort of wooden pole or post. In ancient Greek folk practice, gods may be depicted as wooden beams, sometimes referred to as xoana (singular xoanan), and the archaeological record supplies similar examples in Northern Europe, including among the ancient Germanic peoples. The Proto-Germanic word for ‘a god’ (*ansiz, *ansuz) seems to fall within the semantic field of ‘beam, post’ (*ansaz). Examples of such pole-entities in Northern Europe reach far before the development of the Germanic languages, and before the arrival of the Indo-European languages to Europe. (Reconstructed forms from Orel 2003: 20-21, and see discussion in Dowden 2002 [2000]: 118-120 and Simek 2007 [1993]: 3, 258. English Wikipedia also has a very well-developed article on this topic here.)

Dating from the Viking Age, the Överhogdal tapestry may include the most clear depiction of a sacred tree among the ancient Germanic peoples known to us today. The tapestry features a procession of figures, some with horses, similar to descriptions of the gods going daily to Yggdrasil as described in the Old Norse corpus and perhaps as described in MZ II. Of all of the many figures on the tapestries, an enormous tree appears most prominently on each, dwarfing all else. Scholars often interpret these trees as a sacred tree—perhaps the cosmic sacred tree, Yggdrasil—each with bird on top, also in line with the Mímameiðr description. Discussion about the tapestry is rare in English, but readers can find an excellent article from archaeologist Sven Knippschild here (“Yggdrasil and the Överhogdal Tapestries”, rotergeysir.net, 2018. Readers can view vivid images of the tapestry and interesting discussion regarding the enigmatic manner in which the tapestry was identified at the Jamtli website (located in central Sweden, Jamtli is the somewhat unexpected name of the museum that houses the tapestry).

Some attempts at discerning grove sacred sites have provided some insight into what occurs there. For example, in Lunda, a farm located in central Sweden, archaeologists have identified a site that appears to have been a sacred grove. (For an overview of the site and the findings there, see Andersson 2006: 182-186).

Modern Era Folk Belief

Scholars have often identified folk practices recorded in the last few hundred years as echoes of earlier attitudes toward the veneration of sacred trees and groves. A frequently cited example is the folk practice of maintaining ‘guardian trees’ or ‘ward trees’ on Scandinavian farmsteads. As Anders Andrén puts it, “The more or less explicit argument for seeing a link between these guardian trees and the world tree of Old Norse mythology is based on certain structural similarities, such as the link between and humans, destiny, and trees” (Andrén 2014: 36-41).

Other examples include the potential for continuation among folk narratives found in, for example, Bavaria (see discussion in Simek 2007: 189). Worth mention here, too, is the presence of various supernatural ‘tree women’ in the Scandinavian and German folklore record who may act as something of a protector or donor figure, the best known of which is likely the Hyldemor—Danish ‘elder tree mother’, but similar entities occur in the folklore of what is now northern Germany, such as Frau Ellhorn—German ‘lady elder tree’(for a fairly recent English language overview of this topic and its potential connection to the Old Norse record, see Hopkins 2014: 36-37).

Analysis

Many aspects of Germanic paganism remain murky to us today, but one element bellows loud and clear: The ancient Germanic peoples held particular trees and groups of trees—sacred trees and holy groves—as central to their beliefs, both in religious practice and in myth. Mention of sacred groves and trees goes nearly hand-in-hand with mention of the ancient Germanic peoples. With few exceptions, these historic references do not go into detail about exactly what these groves looked like or what occurred at sacred trees. Potential grove sites tend to prove difficult to identify, and the archaeological record has to date provided little more information than the literary record.

However, references to and records of Germanic mythology provide some insight into the relevance and importance of sacred trees and groves among the ancient Germanic peoples. In the poems and prose narratives that form what we today know as Norse mythology, rendered in Latin letters and, despite all odds, surviving to the present day, we find trees playing a central role to all life and it is a central sacred tree, primarily referred to by the name Yggdrassill, that functions as something of an anchor of the cosmos. All events in Norse mythology rotate around this grand, central tree of unfathomable proportions and extensions.

Consider the prophecy of a seeress, who foresees the regeneration of mankind after a great environmental collapse: Two representatives of humanity will seek shelter in the tree during the collapse and when society falls apart, during the events of Ragnarök, they will await the rebirth of the world and be sustained by the tree. This tree—itself so large, vast, and ancient that perhaps it may be described as a grove itself, a shelter for mankind until they are reborn into a new, replenished world. In crucial ways, this strongly echoes the creation story.

This idea of humankind emerging from the grove brings to mind one of the earliest mentions of the grove among the ancient Germanic peoples, in which Tactitus recounts that the Semnones, who deem themselves to be the most ancient of the confederation of the Suebi, trace their origin to the Grove of the Semnones.

In short, Yggdrasil appears to be the source of humankind—again and again. Yggdrasil also appears to provide us with other important gifts, such as the ability to compose this text: According to Norse myth, it is Yggdrasil from which the god Odin hangs, and from this cosmic process—transcending life and dead for nine nights—where he learns the runes, a writing system, and from where the name Yggdrasil derives (meaning ‘steed of the terrible/awesome/impressive one’; Odin’s gallows).

The linguistic descendants of the ancient Germanic peoples no longer maintain groves. This includes adherents of modern Germanic heathenry, who have yet to reinstate grove veneration on any notable level. However, groves still receive veneration among other peoples. For example, sacred groves continue to receive veneration in India, where they provide a very real environmental benefit. As ecologist Madhav Gadgil summarizes:

Sacred groves are scattered all over India but are mostly within forested areas such as the Western Ghats, the Himalayas, and the northeastern and central hill tracts. These refugia shelter numerous species of trees, lianas, medicinal plants, animals, birds, lizards, snakes, frogs and other creatures that have become rare everywhere else in the landscape. (Gadgil 2018)

Gadgil observes that, “an ecological crisis in the Indian subcontinent, brought about by relentless commercial exploitation of natural resources, is prompting a vibrant revival of these sacred spaces” (Ibid.) and discusses how sacred groves function in a modern context in India.

A rich culture once existed around the sacred trees and groves of the ancient Germanic peoples, as the historic record makes clear. By considering groves in a comparative context, we may better understand the potential of how these groves were understood, how they benefited the communities that revered them—and how they stand to benefit us today.

ABOUT THE IMAGES

This entry contains five original pieces by Rim Bitik for Mimisbrunnr.info, all produced by the artist in 2020. They are as follows:

• I.: A tree motif from the Överhogdal tapestries.

• II.: The descent of mankind from the grove, as reflected in the anthropogeny of the Semnones and in the reduplicated anthropogeny in the Old Norse poem Vǫluspá.

• III.: Another tree motif from the Överhogdal tapestries.

• IV.: The figures of Ask and Embla, progenitors of humankind, reflect a larger pattern in the ancient Germanic corpus equating mankind with trees, in this case perhaps a particularly Icelandic version. The three hooded figures represent the three deities who gave them life, their precise form hooded to reflect that the deities appear to vary between sources, and to emphasize difficulties in depicting figures such as Hœnir, who may have been thought to be a bird-like figure.

• V.: An alternately rendered version of III above, a tree motif from the Överhogdal tapestries.

Readers can find wallpaper-quality versions by clicking the images. Please contact Mimisbrunnr.info for image use requests.

SEE ALSO

• Apple & Apple Tree, fruit-bearing trees symbolically associated with sex, child-birth, and death

• Bee, an insect associated with the tree and concepts of fate

References

• Abram, Christopher. 2011. Myths of the Pagan North: The Gods of the Norsemen. Continuum.

• Abram, Christopher. 2019. Evergreen Ash: Ecology and Catastrophe in Old Norse Myth and Literature. University of Virginia Press.

• Anders, Andrén. 2014. Tracing Old Norse Cosmology: The World Tree, Middle Earth, and the Sun from Archaeological Perspectives. Nordic Academic Press.

• Andersson, Gunnar. 2006. “Among Trees, Bones, and Stones: The Sacred Grove at Lunda” in Anders, Andrén, ed. Old Norse Religion in Long-term Perspectives: Origins, Changes, and Interactions: an International Conference in Lund, Sweden, June 3-7, 2004, pp. 182-186. Nordic Academic Press.

• Cusack, Carole M. 2011. The Sacred Tree: Ancient and Medieval Manifestations. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

• Dowden, Ken. 2002 [2000]. European Paganism: The Realities of Cult from Antiquity to the Middle Ages. Routledge.

• Fahlander, Fredrik. 2018. “The Relational Life of Trees. Ontological Aspects of ‘Tree-Ness’ in the Early Bronze Age of Northern Europe”. Open Archaeology 4. De Gruyter.

• Gadgil, Madhav. 2018. “Sacred Groves: An Ancient Tradition of Nature Conservation”. Scientific American, Dec. 1, 2018. Online. Last accessed March 3, 2020.

• Hooke, Della. 2010. Trees in Anglo-Saxon England: Literature, Lore and Landscape. The Boydell Press.

• Hopkins, Joseph S. 2014. “Goddesses Unknown II: On the Apparent Old Norse Goddess Ilmr”. RMN Newsletter 8, 2014: 32-38. University of Helsinki.

• OED Online. 2020. "grove, n." Oxford University Press, www.oed.com/view/Entry/81891. Last accessed March 3, 2020.

• Orel, Vladimir. 2003. Handbook of Germanic Etymology. Brill.

• Simek, Rudolf. 2007 [1993]. Dictionary of Northern Mythology. Boydell & Brewer Ltd.