The genuineness of the myth seems to depend on whether the mistletoe
is an original feature of it or not, and on this point there can
be little real doubt. The German theory that Baldr could only be
killed by his own sword, which was therefore disguised by enchantment
and used against him, and that the Icelandic writers misunderstood
this to mean a mistletoe sprig, is far-fetched and romantic, and
crumbles at a touch. For if, as it is claimed, the Icelanders had no
mistletoe, why should they introduce it into a story to which it did
not belong? They might preserve it by tradition, but they would hardly
invent it. Granting this, the mistletoe becomes the central point of
the legend. The older mythologists, who only saw in it a sun-myth,
overlooked the fact that since any weapon would have done to kill
the God with, the mistletoe must have some special significance; and
if it is a genuine part of the story, as we have no reason to doubt,
it will be hard to overturn Dr. Frazer's theory that the Baldr-myth
is a relic of tree-worship and the ritual sacrifice of the God,
Baldr being a tree-spirit whose soul is contained in the mistletoe.

The contradictions in the story, especially as told by Snorri
(such as the confusion between the parts played by Höd and Loki,
and the unsuspicious attitude of the Gods as Loki directs Höd's aim)
are sometimes urged against its genuineness. They are rather proofs
of antiquity. Apparent contradictions whose explanation is forgotten
often survive in tradition; the inventor of a new story takes care to
make it consistent. It is probable, however, that there were originally
only two actors in the episode, the victim and the slayer, and that
Loki's part is later than Höd's, for he really belongs to the Valhall
and Ragnarök myth, and was only introduced here as a link. The incident
of the oath extracted from everything on earth to protect Baldr, which