Should Merriam Webster Online Dictionary change their definition of Heathen?

Today in one of the many Facebook groups that I am in, someone shared a link to a petition demanding that Merriam Webster Online Dictionary change their definition of Heathen.

The petition demanding Webster change the definition of the word Heathen. 

So how bad is Webster's definition of Heathen?

First part of the Webster's definition. 

The first part is ok (I guess), and the second part is traditional. Many writers insisted that Heathens were uncivilized.

I just happen to know a worse definition of Heathen (from the 1982 edition of the Random House College Dictionary): "an unenlightened or barbaric idolater."

Oh look, the defintion of Heathen goes back to the 12th century. 

These "insulting" definitions have been in play for a long time. At one point, the term Heathen also applied to the Muslims. Today, it is more or less, everyone who is not a Jew, Christian, or Muslim. I guess that someone decided that the Muslims are civilized.

Definition by rejection of the Bible.

One of the complaints of the petition is that the definition is based on "rejection of the God of the Bible," a god that Jews, Christians, and Muslims share...uncomfortably, but it is the same baseline god if you follow the lines of transmission and origins of these three religions. They argue that Christianity (and the rejection of) should not be in the definition....which ignores why dictionaries get used in the first place--when using a dictionary, you want them to tell you the most likely ways that a word is being used (not some idealized seldom encountered in real life definition).

But look, it is a Christian definition of Heathen.

The synoyms include Pagan which is also defined by its rejection of the god of the Old Testament, New Testament, and Quran.

The definition of Heathen for kids. 

Yes kids, Heathens are uncivilized; Christian writers have been saying that for centuries. And writers do use the term to describe people who have no civilizations or wildly different ones.

Webster would like to know why you are looking up the word Heathen.

Can we at least agree that Webster asking why you are interested in the word Heathen is at least an attempt by them to stay current with its modern usage?

The two things that are to be included in the new definition of Heathen.

Gythja Dearbhla actually says in the petition that not only does they want the reference to the Bible removed, along with the insulting "uncivilized" definition, but they also want the definition to be "a convert of the Aesir and Vanir [ancient gods of the Norse religion]" and "a Norse polytheist."

(By the way, one of my favorite definitions of Cat is actually a definition by what it is not: Cat--not a dog.)

Here is your laugh out loud moment of the day. 

The best comment (for its humor value) was someone saying that "I agree whole heartedly with this action. I do believe the wording needs the approval of a heathen majority."

I presume that Scott Mattis means ONLY Norse pagans are to be consulted.

And this is where I have to ask, "Can you even get a dozen Heathens to agree what type of light bulbs to buy?" And what about all the non-Norse Heathens? Why don't they also get a vote?

As a writer and a scholar, let me be the one to break the bad news to you. Dictionaries reflect how writers actually use words, not how you think the words should be defined by your own particular religion. If religions were allowed to pick the definitions of words, we would get stuck with the following definition of Heathen (buckle in):

Heathen: an ignorant uncivilized person who absolutely is going to Hell for refusing to accept the one true God of the Bible.

And why would we be stuck with that definition? Simply because there are far more Christians than pagans and heathens in English speaking counties, both in the present and in the past. The definitions that Webster and Random House are using are not nearly as bad as the ones that we would get if a committee got to define the word to their satisfaction.

So how do we get the definition changed? Well, a petition is useless. What changes the definition of the word are writers using it in a different manner than it was previously used. So instead of signing a petition, go to Webster Online Dictionary and tell them about instances that Heathen (and for that matter Pagan) are being used in a modern sense of "someone civilized who believes in gods other than the Jewish Christian Muslim god." If enough people do this, they will add a new section to the definition reflecting its new use. Why? Because that is how dictionaries actually define words--by how people are actually using them.

(Please note that the current definitions will remain simply because there is a few centuries of usage that says that all heathens need to be saved by the civilizing force of the one true God. Also note that I am a Heathen and Pagan...not that it will stop you from calling me bad names in the comment section.)

Pagan Portals--Runes by Kylie Holmes (Book Review)

There is an old saying that there is only one book about the Tarot and that each writer only publishes a few pages from it. I feel the same way about books written about the Elder Futhark--the so-called Norse runes. (Actually, the runes used by the Vikings were the abbreviated sixteen rune--Younger Futhark.) And just like one encounters the same information over and over again in Tarot books (or for that matter, books about the Golden Dawn), one reads the same material over and over again in books about the runes. Therefore, when one reviews a book on one of these subjects, one tends to only focus on the few pages of unique material that the writer includes (because the base-line is almost always the same--as in if you have read one book on the subject, you have read them all).

Pagan Portals--Runes by Kylie Holmes is your typical book on runes--containing historical information on the runes, runic divinatory spreads, how to make your own rune set, basic meanings of the runes, and suggestions of how to use the runes in magic.

So ignoring the standard stuff that finds its way into every book on the runes, what sticks out?

The book is written in a conversational tone, which is common with all the books that I have read so far from this particular publisher--Moon Books. I will admit that I spent too much time in academia to be completely comfortable with the style when it comes to regular books, despite the fact that I spend a lot of my time in the blogosphere (both as a reader and a lunatic with a soapbox). Think of the style as a conversation or a letter to a friend--some people will like the tone; others won't.

In the historical section, the author includes a diagram that shows the graphic difference between the Long Branch (Danish) and Short Twig (Swedish-Norwegian) Younger Futhark runes. That is a plus. And she mentions a few historical figures who studied and kept the lore of the runes alive--figures in rune history that I was not aware of. That is also a plus.

But she also mentions the myth of Odin as if it is historical and not mythical--which touches upon a bugbear that I wish authors would not do, and that is the mixing of mythology with historical fact. And in the section where she talks about the basic meanings of the runes, she mentions on more than one occasion what the Norse ("our ancestors") believed about the runes...without ever stating her source. I suspect that her source is intuition and not a document (because I have never heard of a document covering this information--the field of runelogy is made up of best guesses)--if it is an actual document, I wish that she would have came out and cited it by name and number. The fact that I think that she is playing fast and mixing her opinions with the historical facts is a negative. (Remember that I suffered though a Bachelors in both literature and history--it tends to make me frown at the mixing of personal belief and historical facts without the writer coming straight out and stating which is which.)

Holmes also includes the Anglo-Saxon, Norwegian and Icelandic rune poems (both in their original language and their English translation) in the historical section (this is important and/or nice if you are just want to read a single book on the runes, and not have to collect rune books like I do). And I will admit that she is the first writer on the subject of runes that I can remember coming out and stating that we do not have a poem for the Elder Futhark itself (the aforementioned poems deal with the Anglo-Saxon and Younger Futharks.

Overall, if you are after one book on the subject of the runes, this book is a four out of five stars. If you are like me and own two boxes of books on the subject, it will depend upon on how important the unique bits are in filling holes in your knowledge base.

[This review was based on a pre-publication e-file copy given to me by the publisher for review purposes.]

Dear Broncos fans of the muggle variety

Let the taunting begin.

Dear Broncos fans of the muggle variety,

We are so sorry that you are upset that the NFL decided to hang up pictures of the Baltimore Ravens' quarterback downtown and on the side of the stadium. But some of us feel more supportive of the Ravens than we do of the Denver Broncos. It is nothing personal--it is just when you talk about sports that do not happen on broomsticks, us wizards tend to decide who to cheer for based solely on the totems and colors, and where we live doesn't matter so much. And I like ravens better than I like horses, plus their team colors are nicer. This is also true of the Minnesota Vikings--I like their totem and colors better too. I know that this type of logic eludes you muggles, just like the fact that football is so f***ing boring! But please try to keep it in mind when I am cheering for someone other than your local sport teams.

P.S. The only exciting football in human history is of the zero gee variety; and sorry, I still can't cheer for Denver in that time period because my favorite team is the London Jets. I don't imagine you muggles understand time travel either. Again, sorry that your feelings are bent out of shape.

Sincerely,

The Wizard of Cook St.

Hanuman Pow Wow Migraine Mantra

Last night I ran across the following mantra for curing migraines while reading Philip Lutgendorf' Hanuman's Tale: The Messages of a Divine Monkey. It reminds me of some of the Pow Wow (Pennslyvania Dutch) and the Runic magic that I have seen for the same health issue.

[To be recited seven times while blowing the ash of burned cow dung in the afflicated person's face]

Om salutaions! Born in the forest, monkeys climb trees, leap from branch to branch and eat raw, wild fruits. Half they tear, half they split, half they let fall. When Hanuman-ji roars, migraine goes away!

Quote of the day: Kenaz Filan on Thurisaz

It is easy to cast some runes as benevolent spirits of light and love. Thurisaz is not one of those runes. The Thorn has the personality of a rabid pit bull with a toothache. It will gladly tear into anything you send it after, and if you aren't careful it will turn around and chew you up as well.

You can read the rest of Kenaz Filan's useful essay on Thurisaz over on his blog.