I would place emphasis on "Valhalla," Hall of the Fallen (in combat, honorably). In this context, <PERSON> is entering the deck that has the frozen travelers (pilgrims, if you will).
In Valhalla, we get the imagery of <PERSON> and the many worthy dead chosen by his Valkyries for training and fighting in the realm of the Aesir to prepare for Ragnarok.
While <PERSON> himself was a semi-subversive God who sometimes intentionally brought about human conflict to increase his own ranks, <PERSON> presumably takes this position to use these many worthy souls to concoct and perfect his conception of the human/xenomorph hybrid for waging his own Ragnarok on human/engineerkind.
If you contrast it to the title of "Covenant," which in my mind is very much tied to the ideas of Puritan/Pilgrim immigration from England to the New World and that whole fantasy/mythos. Obviously its all horribly subverted as these cryosleep pilgrims, who are essentially dead and waiting to be reborn, have an entirely new reward for the initial covenant/contract they had taken or made in embarking on this journey.
Whether you also take Covenant in its religious sense is up to you. Life being a journey and the idea of promises to god or congregations are everywhere and everywhen.
I think the fabric of the Valhalla references is stronger when considering the mythos of the titan <PERSON> and <PERSON>'s <PERSON>. <PERSON> steals fire for mankind and all that jazz, he gets punished for it. Down the road, <PERSON> sets him free.
Meanwhile, <PERSON> is one example of the succession of hierarchies; <PERSON> to <PERSON> and the titans to <PERSON> and the Olympian gods. Throughout Classical Greek literature and mythology(from which ideas are carried over into Roman mythology), there is always an idea of the gods, especially <PERSON>, trying to prevent their fated decline or overthrow.
You can compare that to the engineers trying to destroy their own creations, only to be destroyed by their other creations intended for the destruction of the first.
Further still, you have the whole <PERSON> shtick. Since I already watched Prom, I assumed <PERSON> had to turn on the Covenant's crew eventually so I interpreted the incorrect citing of the poem's authorship from <PERSON> to Lord <PERSON> as a mistake. 72
But I'm like... this is a huge blockbuster film, there's no way. And then we get the whole <PERSON>/<PERSON>: It's <PERSON>, not <PERSON>. And the crowd is supposed to gasp in unison at the realization? I thought it was so incredibly misplaced.
Regardless! The reference, I thought, was supposed to inspire the sense of that poem: a memento mori. That is to say, everybody dies eventually (special ironic emphasis is placed on people with power or aspirations to grandeur). <PERSON> says it while looking out over the ruins of the engineer's temple-city-thing. In this regard and while considering the whole "We're better than humans, let's kill/surpass them," the sense of Greek God lineage/succession and the transience of life/power are all emphasized. <PERSON> pokes a hole in the assumed timelessness of human hegemony when in truth, the death of engineers (human progenitors), should be a reminder that a similar fate is in store for them. We might even apply this to <PERSON> himself in assuming his invulnerability with respect to the xenomorphs.
I think interpreting it in the Nazi/eugenics sphere goes a little too far but I felt the references or internal callbacks of the film were a little showboaty/hifalutin.
Hopefully you found this answer suitable. 80