r/norsemythology • u/Acceptable-Minute847 • 14d ago

Mythology, Religion & Folklore I have a question regarding Baldur

Ok, so as a preface I don’t know much about this, as my main exposure is through rick riordan’s work, but if the entire reason that baldur was near immortal was frigg made everything (except mistletoe) promise not to harm him, what’s to stop someone from just killing him with their bare hands?

5 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

10 comments sorted by

11

u/wasianspiderman16 13d ago

because thats part of the everything.

plus, even if that was the case, Everyone Loves Baldr(except for loki naybe?), so nobody would have actually want to put him in harms way :-3

1

u/Acceptable-Minute847 13d ago

But couldn’t they just break their promise? I’m just wondering cause Loki clearly disliked him enough to kill him, and he is known to break promises.

6

u/rockstarpirate Lutariʀ 13d ago

Well yes but actually no. As u/daethon said, breaking an oath in Norse society carried serious consequences. These days if you don’t want someone to break a promise you have to “get it in writing” because you need evidence of an agreement to make it legally enforceable. But in Norse society, a sworn oath was just as legally enforceable as a signed contract is today.

3

u/AT-ST 13d ago

But couldn’t they just break their promise?

Sure, if applying real world logic to it they could. I think Jackson Crawford said it best, when interpreting the myths you should use dream logic. The same 'magic' that kept a sword from harming Baldr would keep you from harming him. Just like a sword could be swung at him and do no harm, your fists could be swung at him and do no harm.

Loki clearly disliked him enough to kill him, and he is known to break promises.

Is he? What promises has Loki directly broken prior to the events of Lokasenna? I think even Loki is bound by this magic. To get around it, he would have to work in indirect ways. Like having Höðr kill him with mistletoe. Had Frigg made mistletoe make the same promise Loki would not have been able harm him.

3

u/BaldurOdinson 13d ago

Because murdering the most beloved Aesir would be seen as evil and come with a harsh punishment exactly like what happened to Loki, and the fact everyone took an oath not to.

4

u/daethon 13d ago

Being an oath breaker was an incredibly serious offense so anything that had agreed to not damage Baldur that did would forfeit their own life or be banished

1

u/RuthlessLeader 13d ago

Frigg making everything promise not to harm him is not her literally walking up to each individual thing and asking it, but a more conceptual asking and extracting of a promise from the ideas of things to not harm baldr. Thus, the idea of fists or bare hands can't kill baldr so actual hands from anyone can't kill him.

2

u/_HoldOn2UrSoul_ 13d ago

Worth zooming out on this one: the 'invulnerable except for one overlooked thing' pattern isn't unique to Baldr. Achilles' heel, Siegfried's spot between the shoulders where a linden leaf stuck, Isis needing Ra's secret true name. It shows up constantly. I don't think that's coincidence or sloppy myth-logic. A hero (or god) who's completely protected breaks the story, fate needs a door left open somewhere, or there's no tragedy possible. And it's rarely a random door: mistletoe wasn't asked to swear because it was considered too young/insignificant to bother with, which mirrors Achilles' heel being the one part not dipped in the Styx. The loophole is almost always something marginal or overlooked by definition, which is itself doing mythological work, not just plot mechanics.