Although Rooth presents some interesting information the lack of any evidence other than some folks sayings does not, in my opinion, give any convincing connection between the spider and Loki. The only possible evidence she gives is the possibility of the net, which Loki is said to have invented, as being a representation of the spider's web. But like most of the evidence she gives it is a bit of a stretch and in the end she only shows that the Locke was used as Loki's name but in the absence of any other correlative evidence this really seems to me to be stretching it a bit to then connect the spider to Loki because, as she admits, there are many other names used for the spider than Locke. Ultimately Rooth's assertions about Loki are faulty and in my opinion off the mark for a two reasons. First there is absolutely no correlative evidence in the lore that even remotely connects Loki to the spider. It would be different if there were some shred of evidence in the lore to back up the already meager evidence from the folklore but there is none. Second her supposition depends on not being originally a member of the Aesir and that he was anthropomorphized from the spider. She states that since Loki is always mentioned with different gods shows that he was a later addition is very unconvincing as he is mentioned with those gods more than a few times (i.e. Othinn and Thorr). As Loki is so central to most of the major stories in the lore that he was a later addition or anthropomorphization extremely unlikely. Likewise his early mention in poems like Haustlong and others also work against this theory. So in the end, although Rooth presents some interesting ideas she is unconvincing. It is interesting though that she does present information that does further support Loki's connection with fire, even though that was not her purpose.

 The last thing I would like to examine is the possible connection between the triad of Othinn, Loki and Hoenir and Othinn, Lothurr and Hoenir. It is thought by some that Loki and Lothurr are two names for the same reason because of the similarities in the names. There are some that dispute this and indeed it is a matter which there is no real certainty on. But it is very interesting to note that there is no other mention of Lothurr in the lore other than as traveling companions of Othinn and Hoenir. So what we know of Lothurr is simply that he traveld with Othinn and Hoenir. Furtherly, in my mind, points to the possibility of Lothurr and Loki being the same person is the fact that the same two people, Othinn and Hoenir are mentioned as traveling with Loki as well as Lothurr. Simek states that it is possible that the name of Loki is short for either Lopt or Lothurr. If we allow that Lothurr and Loki are possibly the same person then we must accept that Loki took a role in the quickening of the progenitors of our people for it was the triad of Othinn, Lothurr and Hoenir who each give a gift to the first man and woman of our people, Askr and Embla. I will admit that this connection is tenuous at best so I will leave it to the reader to decide for him or herself.

No matter where a person comes down as to what Loki's role is in the Northern Lore, I think it is safe to say that his role is enigmatic in way that he would possibly be pleased with. I believe that I have shown at least the possibility that he was in early lore before the coming of Christianity, more a mischievous figure whose actions ultimately brought the Aesir great benefit although at first they may have seemed negative in nature. But that is indeed the way of Loki, taking disaster and making something beneficial from it. It is likely in my opinion that as the Christian conversion got under way that Loki's character gradually began to be blackened by Christian scribes with an agenda until we come to Snorri and Lokasenna and Loki's demonization. I think also that Loki's binding and his involvement in Baldr's murder could have been late additions. I likewise think that when one takes into account the evidence from Folklore that Loki's connection with fire is a real possibility. I have always thought the nature of fire as an apt representative of Loki's nature, that is just as apt to be helpful or cause problems.

 So no matter what the reader's own opinions on Loki are, I hope that I have increased their knowledge of this most enigmatic of the Aesir and have given the reader a few things to consider about Loki. Whether or not the reader would agree with me and call Loki, a friend of the Aesir or if they would call him enemy of the Aesir, there is one thing that cannot be denied and that is that the Lore, and indeed, the Aesir, would not be the same without Loki.




Bibliography

Gods and Myths of Northern Europe H. R. Ellis Davidson

Dictionary of Northern Mythology Rudolf Simek

The Prose Edda Translated by Arthur Gilchrist Brodeur

The Poetic Edda Translated by Benjamin Thorpe

The Poetic Edda Translated by Bellows with emendations and editing by Ari Óðinssen

The Danish History Books by Saxo Grammaticus Translated by Oliver Elton

Loki in Scandinavian Mythology by Anna Birgitta Rooth