How to: Paganism as a Hinduism cognate in Europe

Um, they did.

Srsly. There are a lot of correspondences between Vedic and Nordic mythology, particularly in the most ancient parts of the creation myths.

For that matter, they call it "Indo-European" for a reason--all the European pagan traditions (well, barring non-IE peoples like the Basques and the Finns) stem from the same base. The Romans, for instance--don't look at their pantheon, sort of artificially reconstituted by giving Latin names to basically Greek gods--look to their legends about the history of the Roman Republic. They basically retold the ancient stories of the gods in humanized, civic form.

Now that might not have much to do with what Midas is trying to do here. But Toynbee speculated on the alternate history possibilities of the early Medieval Christian order collapsing completely between the hammer of Viking (and other pagan) invasions and the anvil of expanding Islam. IIRC he then faked right, having the Viking-dominated northlands convert to Christianity--but Celtic rite, surviving as the last forlorn outpost of Christiandom in Ireland. He felt that would be more compatible somehow with the newly Islamic southern Europe. What if no Christian rites survive anywhere in Europe, yet large parts of it never become Muslim either--you'd get paganism, in fact a paganism distantly branching from the same roots as Hinduism.

Mixed up pretty freely, as pagans tended to do (and so-called Great Religions as well--I'm looking at you, Mother Holy Roman Catholic Church!) with syncretic additions from everywhere and everyone they interacted with.

In addition to Nordic versions there were other Germanic variations, not to mention completely non-IE traditions like the Finnish and the Magyar.

it seems you and i have different understandings of the term "aryan". you are referring to indo-europeans, and yes there was an indo-european migration into europe. but the aryans i am speaking of were a single tribe who invaded india from persia, and it was documented, and created a single state. cultural heritage and political heritage are very different things (both would be needed).

everything else, i generally agree with, except for your quip about catholicism, but thats an argument for another day. :D
 
I actually read more into the matter, and while a prolonged Rome seems like a nice catalyst for the preservation of paganism in Europe, I didn't know that the post-Roman Empire saw a surge in paganism. There were several attempts to install pro-Pagan Emperors on the throne, and I am wondering if such a situation were to arise, whether or not paganism could've survived better (perhaps the centrality of Christianity weakened).

One doesn't need to make the Roman Empire more successful, you just need to keep people like Constantine out of the succession. Maximinus Daia was the first emperor to attempt the idea of organising the collective Pagan priesthoods into a single hierarchy, empowering the high priests as magistrates. Without Constantine's endorsement, any ideological shift within Roman Polytheism after 300 CE could occur if Christianity was still on the sidelines. The problem isn't cross-religious syncretism, but what new hierarchal structures and popularist ideologies could be applied to preserve traditional Polytheism.
 
Well, the obvious candidate is Julian. Without getting too Julianwanky (no conquering the Germans or eliminating all traces of Christianity or what have you), just have him have a moderately successful Persian campaign and then just survive and let his policies go into effect (those being the segregation of classical and Christian education, the toleration of all sects, the rebuilding of the Temple, and the bankrolling of pagan priests). It would keep the educated classes and Europe largely pagan while still having Christianity as a large social force. The books I've read on the subject compare his plans to the Tang dynasty's restoration of Confucianism as the state ideology of China.
 

elder.wyrm

Banned
I actually read more into the matter, and while a prolonged Rome seems like a nice catalyst for the preservation of paganism in Europe, I didn't know that the post-Roman Empire saw a surge in paganism. There were several attempts to install pro-Pagan Emperors on the throne, and I am wondering if such a situation were to arise, whether or not paganism could've survived better (perhaps the centrality of Christianity weakened).

I actually think a prolonged Rome is worse for Paganism. After all, the entire reason paganism was overcome was because the Romans adopted it as a state religion and started actively persecuting pagans.
 
That's also true. If the Second Century Crisis had somehow done the Empire in, Christianity would have a very difficult time making inroads in the West.
 

MAlexMatt

Banned
Paganism in North and Western Europe is/was primarily fertility-religion, shamanism and Nordic polytheism. Further south, there is the Gaullish polytheism (I hate Celtic or Druidic as titles) that ended up being controlled by the Druids and which scared the Romans stiff. By the time you reach the Balkans, there is the Greek Pantheon of Gods and nature spirits to consider - not that far removed from Nordic Polytheism and fertility religions. But no Hindu tradition. You'll probably have to go well into BC to create that - and what will carry it? There will be strong (if passive) opposition from a variety of pagan religions.

A lot of the theology that went into European pagan traditions had rudiments that would be familiar to a contemporary Hindu (to the extent you can talk about Hinduism at the time), if not outright identical. In fact, you could say that, say, Germanic ideas about fate and destiny are the seeds, the undeveloped clay, of ideas like karma.

I think the issue is that the first European pagans to urbanize (and thus gain the basis for sustained theological development), the Greeks, almost immediately abandoned their polytheist pagan roots and made a mad dash towards a kind of philosophical monotheism in Parmenides and subsequent post-Socratic thought.

So really what you need is to avoid the Roman conquest of the Mediterranean and the subsequent spread of Hellenist ideas Westward. Hellenism would still dominate out East, but the continent of Europe itself would be free to develop a native tradition of thought separate from the Greek one. Similarly, without the rise of a modern state so intimately tied up with an official religion, religious thought in Europe can maintain the kind of decentralization that Hinduism always enjoyed
 
A lot of the theology that went into European pagan traditions had rudiments that would be familiar to a contemporary Hindu (to the extent you can talk about Hinduism at the time), if not outright identical. In fact, you could say that, say, Germanic ideas about fate and destiny are the seeds, the undeveloped clay, of ideas like karma.

I think the issue is that the first European pagans to urbanize (and thus gain the basis for sustained theological development), the Greeks, almost immediately abandoned their polytheist pagan roots and made a mad dash towards a kind of philosophical monotheism in Parmenides and subsequent post-Socratic thought.

So really what you need is to avoid the Roman conquest of the Mediterranean and the subsequent spread of Hellenist ideas Westward. Hellenism would still dominate out East, but the continent of Europe itself would be free to develop a native tradition of thought separate from the Greek one. Similarly, without the rise of a modern state so intimately tied up with an official religion, religious thought in Europe can maintain the kind of decentralization that Hinduism always enjoyed

Interesting post. Would the different Western European pagan traditions merge or overlap, the way "Aryan", Dravidian, Punjabi traditions merged into the stream of Indian civilization but yet kept their own uniqueness? Celtic Druidism and Norse religion merging? Would one tradition predominate? There is a theory that the "Celts" were a relatively superficial overlay over other peoples (not dissing the Celts, being Celtic ancestry myself).

The Druids as a proto-Brahman class?

Would a European pagan tradition have the ascetic element of some aspects of Hinduism?
 
I agree with what was said before, the best way is probably to keep Christianity away from Europe. If Judea is not part of an european empire, there won't be many people moving the great distance from the Levant to Western Europe. Better still, if Judea is part of a mideastern empire, that'll give them a different direction to expand in, and maybe even allow for christians to be viewed as "Them" by Europeans.
 
Hinduism has lots of exotic animal headed deities, i can only see a european cognate of Hinduism having something similar if the Religio Romana incorporates the civilo pagan religion of Ancient Egypt to a greater extent
 
Hinduism has lots of exotic animal headed deities, i can only see a european cognate of Hinduism having something similar if the Religio Romana incorporates the civilo pagan religion of Ancient Egypt to a greater extent

No it doesn't. In any case that's a rather simplistic view. And "Exotic"? seriously, how Orientalist can we get?
 
Last edited:
Top