Germanic paganism forming a formal religion.

Any particular time period you thinking of OP?

Any religion is going to borrow off of elements at the time. It's all well and good having Sven the prophet claim that there is but one god and Odin is his name, but without any kind of gradual reason or exclusionary arguments then you are not going to get far.

I would imagine as others have said that any major Germanic religion without going too far back is going to have roman involvement. Any earlier and the druids dominate the religious show which beyond conjecture we know jack all about.
Not really any time period sadly.
 
If organization came pre-Christian, I wonder if Germanic paganism would stay in the area it takes its name from? No HRE for u!
 
It depends on which of the gods is leading the pantheon. While it was traditionally Odin/Woden - the allfather, the wanderer, the wisest being - the Norse pagans supposedly came to favour Thor for his prowess during the Viking Age. If the Germans are forced to fight several wars against Christian neighbours in order to survive and maintain their way of life, it's possible that the shift to Thor will occur here too, meaning their morals may be based around violence and vengeance.

It should be noted that the current hypothesis for Thor's late-Viking age popularity (as indicated by Adam of Bremen's description of the Temple at Uppsala, where Thor occupies the most prestigious position) is not so much in regards to Thor's position as a god of strength, but rather how the gods were perceived by the average worshiper. Odin was the god of healing, death, royalty, the gallows, knowledge, battle, sorcery, poetry, frenzy, and the runes. Notice anything? Almost all of those associations are more pertaining to the upper classes, the jarls and other royalty.

Meanwhile, Thor was associated with thunder, lightning, storms, oak trees, strength, the protection of mankind, hallowing, and fertility. And while the nature aspects of Thor are obvious, much of his other associations are extremely populist in nature, especially in regards to fertility and personal strength. The current hypothesis suggests that as the upper classes converted to Christianity in order to secure more advantageous marriage alliances and trade with the Latin-dominated European continent, the lower classes (freemen and the like) continued to cling to their old beliefs for quite some time. Norse paganism then took a distinctly populist bent, as the "every-man" Thor became more prominent in comparison to his aristocratic-focused "technically argr and kinda batshit insane but still wise" father Odin.

Interestingly enough, it might not be the first time this shift in theological supremacy took place. Tyr/Teiws/Tiw/Teiwaz may have occupied Odin's position as "Sky Father" in the pre-migration period, but lost his position for reasons we still do not understand (save for Saxony, where he was still venerated as Seaxnēat [probably - there's still debate whether Seaxnēat is Freyr or Tyr, but currently leaning towards Tyr due to his association with swords and his previous position in the pantheon]).
 
Last edited:
Pre-Christianity, maybe some Mithras/Baldr hybrid could work? It would be the most utterly manly man religion of all time though.

Why Baldur and not Thor?

Besides: Gurps AE 2 had the Midgard TL. The Vikings take Constantinople / Mikligardr (with some help from rebellious elements, and while the emperor is fighting elsewhere), get Greek fire too... Christianity makes a return later, but Vinland stays pagan, and paganism develops into Thorism.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
The result relies largely on the cause. If it's because of Roman influences (which seems necessary in order to get everyone looking the same way), that'd rather change a lot since I doubt the ceremonial role of Germanic kings in their religion would sit well with the Romans. Germanic paganism, as did Roman, was heavily intertwined with the ruling classes, which is part of why both gave way to Christianity amongst the common people. (as far as I know) Unless something radical happens I doubt you'd see a separate clergy develop.


Actually, according to some, Christianity spread earlier and faster in the Roman upper and urban classes then in poorer and more rural areas, and that this process repeated itself in northern Europe.
 
in my bantu fantasy world, i made bantu traditional religion in a world religion, complete with church and text. you might get something out of that.....PM if you care
 
Actually, according to some, Christianity spread earlier and faster in the Roman upper and urban classes then in poorer and more rural areas, and that this process repeated itself in northern Europe.

The word "pagan" literally comes from paganus, meaning rural villager/yokel. Much early conversion to Christianity (and other mystery cults) was done by the urban middle and upper classes who had the time, money, and cynicism to try out different belief systems and faiths. Furthermore, following Constantine's conversion and elevation of Christianity, many of the upper-classes fully converted in order to receive social benefits/patronage from the new Emperor (who openly favored Christians in his administration), in a manner similar to how the German kings would marry themselves and their sons off to Christian princesses for stronger marriage alliances and material benefit. It would have been similar had Constantine reinforced the cult of Sol Invictus*, or converted to Manichaeism or something.

*420 praise it \[T]/
 
The Germanic and Norse Pagans didn't really proselytise. I imagine that any converts would come to their side for the sheer liberation of it, since their religions don't have strict doctrines and rules. Are you a warrior? Die on the battlefield and go to Valhalla. Want the crops to grow? Slaughter a cow and drench the soil in blood and give your prayers to Thor. Getting married? Cover yourself in chicken blood and lie naked under the moon for Frigge, or something. Have sex. Father bastards. Drink. Take mushrooms. Feast. Fight. Worship however you please in your every-day actions, rather than in overt acts of devotion.

For someone forced to toil under a Christian king, pay high taxes or risk severe punishment, see the bishops and priests grow fat with meat and gold, and drop everything to attend mass every Sunday, the idea of kicking back with a cold beer and a couple of women might be a very attractive prospect. The Pagans were also more poetic in their religion than the Christians, I'd say; it wasn't just the church and the king telling you to obey that had you believing. They believed they could hear the gods' in the thunder, see them in the sun and in the shape of a person's body. They saw ravens and believed Odin was watching over them. They had signs, things they could reach out to with all their senses to affirm their beliefs. The Christians had the scriptures.

I think this displays a rather serious misunderstanding of Medieval Christianity. The religious life of the average peasant wasn't based as much on the scriptures as it was things like the liturgies, passion plays, and the saints who filled a great many of the "poetic" functions you seem to think set paganism apart. Their faith was very real to them and as easy to confirm with the senses as anything the pagans believed, because it was an integral part of their daily lives.

I also think you're overstating the appeal of "freedom" somewhat in a society based on subsistence agriculture. Christianity's liturgical calendar, with its time set aside for fasting (and less officially, revelry) was tailor-made to make such a lifestyle easier. Also, pagan kings are going to force you to toil too, and charge as high of taxes as they can get away with. This is a time when the only people who would benefit from the "freedom" you're proposing would be an upper-class of some kind, so it's unlikely we'd see the developments you've laid out with peasants in favor of a turn away from the Church.
 
I think taxes would be lower if lots of income is coming from other countries saved up taxes...
 
Last edited:
The Germanic and Norse Pagans didn't really proselytise. I imagine that any converts would come to their side for the sheer liberation of it, since their religions don't have strict doctrines and rules. Are you a warrior? Die on the battlefield and go to Valhalla. Want the crops to grow? Slaughter a cow and drench the soil in blood and give your prayers to Thor. Getting married? Cover yourself in chicken blood and lie naked under the moon for Frigge, or something. Have sex. Father bastards. Drink. Take mushrooms. Feast. Fight. Worship however you please in your every-day actions, rather than in overt acts of devotion.

For someone forced to toil under a Christian king, pay high taxes or risk severe punishment, see the bishops and priests grow fat with meat and gold, and drop everything to attend mass every Sunday, the idea of kicking back with a cold beer and a couple of women might be a very attractive prospect. The Pagans were also more poetic in their religion than the Christians, I'd say; it wasn't just the church and the king telling you to obey that had you believing. They believed they could hear the gods' in the thunder, see them in the sun and in the shape of a person's body. They saw ravens and believed Odin was watching over them. They had signs, things they could reach out to with all their senses to affirm their beliefs. The Christians had the scriptures.

Is there nothing poetic in the idea that the Maker of all things loved the world so deeply than He gave His Son over to the world to suffer for the sake of man? Is there nothing appealing in the idea that God chose to be born as a man, a common man, and to live as one, to suffer and die for all mankind, slave or free? Is there nothing beautiful in the idea that all of Creation is born of the Maker's thought, that all things in heaven and upon the earth were born from Him, from the sun and moon and stars to the very dirt we step on?

There is a certain appeal to Christianity that paganism does not have, just as the reverse is true.
 
Actually, according to some, Christianity spread earlier and faster in the Roman upper and urban classes then in poorer and more rural areas, and that this process repeated itself in northern Europe.
It spread mainly in the cities, yes, but calling that an upper class phenomenon is a bit of a stretch. While there undoubtedly was a portion of the elite that turned to Christianity (it's a big part of how they spread, and their homes were ideal places to congregate) it couldn't have been as successful without extensive outreach amongst the urban poor.
 
Well, I haven't heard of those, but then again I'm not that interested in neopaganism.
Not talking about neopaganism (although that could be cool).

I remember years ago reading a book on the history behind the Irish book of Invasions. As a quick aside, the book of invasions is interesting as Christian literature because it is on one hand the main surviving source of our knowledge for Irish Celtic mythology, whilst also being a large counter to it. The book christianises the myths and places them in an abrahamic context.

That aside, from memory the book casually mentions similar attempts with the germanic pantheons, of which early missionaries would try to convince people that this was the new world of Baldr, and that Jesus was the resurrected Baldr.

Now saying that, I have never found the source of this story. I have looked on multiple occasions and found references to it, but not any instance or communication that those references refer to.

IF it was an event that happened, then I don't see why it couldn't happen with Mithras, particularly due to the soldier cult involving many Germanic soldiers.
 
Top