Hellenistic Religions in a Modern World

I would love to see a timeline where Pythagoreanism or Neopythagoreanism becomes dominant in the West, overlapping pagan beliefs the same way that Taoism and Buddhism not only coexisted but comingled with pre-existing Chinese folk beliefs, to the extent that arhats and boddhisatvas are worshipped as dieties and shrines to Mazu, Caishen, and the city gods are regarded by many Chinese as aspects of Taoism. Considering that folk beliefs in house spirits like kobolds, nisse, brownies, domovoi, and monaciello perservered in post-Christian Europe as late as the 19th Century, it seems highly likely.
I think the difficulty is that both pythagoreanism and neopythagoreanism were largely (as I understand it) very elitist and in many ways represent the same issues that gnostic Christianity would suffer in that it required too much effort for your average man.

Pythagorean/platonic traditions require the subject to become a contemplative and dedicate much of their life with philosophy. Christianity requires faith and that's it.

It's a similar issue with stoicism to some extent. You can practice it casually, but there isn't really a reward for doing so like being a layman of buddhism (better chance of rebirth as a monk).
 
Pythagorean/platonic traditions require the subject to become a contemplative and dedicate much of their life with philosophy. Christianity requires faith and that's it.

It's a similar issue with stoicism to some extent. You can practice it casually, but there isn't really a reward for doing so like being a layman of buddhism (better chance of rebirth as a monk).

Is it possible to reform these philosophies to become more universalist in the same way Buddhism was successful in spreading to common people throughout large parts of Asia?
 
Western philosophies can be summarized by pairs of opposite ways for reaching the Truth, and people understand emotions.

So we could have people eternally arguing about freewill vs fate, Aristotelian realism vs Platonist idealism, even utilitarianism vs "human-rights realism", empirism vs rationalism, whether the end justifies the means or not, or any other ramification of these bipolar philosophical debates.

Even though, the best way to get people in some religion is fear, so we can disguise science as magic and get people fear it: Astronomy hidden as Astrology for example, remember Asimov's Foundation...

How can we get something for fearing afterlife?
 
Is it possible to reform these philosophies to become more universalist in the same way Buddhism was successful in spreading to common people throughout large parts of Asia?

It's difficult to say. I mean when we look at the success of buddhism, it's important to remember the cultural and philosophical climate it entered.

Doctrines of Karma, rebirth and the wandering contemplatives of south East Asian traditions already gave much of the ideas of buddhism solid ground from whin to be considered normal and it's conclusions not far out.

China and it's surrounding countries are really interesting on this ground though. One of the greater issues of Buddhism is it's doctrine of emptiness, an idea which is very difficult to understand and in many ways is pointless to understand if you can't intuit it. When it came to China however it found a culture already highly exposed to Taoism which extraordinarily seperatly had already well established emptiness philosophically. Indeed there were so many obvious similarities at first that for many hundred years the word Tao was used in place of dhamma and this greater emphasis on emptiness led to Bodhidarma's establishment of the Zen/chan tradition just as Sikhism borrowed so heavily from both Islamic and Hindu traditions.

Pythagoreanism/Platonism MAY have an interesting compatibility point, but it's a problematic one. According to contemporary roman historians, there was a lot of similarities between the druidic philosophies and pythagoreanism. If that IS true, you could potentially have a more civilised celtic world adopt Hellenistic culture in mainland Europe (the Galatians of Anatolia could work, but I know virtually nothing about them and in the back of my mind I seem to recall that they had no Druids) and from there make them wish to hellenize to the point of merging pythagoreanism truly into their traditions, but I have no idea where you would begin.

P.s. There is more to the universalism of buddhism, but I am typing this from my phone and auto correct is devoting me insane. Apparently Bodhidharma wants to bomb Osama and it was Tapirs that truly spread buddhism into East Asia. According to Apple anyway...
 
A thought I had in the past was that Ancient Greek religion, or anything like that, would have a harder time standing up to a modern environment than the OTL current religions. There's less malleability in the face of science. It's more difficult, for example, when the rotation of the planets are discovered for the Hellenistic religions to make that work with the idea that Apollo pulls the sun with a chariot or that it's the Egyptian god Ra or whatever else.

So how would the Hellenistic Religions look in the modern world? How would they adapt to science and discovery?

The problem is, it depends largely how does that happen, because, if it's by making Christianity a more elitist/non-proselytistic religion, and assuming that the Mystery Cults decide to remain just that, mysteric sects without any strong wish to expand it to everybody, then it's fair to assume that something akin to Hinduism but with a slightly more organized religious canon may arise. Naturally, this is the solution that has the biggest butterflies, as without the Roman Catholic Church begin at least a symbolical sign of unity of most of Europe, the Middle Ages and forward will be really different, but it's the more likely one.

If you make this happen with a stronger Neoplatonism, or general stupidity and stubbornness from the early Church (or both), the resulting religion Graeco-roman would not be all that much different from Christianity seen from a Gnostic point of view... which also means that the general population will be pretty much excluded. Sadly, this alsomeans that's very unlikely it will survive to our times, bringing it close to ASB territory. It is easy to imagine something that sounds like he current New Age theories mixed with some of Jehova's Witness beliefs.

Another way would be humanists in the Renaissance going "We copy our ancestors' art style, we translate and uphold their literary works, why not convert to their religion?" It requires a massive change in mentality, ASB even, and it means ditching some aspects for make it fit to the modern world, but the result would be more akin to what some people think when they hear "Hellenic religion in modern times" (gods that are actually gods [not quite allegories, that is] with feelings similar to the ones of humans; divine intervention in every sense of the word begin considered a commonplace...) and, while it will change something (returning paganism in the times just before the Coutner-Reformation isn't exactly a stroll in the park), the result world would be still somewhat recognizable to us.
 
then it's fair to assume that something akin to Hinduism but with a slightly more organized religious canon may arise. Naturally, this is the solution that has the biggest butterflies, as without the Roman Catholic Church begin at least a symbolical sign of unity of most of Europe, the Middle Ages and forward will be really different, but it's the more likely one.

One of the aspects of Hinduism that's unclear to me, and I hope someone can clear this up, is whether or not there was any self-perception among Hindus throughout the subcontinent of having a common religious identity (albiet a broad spectrum of forms and practices) before Westerners defined them as such.

I ask this because, the development of a European equivalent of Hinduism would seem to recquire the various pantheons of the Greeks, Celts, Latins, Germans, Slavs, and even non-Indo-Europeans in Europe to undergo some degree of synthesis to find equivalent gods and goddesses. This happened between Greece and Italy but didn't occur in the lands beyond Roman authority aside from makeshift, superficial correlations made from outside observers such as Tacitus.

It seems to me that while smaller dieties in India differ from village to village, region to region, and culture to culture, the prominent gods and goddesses such as Shiva, Kali, and so on seem to be shared between various ethno-linguistic groups in India, even the non-Aryan Dravidians. Did such dieties become widespread due to direct transfer from one group to the others, replacing the former pantheons, or did the Vishnu as worshipped in various parts of India originate as the amalgamation of various local "equivalent" god through correlation the same way Jupiter and Zeus came to be seen as one?

Would a Europe that stays pagan continue to have separate Celtic, Germanic, Basque, and Latin pantheons or would they eventually, at least superficially, meld into one? The different varieties of Hinduism don't seem to have any ethnic or linguistic aspect in their differentiations...
 
Would it be fair to say that after the fall of Rome, the Catholic church was the last remnant of Roman government left?
In the West, yes. In the East, the Roman government persisted until [debatable point in time], when it became a Greek government that called itself Roman. But even then, the Western Church vaguely accepted the political authority of the Eastern Roman/Byzantine Empire.
 
One of the aspects of Hinduism that's unclear to me, and I hope someone can clear this up, is whether or not there was any self-perception among Hindus throughout the subcontinent of having a common religious identity (albiet a broad spectrum of forms and practices) before Westerners defined them as such.

I ask this because, the development of a European equivalent of Hinduism would seem to recquire the various pantheons of the Greeks, Celts, Latins, Germans, Slavs, and even non-Indo-Europeans in Europe to undergo some degree of synthesis to find equivalent gods and goddesses. This happened between Greece and Italy but didn't occur in the lands beyond Roman authority aside from makeshift, superficial correlations made from outside observers such as Tacitus.

It seems to me that while smaller dieties in India differ from village to village, region to region, and culture to culture, the prominent gods and goddesses such as Shiva, Kali, and so on seem to be shared between various ethno-linguistic groups in India, even the non-Aryan Dravidians. Did such dieties become widespread due to direct transfer from one group to the others, replacing the former pantheons, or did the Vishnu as worshipped in various parts of India originate as the amalgamation of various local "equivalent" god through correlation the same way Jupiter and Zeus came to be seen as one?

Would a Europe that stays pagan continue to have separate Celtic, Germanic, Basque, and Latin pantheons or would they eventually, at least superficially, meld into one? The different varieties of Hinduism don't seem to have any ethnic or linguistic aspect in their differentiations...
From my understanding, there was a sense of a common series of faiths but (like with pagan europe) often different local versions of the same stories or different gods in the same role. The brahmanic faith or the early Vedic faith is widespread enough sharing enough philosophically that the writings of Jains and Buddhists refer to it in a rather universal fashion in a manner that suggests those who would hear them would also understand the references.

There are significant enough differences in stories though. Many early versions of Ravana have him as a good guy and emphasise his pious nature, whilst the more commonly known Ramayana likes to focus on him as evil lord evlington. Further radical in this fashion are Jain versions of common hindu stories which replace the deities as misguided people and even has Ravana as the next destined Tirthankara (probably spelt wrong, but I am on my phone) and has some super weird stories on shiva (his love making skills being so powerful he kills a lot of people from some Jain stories I have heard.

The point is that there was a similar atmosphere to Ancient Greece. There was enough in common along what we now consider to be the hindu regions to the point where you could recognise them in common even with vast differences.
 
From my understanding, there was a sense of a common series of faiths but (like with pagan europe) often different local versions of the same stories or different gods in the same role. The brahmanic faith or the early Vedic faith is widespread enough sharing enough philosophically that the writings of Jains and Buddhists refer to it in a rather universal fashion in a manner that suggests those who would hear them would also understand the references.

There are significant enough differences in stories though. Many early versions of Ravana have him as a good guy and emphasise his pious nature, whilst the more commonly known Ramayana likes to focus on him as evil lord evlington. Further radical in this fashion are Jain versions of common hindu stories which replace the deities as misguided people and even has Ravana as the next destined Tirthankara (probably spelt wrong, but I am on my phone) and has some super weird stories on shiva (his love making skills being so powerful he kills a lot of people from some Jain stories I have heard.

The point is that there was a similar atmosphere to Ancient Greece. There was enough in common along what we now consider to be the hindu regions to the point where you could recognise them in common even with vast differences.

Do the various major Hindu dieties have different names between different languages, as well? I'm particularly curious about their names in the Dravidian languages and how similar or different they are. If similar, that would indicate the Dravidians abandoned their old gods in favor of the Indo-Aryan ones from the north, but if different, that would suggest they maintained their own pantheons and perhaps fused them with aspects of the Indo-Aryan religion.

In a pagan Europe, do you think Greco-Roman ideas would be incorporated into the northern, Germanic and Slavic faiths to a great degree and "standardize" them, or is it more likely that the Mediterranean world and the northern peoples would maintain distinctive forms of religion with minimal crossover?
 
Hellenistic religion's impact on culture

I have plenty of grounds to believe that Hellenistic religion would have MASSIVE butterflies on today's culture:
1: Hellenistic religion surviving= the LGBT movement is butterflied out of existence due to cultural redundancy, because the Ancient Greeks, and the Romans even more so, were very into bisexuality. The Hellenistic model of society apparently assumed that humans are bisexual by default rather than heterosexual. Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar were both well-known for loving people of both genders- Alexander had Hephastion and Roxane, Caesar had the King of Bithynia and the wives of several politicians.
2: Hellenistic religion surviving= increased naturist movement, because the Greeks exercised in the nude and the Romans bathed in public. Nudity would probably be mandatory in gyms and pools, and no OTL swimwear would exist, with the exception of swimming masks and buoyant swim-wings. Yoga pants and clothes for exercising would more than likely be butterflied out. In short- modesty would be butterflied out!
3: Hellenistic religion surviving= American Civil War more than likely butterflied out, unless there is a major Abolitionist movement ITTL somewhere in the period between 1200 and 1900. Slavery would not be based on race, and where there are slaves (and who is enslaved) could be completely different- POWs are the main source of chattels, followed by prison convicts, debtors, and minors enslaved by their parents. The old Turkish ruling that slaves have zero lineage (the scenario of a master having an affair with a female slave, then that slave having a son, who is by law born a freeman, and can legally purchase his own mother if she is still enslaved, could be possible) could be considered the norm. By the 21st century ITTL, the only slaves are prison convicts and 'concubines' (the definition of that word WILL include things too mature to talk about on AH.com), as the Industrial Revolution has practically done in forced labor.
4: Hellenistic religion surviving= Islam butterflied out, which means TTL Joatsimeon does not get banned from AH.com (Please don't ban me for saying this!). Christianity and Judaism also get butterflied into insignificance.
5: Hellenistic religion surviving= Celtic, Norse, Roman, Babylonian, and Carthaginian religions surviving into the present day. The Aesir compete with the Olympians for space in religious media, followers of Marduk and Morrigan participate in an auction for sacred ground, etc. Perhaps TTL's Neil Gaiman writes American Gods to include a Pantheon that originated from English colonists in New York or something like that. In short, paganism would have the run of the place, and Sikhism would be the one major monotheistic religion. Oddly enough, Wicca would be butterflied away, because there would have already been existing nature cults in which Howard Gardner could dance sky-clad with young women.
6: Hellenistic religion survives= Gothic architecture and OTL Baroque and Rococo periods more than likely butterflied out of existence. Classical and Neoclassical would be the main art styles. Modern fashion would probably either remain stagnant since the Regency period or look a lot more like something the Greeks or Romans would have recognized.
7: Hellenistic religion surviving= Bison would be more common, as the armies of whatever US-Equivalent controls the great plains would not try to deliberately drive bison extinct in order to control the Natives- priests and Priestesses of Artemis, Hecate, Gaea, Pan, Poseidon (because bison are close enough to cattle), and pretty much every other nature god and nature goddess would all be clamoring against wantonly killing an animal.
8: Hellenistic religion survives= ESRB and TV censorship likely gets butterflied away- the Greeks and Romans did not complain about nude statues displayed in public, and saying "Not in front of the kids!" would probably be butterflied away too.
9: Hellenistic religion survives= Paleontology becomes quasi-religious, as fossils are sacred to both nature gods and mineral gods. The Sauropod "Sauroposeidon" would have a different name, as do other scientific names that invoke the names of gods.
10: Hellenistic religion survives= butterflies away saying "gesundheit" every time you sneeze.
 
A thought I had in the past was that Ancient Greek religion, or anything like that, would have a harder time standing up to a modern environment than the OTL current religions. There's less malleability in the face of science. It's more difficult, for example, when the rotation of the planets are discovered for the Hellenistic religions to make that work with the idea that Apollo pulls the sun with a chariot or that it's the Egyptian god Ra or whatever else.

So how would the Hellenistic Religions look in the modern world? How would they adapt to science and discovery?

If you mean Greek paganism they probably are still around just with not enough followers to influence anything. Religion seems to have a habit of going by its old ways no matter what science proves.
 
One of the aspects of Hinduism that's unclear to me, and I hope someone can clear this up, is whether or not there was any self-perception among Hindus throughout the subcontinent of having a common religious identity (albiet a broad spectrum of forms and practices) before Westerners defined them as such.

I ask this because, the development of a European equivalent of Hinduism would seem to recquire the various pantheons of the Greeks, Celts, Latins, Germans, Slavs, and even non-Indo-Europeans in Europe to undergo some degree of synthesis to find equivalent gods and goddesses. This happened between Greece and Italy but didn't occur in the lands beyond Roman authority aside from makeshift, superficial correlations made from outside observers such as Tacitus.

It seems to me that while smaller dieties in India differ from village to village, region to region, and culture to culture, the prominent gods and goddesses such as Shiva, Kali, and so on seem to be shared between various ethno-linguistic groups in India, even the non-Aryan Dravidians. Did such dieties become widespread due to direct transfer from one group to the others, replacing the former pantheons, or did the Vishnu as worshipped in various parts of India originate as the amalgamation of various local "equivalent" god through correlation the same way Jupiter and Zeus came to be seen as one?

Would a Europe that stays pagan continue to have separate Celtic, Germanic, Basque, and Latin pantheons or would they eventually, at least superficially, meld into one? The different varieties of Hinduism don't seem to have any ethnic or linguistic aspect in their differentiations...

I imagine that Celtic and Basque would be too small fry to have an effect. But yes, I imagine that a Greco-Roman-Germanic-Slavic merger would almost certainly happen. Either you get the Greco-Roman merger, where gods in different pantheons are seen as different names for the same gods, or you get a situation where the different pantheons battled each other, such as in the Titan vs Olympian split.
 
I have plenty of grounds to believe that Hellenistic religion would have MASSIVE butterflies on today's culture:
1: Hellenistic religion surviving= the LGBT movement is butterflied out of existence due to cultural redundancy, because the Ancient Greeks, and the Romans even more so, were very into bisexuality. The Hellenistic model of society apparently assumed that humans are bisexual by default rather than heterosexual. Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar were both well-known for loving people of both genders- Alexander had Hephastion and Roxane, Caesar had the King of Bithynia and the wives of several politicians.
2: Hellenistic religion surviving= increased naturist movement, because the Greeks exercised in the nude and the Romans bathed in public. Nudity would probably be mandatory in gyms and pools, and no OTL swimwear would exist, with the exception of swimming masks and buoyant swim-wings. Yoga pants and clothes for exercising would more than likely be butterflied out. In short- modesty would be butterflied out!
3: Hellenistic religion surviving= American Civil War more than likely butterflied out, unless there is a major Abolitionist movement ITTL somewhere in the period between 1200 and 1900. Slavery would not be based on race, and where there are slaves (and who is enslaved) could be completely different- POWs are the main source of chattels, followed by prison convicts, debtors, and minors enslaved by their parents. The old Turkish ruling that slaves have zero lineage (the scenario of a master having an affair with a female slave, then that slave having a son, who is by law born a freeman, and can legally purchase his own mother if she is still enslaved, could be possible) could be considered the norm. By the 21st century ITTL, the only slaves are prison convicts and 'concubines' (the definition of that word WILL include things too mature to talk about on AH.com), as the Industrial Revolution has practically done in forced labor.
4: Hellenistic religion surviving= Islam butterflied out, which means TTL Joatsimeon does not get banned from AH.com (Please don't ban me for saying this!). Christianity and Judaism also get butterflied into insignificance.
5: Hellenistic religion surviving= Celtic, Norse, Roman, Babylonian, and Carthaginian religions surviving into the present day. The Aesir compete with the Olympians for space in religious media, followers of Marduk and Morrigan participate in an auction for sacred ground, etc. Perhaps TTL's Neil Gaiman writes American Gods to include a Pantheon that originated from English colonists in New York or something like that. In short, paganism would have the run of the place, and Sikhism would be the one major monotheistic religion. Oddly enough, Wicca would be butterflied away, because there would have already been existing nature cults in which Howard Gardner could dance sky-clad with young women.
6: Hellenistic religion survives= Gothic architecture and OTL Baroque and Rococo periods more than likely butterflied out of existence. Classical and Neoclassical would be the main art styles. Modern fashion would probably either remain stagnant since the Regency period or look a lot more like something the Greeks or Romans would have recognized.
7: Hellenistic religion surviving= Bison would be more common, as the armies of whatever US-Equivalent controls the great plains would not try to deliberately drive bison extinct in order to control the Natives- priests and Priestesses of Artemis, Hecate, Gaea, Pan, Poseidon (because bison are close enough to cattle), and pretty much every other nature god and nature goddess would all be clamoring against wantonly killing an animal.
8: Hellenistic religion survives= ESRB and TV censorship likely gets butterflied away- the Greeks and Romans did not complain about nude statues displayed in public, and saying "Not in front of the kids!" would probably be butterflied away too.
9: Hellenistic religion survives= Paleontology becomes quasi-religious, as fossils are sacred to both nature gods and mineral gods. The Sauropod "Sauroposeidon" would have a different name, as do other scientific names that invoke the names of gods.
10: Hellenistic religion survives= butterflies away saying "gesundheit" every time you sneeze.

This is a good example of the classic mistake made in a lot of alternate history: you take a divergence from a point in history, and then freeze frame the split for centuries afterwards. The idea that there would not be evolution in architecture, for example, is completely alien space bats. Equally is the idea that a racial hierarchy wouldn't set in in slavery, should Europeans be the power elite in the Americas and there's a cheap source of forced labour from Africa.
 
food for thought...

To be fair...
1: the Catholic Church today is pretty much the same Catholic Church as it was in the 4th century, Counter-reformation and Vatican II aside. Large organizations and movements tend to remain consistent even over thousands of years.
2: Rome and Germany frequently took each other's inhabitants as slaves- both were Caucasian.
3: I'm not even going whole-hog on the ASBs- I was simply noting that society would be drastically different being based on a different culture.
4: Hellenism already has a major influence on our world- it would not be a stretch to see Greek-style Gymnasiums and Roman-style public baths in ITTL's 21st century.
5: Do YOU have any theories as to your daily routine ITTL (assuming there is some concerted international campaign for emancipation before 1900)?
 
To be fair...
1: the Catholic Church today is pretty much the same Catholic Church
as it was in the 4th century, Counter-reformation and Vatican II aside. Large organizations and movements tend to remain consistent even over thousands of years.
2: Rome and Germany frequently took each other's inhabitants as slaves- both were Caucasian.
3: I'm not even going whole-hog on the ASBs- I was simply noting that society would be drastically different being based on a different culture.
4: Hellenism already has a major influence on our world- it would not be a stretch to see Greek-style Gymnasiums and Roman-style public baths in ITTL's 21st century.
5: Do YOU have any theories as to your daily routine ITTL (assuming there is some concerted international campaign for emancipation before 1900)?

It'd be different, but not in the ways you would expect.

The Hellenists were very otherworldly, more so than the Christians. Platonic philosophy is known for its contempt of the material world. The Fathers of the Church didn't get their ideas from nowhere. I'd say the prudishness and celibacy would be more common in a Hellenistic religion. For an idea of it, look at the Cathars and the Marcionites.

And the Hellenists were more focused on man and ideas than nature.
 
Wikipedia says:
Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360-c. 270 BCE) is usually credited with founding the school of skepticism. He traveled to India and studied with the "gymnosophists". From there, he brought back the idea that nothing can be known for certain. The senses are easily fooled, and reason follows too easily our desires.

I don't want to promaote this guy specifically, but this shows that (especially after Menander/Milinda), a heavily Buddhist influenced philosophy or simply Buddhism might play an important tole in the Hellenistic mediterranean.
 
I have plenty of grounds to believe that Hellenistic religion would have MASSIVE butterflies on today's culture:
1: Hellenistic religion surviving= the LGBT movement is butterflied out of existence due to cultural redundancy, because the Ancient Greeks, and the Romans even more so, were very into bisexuality. The Hellenistic model of society apparently assumed that humans are bisexual by default rather than heterosexual. Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar were both well-known for loving people of both genders- Alexander had Hephastion and Roxane, Caesar had the King of Bithynia and the wives of several politicians.
2: Hellenistic religion surviving= increased naturist movement, because the Greeks exercised in the nude and the Romans bathed in public. Nudity would probably be mandatory in gyms and pools, and no OTL swimwear would exist, with the exception of swimming masks and buoyant swim-wings. Yoga pants and clothes for exercising would more than likely be butterflied out. In short- modesty would be butterflied out!

Many of your points don't account for huge, huge butterflies - The idea that the United States or Sikhism would still come about in a world where Christianity never becomes as influential is highly unlikely.

Your first two points are interesting, though, and I've always viewed a lot of modern societal debates this way. There are plenty of cultures in which the sight of a nude body of the opposite sex is just part of everyday life, yet because of the sense of shame toward nudity ingrained in Christianity (Adam and Eve instantly become ashamed of their bodies after eating from the tree of knowledge), we Westerners debate over trivial matters such as how to set up public restrooms for transgendered persons (why have gendered restrooms at all?), or whether mothers breastfeeding in public is an acceptable practice (why not?).

I imagine that Celtic and Basque would be too small fry to have an effect. But yes, I imagine that a Greco-Roman-Germanic-Slavic merger would almost certainly happen. Either you get the Greco-Roman merger, where gods in different pantheons are seen as different names for the same gods, or you get a situation where the different pantheons battled each other, such as in the Titan vs Olympian split.

I suppose that the way various non-Roman peoples like the Franks, the Rus, and later, the Turks, clamored to see themselves as the heirs to the Romans after their collapse would indicate an eventual merger of the various European pantheons. If a surviving pagan Eastern Roman Empire has as much cultural impact on the Slavs as the Christian one did, the synthesis of Greco-Roman and Slavic ideas is very likely.

It's also possible, however, that the inhabitants of Russia might eventually become Zoroastrians after contact with Persia. There is a theory that the Slavic pantheon contained a dualistic concept of a white god (Belobog) and black god (Chernobog, like the one in "Fantasia") that may have been influenced by Zoroastrianism. Maybe, due to butterflies, the Slavs would never become the dominant linguistic group in Russia over the Scythians and Sarmatians, in which case Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, or a native Indo-Iranian paganism might be dominant.

The Celts in Britain and Ireland, too, are likely to synthesize the Hellenic gods the same way they adopted Roman Catholicism, and the same way the Romanized inhabitants of Gaul and Spain began following the Greco-Roman pantheon (are there any cases of continental Celtic gods being incorporated into Roman religion?).

The Germanics, however, I'm not sure about, especially in far-away Scandinavia. I have trouble believing that all Europeans would adopt the Greco-Roman religion, implying some sort of pan-European sentiment that definitely didn't exist that far back in antiquity. There must be a geographic boundary to Hellenic paganism somewhere - In the northeast, the Urals would seem to be the natural stopping point and Persia's dominant Zoroastrianism would seemingly halt its spread southeast. The Sahara and Arabian deserts would limit the Greco-Roman pantheon to the south. I could see the Scandinavians holding out as well, due to the detached, isolated nature of Scandinavia's geography.
 
Puranas?

The Hindu Synthesis owed much to the Puranas; flexibly adaptable stories with open slots for local deities or local names or attributes of deities, spread throughout the subcontinent and beyond by thousands of Brahmins, who had accepted the challenge of universalist Buddhism and Jainism.

To bring about this pan-European Hellenic Synthesis, what would take the role of the Puranas, who would play the part of Brahmins?

Also, let's not forget that Buddhism and Jainism had developed in reaction to an earlier Hindu foundation: Vedic Brahminism. So, if this Hellenic Sybthesis occurs in the 1st millennium CE, don't expect it to remain unchallenged from unorthodox universalist religions from within.
 
Top