Heimskringla - it sounds like a good curse word to say when you accidentally hit your finger with a hammer: “Heimskringla!”
I think that also pretty much summmarizes the mood old “Snorri” - the author of this work (who lived from the 1170’s-1240’s AD) - angrily puts one in after reading the farcical abbreviation he hammered over the lines of the true Ancient Kings of the North.
He mostly passes off the over four thousand year old Norse Gothic King Line’s with just some recently deceased usurpers of half danish origin who were, at best, living in the 850’s to 950’s AD, just three centuries before him (like Harald Fairhair; he with his famed and oh so noble “scat” as he calls it: “land-tax” p.19, that he enforced on all deliciously (sic)). This would be like us replacing the most archaic and noble Indian Chieftains in America (mentioned by the Hopi and Rafinesque) with the English King George as the progenitor of all their King Lines. It is insane it passes as “early” history today.
Being taught under the most holy initiate the Icelander Saemunder Frodi - recorder of the extremely ancient Elder Edda (in my top 40 fav books for life) and the author whose history of the Norwegian Kings is now conveniently “lost” or shall we say “appropriated” by this violent, short-sited, war-monger Snorri (who began his battles when Saemunder’s daughter refused him in marriage) - Snorri does, as if by accidental osmosis (being near Saemunder in his youth) actually have a good knack for revealing *very* archaic sacred geo-mysteries on forgotten lands contained in symbol within the god-lore of the North in his Prose Edda, however. So I give him that, but only that. Yet one finds this universally: among the Greeks on Atalas and among the Hindu’s on Idaspati and his “steppe isle’s thrice times removed” too and so on and so on.
So overall I would say Snorri is not so unique but rather fits what Napoleon said: “History is written by the victors who are usually notorious liars.” However if Napoleon believed “all” history was subjective like the modern Foucult lovers would have you convinced, then why did Champollion - one of the most immenent historians of his day - say Napoleon often corrected him on many fine points in history he had himself forgotten? No Napoleon only believed some of history is lies, the rest truth - as do I.
Yes there were many better historians than Snorri, but much crumbled through and on into his works despite him; so there is no reason to fully discount his works, just shoot the messenger and his abbreviations.
Now Snorri in this work would have you believe this Harald Fairhair the pseudo-dane, pseudo-avar (truly half Chunni and half-dane per a British record I once came across - oh and his imaginary father is euphemistically called “halfdan”), this usurper - who was part of the movement that desecrated the last vestige of true king lines all over Norway as this book shows, and who really got the evil “dane-law” going after destroying all the monastaries in Northern France, Briton and Ireland in the late 800’s (a century earlier than commonly thought when one looks close) - was the true “King” of all Norway; or of as old as he could go back. No, the Northern Kings did not come from him, they were murdered and replaced by him and his ilk. Such group came in among the Danes.
Snorri’s lie is the same lie Johannes Magnus says Saxus Grammaticus made making all stem from some recent half “Danish” (sic) Kings. Nothing could be further from the truth. These were the usurpers of the Kings.
All this period of Fairhair and a little before; He and Lodbrok and Harald Wartooth (if he is not the same as Fairhair, everywhere Northern chronologies were conflated by exactly 100 years at this period) were all of this same ilk: mercenaries of violence and half chunni avar in descent, not of royal lines. Such was the motif in the North then from 530-930 AD.
Adam of Brehmen is a better source on events in the North than this Snorri and lived two centuries before him. He confirms what I am saying, of this migration of violent peoples from the Northeast into Gothland and Germany and on further west. Johannes Magnus of the early 1500’s though spoke the truth about these types of so called Danes, being more near them. He says the Norwegians were mostly peaceful for thousands of years internally before they came. Because of this his works have been restricted until recently as somehow anti-danish (how I don’t know if one is opposed to those who overtook the beautiful and gracious Danes). They are still today untranslated.
Some will try to make Snorri’s “early king” Harald as being in the court of Yaroslav the Wise (of the double eagle insignia) and in the time of the Gardarike Varangian holy founders of Russia who defeated the pseudo-Kievans. I could not believe it because St Simeon the New Theologian was a frighteningly conscious wiseman in such court so I knew there was no way on earth two such beings could co-exist politically. So I looked into it and Yaroslav kicked Harald Fairhair out for being too much a warmonger almost immediately after associating with him.
Snorri, a few centuries after Harald Fairhair, was part of this still ongoing Pseudo-Danish warlord led mercenary cult usurpment of all holy king-lines in the North. But when he left it, it was too late, they came after him. He had already done their bidding though however much meaning to or no, he abbreviated the more ancient King lines (later more correctly recollected by the true Goth Norwegian Johannes Magnus) in this work of his, the Heimskringla, to fit this movements’ purposes of a more recent historical character by appropriating archaic kings’ names at times in this rewrite and applying them to them.
Charlemagne, the century before Snorri’s Fairhair of the 850-950 AD range, was recorded weeping at his death bed in 814 AD looking into the North and realizing not only should he not have so harshly persecuted the universal noumenalist pagans but also, more importantly, he should have stopped the Hun Avar take over in the North because he saw from there would be launched next, behind their hollowed out Northern people’s visage and king lines co-opted, further depradations upon all the West. And indeed this is what happened. Fredegar in the 600’s AD speaks of the Huns making “belfaulci” (forced war mercenary laborors) of the the Northern Goths and Germans at such century before Charlemagne, against their will. So what Charlemagne was seeing increase is not just fictional opinion of Charlemagne.
It occured before Charlemagne and after - he was just a brief holding force. Before him were two major sweeps, one in the 430’s-530’s with Attila on Catalaunian fields against the Heruli Goths in France; and then the sons of Attila’s brother: Henghist and Horsa (who were in the 530’s not 430’s) behind King Mrdred invading as the golden armored Avar Huns in the first Invasion on Briton after Germans/Saxony/Saxons had already been peacefully in colonies there a hundred years. The Huns ever came up the Sava/Avar river into the Oder on unto Hamberg and to a certain two regions of Daneland or Denmark - one being juteland and the other of the Angles; then they kept taking over parts of Norway first - but they hated above all the Germans and followed them wherever they fled. If the British later called them Saxon’s who came into Angle’s lands and then on to them (Anglo-Saxon), this was just euphemistic descriptions of peoples based on the lands they migrated through, not their actual blood-line. For the earliest British and Irish records called them Avars (which many early writers say is synonomous with “Huns.” They describe them as coming in with little coracle boats just as the Huns had as well).
Those two overthrows of the peoples of the North before Charlemagne were nothing though compared to the Fie-King Khazars (pseudo-Vikings) after him whom he foresaw while dying, they who obliterated many of the true holy Norwegian Goth Valh-Kings and married into the rest doing the same in Daneland as they did to Norway in their hey day in the 800’s, then came down into all the West with their dragon ships and up into the Isles. Such was the movement Harald Fairhair and Snorri Sturleson were part of. They were not of the movement of Charlemagne or the true Norwegian and British Kings of old; nor of Islam growing east and swapping sons’ upbringings with the courts of Charlemagne; nor of Saemunder and many others. They were as different from all of these as oil and water. The old Norse work the Volsunga Saga speaks of the enemies ships, the evil oarers, as having dragons on them (Fie-King)!
The Heimskringla is more an end record of a usurpment period trying to make it pretty and glorify it by half types incorporated into it.
Archeologists find, confirming the take over of the Norse by foreign people’s, burned houses everywhere in Norway from the 550-850’s and strange Hunnish and Arabic coin mixed cache’s (for the Hun Khazars traded with the Arabs, those same Arabs who joined the Quareyshi and Zaidi Arabs who later with Jafar’s good Kufic Hindu early islamists and Kurdish King David, all from 650-850 became more confirmed enemies of the Hun Kafirs; these Khazars and their Khaganates persecuting them from day one in Yemen even as they did to the early Gnostic Christians. Such were coming now from 530-930 from the forests of the Urals as Fie-Kings all upon the Northwest as Adam of Brehmen and Johannes Magnus report).
It is sad today Norwegians speak proudly of being bloody, spoiling Vikings like some dumb moderns and forget who they were before as true, holy, noble, gothic, “peaceful till outright attacked,” Norse (previous to these Vikings who overtook their culture).
Also, one cannot fault esoteric Hebrews, or even exoteric one’s for these quasi Russians, Viking Khazarian Avar Huns - other than the latter taking such canaanites of spirit and even possible descent as “their own” per the medieval historians (...I have found maps showing the Hebrews calling such lands the Huns came from: “Canaanae”). Nor can one fault esoteric Christians who saw through all this increasing tendency toward mercenary violence for spoil in their day moving west.
But exoteric Christians; one can fault them quite a bit for all this happening. For their virus of converting people by bloody, violent force of inquisition - begun with that dead soul Maximus the Pseudo-Roman Emperor up in Briton unto these times in the 850-950 AD range was going on everywhere in the North by then; and Snorri records many of the terrible details of it. So in reaction there were exoteric pagans coming and killing exoteric christian kings and peoples. Such created a divide and conquer that left a vaccuum for the Avar Kings to come in and take over the West for spoil and land-tax dominance as indeed they did and as indeed is the new modus operandi for all in place still today (i.e. morally dead corporations running our governances globally with no spiritual overtones to them whatsoever).
So, in conclusion, if one wants to really learn of the ancient Nord Goth Kings of heroic valour and tales of old then read elsewhere; if one wants to know what really happened in brief in the North from 500-1,000 AD morally, politically and spiritually and not just “strategically,” I have just shown that; but if one wants a lot of further battle details on a gruesome, pedantic, legalist, savage, war-mongering, mercenary culture of once holy westerners corrupted by influence from an anciently evil culture beyond human imagining that came out from the upper Urals and in among them changing all them through psychic trauma (while the exoteric Christians were converting by the sword sweeping up from southwest) then read on into the Heimskringla.