#soft polytheism

[theanic-devotion]

Someone: what religion are you/what do you believe?

What I think: I’m somewhere between a soft polytheist and a pluriform monotheist. Maybe henotheistic. Sort of hellenic, but open to other pantheons. I like the idea of a Mother Nature type entity, but more in a panentheistic way. But also not mother as in female or woman, mother as in it’s the easiest way for my human mind to conceptualize a being that is everything and nothing.

What I say: I’m pagan

[dandelionjack]

as a natural skeptic i’m gonna be real with you. i’m slamming the brakes on this whole religion thing before i figure out what it really is that i believe. one thing i know for certain is that i don’t think my experiences of the world relate to what you call “hard polytheism” at all, so i will be refraining from referring to myself as “pagan” or “heathen” or similar terms from here on out — as i learned from reddit, actual pagans, i.e. those of you who believe that the Gods from whatever pantheon you follow are literal, actual, 100% independent, non-anthropogenic, non-metaphoric entities, tend to frown upon talk of “archetypes” and co. i don’t want to be seen as insulting your Gods with my home-brewed eclectic woo-woo nonsense, so i’ll keep at an arm’s length until i’m one hundred percent sure that i can defend my own beliefs because i know what they are.

i personally lean towards the chaos magic side of approaching these concepts — although, truth be told, i need to do more reading. a lot more reading. but once again, i stress, personally, i find myself far more comfortable with the concept of egregores. metaphysical entities, congregations of energy and intent, that have been given power and consciousness through centuries of dedicated devotion and prayer from humans. if enough people direct their thoughts towards an idea for long enough, leave offerings for that idea, hold festivities in its honour, write poetry and paint artworks depicting and praising it, then it’s no wonder if it gains a mind and will of its own. i lean towards the idea of deities/other spirit entities as personified aspects of the universe, as currents of energy or patterns of thought or representations of natural phenomena that were given different (or many) names in different historical/geographic contexts and have taken on a semi-solid shape with time

which is to say, i don’t know whether the Presence that has been visiting me — the one that rekindled/sparked/ignited my interest in all of this, pun quite intended if you know who i’m talking about, is genuinely the ambiguous, controversial Norse deity that i have been referring to Them as; whether They are some kind of thoughtform or another separate spirit; a manifestation of my subconscious desire to “Aren’t You Tired Of Being Nice Don’t You Just Wanna Go A Little Apeshit”; or a character i Made Up In My Head (not outside of the scope of possibility, knowing my tendency to spot patterns where there aren’t any). i’m treading with caution. that’s what you do. because after doing some wider research, i really, really don’t wish to be associated with that sort of person — you know the one. edgy. rebellious kid. doesn’t know what they’re talking about. witchtoker

after all, i did come here through pop culture. so, maybe, all this ends up being is another hyperfixation on mythology. i’ve had those before as a way younger teen — thanks, uncle rick. don’t really know how to conclude this, so: i’ll get more educated and get back to you. if any of you (you know who you are) have any BOOK or ARTICLE RECOMMENDATIONS based on what i’ve said above, please don’t hesitate to PUT THEM IN THE COMMENT SECTION

xoxo, ivy

[citrineandrosmarin]

So I'm generally a Hard Polytheist, with exceptions. But in the sphere of Hellenic worship the more I learn about how differently we interpret some deities or aspects of them in the modern day, the more I see what has changed and in some ways our "versions" of the gods are more removed from their "originals" than say, the Romans'. In which case if we are not strictly worshiping the theoi in their Greek cultural context but also our own, why would you not include the Roman context too? If the gods adapt to cultural changes then seeing the Roman ones as separate beings rather than the theoi adapting makes less sense.

Am I making sense?

[silverthornwitchery]

Hail, The Goddess of many faces! Great queen of heaven and earth! You who art Freyja, who art Sekhmet-Bast-Hathor, Lady of the Sun, Moon, and Twilight, Who art Aset, Isis, Lady of Magicks, Who art Hekate, Lady of Crossroads, Who art Aeracura, Lady of the darkened Earth, Who art Rosmerta, Lady who provides for all, Who art Frigg, The Divine All-Mother, Who yet again is Isis, Demeter, and many more. Hail to you, Great Mother, Caring, Loving, Yet Furious and Frenzied, Cunning and Sly, You guide the hand of witches, and cunningfolk, and those who work their sorceries. Hail to you, Goddess, Queen of Earth, Queen of Heaven! As Above, So Below, We Honour You, Great One.

[booksandwitchery]

Hydromancy and Scrying

So I tried scrying for the first time a few nights ago. My experience was compelling (????) so I am going to share it.

The first time I was introduced to scrying (outside of fiction) was last year when I read The Witch of the Forest's Guide to Natural Magick by Lindsay Squire. She introduces scrying as an exercise that, like other methods of divination, assists in revealing or seeing hidden information. I don't believe in supernatural scrying, like seeing the future or talking to spirits, but I firmly believe that divination can bring things to the surface of your mind from your subconscious. Many methods of scrying involve meditation upon a reflective surface, but Squire also discusses things like pyromancy and bibliomancy.

Instructions for scrying, as stated in her book, promote passive observance of the subject of divination (fire, water, deck of cards, flock of birds, etc). With scrying, as the images come and go in our mind we should attempt to interpret them.

Hydromancy, where the reflective surface for scrying is water, seemed the most appealing to me--but it took me a long time to find a scrying bowl that worked. It ended up being a shallow, circular, matte black ceramic bowl. At night, I lit a candle, turned all the lights off, bent my head over the bowl, and observed the water. Afterward, I wrote down my experience:

"I am in a dark room--spherical and all black with traces of white and blue creating hints of shadow and depth, solid but blurry in the water.

There seems to be a rodent to my right (or something like a rodent) looking over a wooden desk at me, talking. He's got a man's voice and he speaks English. He's very wise, but he's small. He's very blunt, too--not rude, but he doesn't waste time on sentimentality or getting too emotional about things. He's generally not very emotional, but he's smart and kind. He knows what he's talking about, and he's generally right about things.

To my left, light is shining through two separate doorways, one big and one small. They are doorways to other places but I don't know where they go. I'm having a hard time deciding whether I should focus on the wise rodent, or the other doorways. I decide that the doorways and the rodent are equally important.

Then my cat distracts me, and I decide that this was more than enough for a first scrying session. I blow the candle out."

I think I'll be chewing on this one for a while, honestly. What an interesting first-time experience. I'll say it's possible the animal that was speaking to me is some aspect of my higher self, or an aspect of myself that I am looking to for guidance right now. I felt extremely comforted by him, like I knew him very well. Y'all, I literally just imagined a rodent in a scrying bowl lit by a candle in the dark, but he feels like a very real aspect of myself that I want to get to know better.

TLDR; Based on my first impressions, scrying is really fun, is a great writing exercise and also returns those feelings of enchantment that I felt when I was a kid.

[emilytheghostwitch]

Two types of Polytheism is Hard Polytheism and Soft Polytheism.

I would like to talk about them today in a short post, as I find them helpful terms for those who practise any form of Paganism or blended faith.

Soft Polytheism:

This is where all aspects of the Divine can be seen to be different aspects of the same Being. Many cite the Roman and Greek Deities as prime examples of this, like for instance, when you think of Aphrodite and Venus.

Some also view the different faces or facets of the Divine as archetypes that people can interact with. This can be found in lots of different types of paganism, and is very common in pop culture paganism.

When I think of soft polytheism in fiction I often think of the scene in the first House of Night book where Nyx is showing the different faces of who she is to Zoey.

Many Pagans cite the proto indo European pantheon of gods, that many of our gods can be traced back to; and while I think researching the roots and history of pantheons in general is important, the way you view deity does not have to be justified. (Unless you’re culturally appropriating or whatever, then maybe, you know, rethink what you’re doing?)

Hard Polytheism:

Hard Polytheism in contrast to this is believing that all the Deities to ever have existed and that will exist are their own separate Being.

People who follow this line of logic believe that the Deities are real beings, and not personifications. (Although you don’t have to view them as personifications in soft polytheism either.)

Neither way of viewing the Gods is more right than the other, it is simply a matter of personal belief, and way of interacting with the world.

[thehexwitch]

I've been starting to relate more to deity and divinity in a more literal sense than before, and have been really leaning toward the idea that while the majority of spirits are tied toward land, more powerful divine spirits can travel and exist multiple places at once. My gut has been pulling me toward Celtic and Roman polytheism, though through a very traditional witchcraft-influenced lens.

I've been a practicing witch for almost 10 years now, but I still struggle with understanding what path I want to go down spiritually. In many ways, I still feel like a beginner. There are so many elements from folkloric and historical witchcraft and polytheistic practices that I relate to, but I need some sort of core to center my beliefs around and am so naturally skeptical. Constantly questioning how my beliefs fit together and can work.

Anyway, curious if people have experience with working with these pantheons. I'm definitely more of a soft polytheist, as I tend to view spirits as aspects of each other and divinity as somewhat of a hierarchical title in some ways. I still want to be respectful to the rituals and offerings these divine would appreciate and expect.

[dian-and-the-gods]

Was reading De Natura Deorum by Cicero and...my head....

"The first Venus, who has a temple at Elis, was the daughter of Cœlus and Dies. The second arose out of the froth of the sea, and became, by Mercury, the mother of the second Cupid. The third, the daughter of Jupiter and Dione, was married to Vulcan, but is said to have had Anteros by Mars. The fourth was a Syrian, born of Tyro, who is called Astarte, and is said to have been married to Adonis."

So um...??

Seems like some ancients saw that in some myths Venus came from the foam of the sea and in other myths was the child of Jupiter and Dione, and they just went "mm yes that simply means there are like 5 different Venuses who all have the same name and the same domain, but these different myths correspond to only one of those" ... like that's not my explanation for why there are different genealogies in different myths at all...

A difference in genealogy makes a wholly separate deity who still has the same name and domain, this is like super hard polytheism lmao

Also interpretatio romana got in the way here lol, funny how instead of saying "Venus is Astarte just under a different name for the Syrians" they go like "Astarte is yet another Venus who is her own separate individual to our Venus", funny how they went full circle back to hard polytheism lmao

[mischiefmanifold]

if it’s ok can I get your thoughts on soft polytheism? is it like okay to do.. is it considered polytheism?.. is it frowned upon?

Admittedly I do not have much experience with "soft polytheism", this post is based on a 5-minute google search.

The website Round the Cauldron (LINK) describes soft polytheism as "the belief that all deities are part of one larger whole". Hellenic Faith (LINK), on the other hand, views soft polytheism as a useless term for a phenomenon that already has a name. ("The various ideas that 'soft polytheism' is usually used to describe already have names; none of which are 'polytheism' because what is being described is not polytheistic.")

I am a "hard polytheist", essentially the opposite of a soft polytheist. I believe that all deities are distinct entities and are not parts of a whole.

My personal opinion is that it doesn't really matter what terms you use as long as you're using them correctly. Polytheism is defined as a belief in multiple deities, and if your version of soft polytheism follows that premise, then honestly I don't really care that you're using it.

[just-a-simple-wanderer]

It’s interesting to see all the different pathways polytheism (or even monism) can take.

I like the mention of most thinking Zeus and Jupiter are the same god, just seen through a Greek and then Roman lens, while Thor is separate from both of them. That seems to be more my take.

On the other hand, while I definitely don’t think I’m a monist, I do like the idea that all these gods can coexist and work together and not step on any toes, despite being part of different pantheons. Which seems more soft. But I also don’t think the Egyptian gods are the same as the Norse, are the same as Chinese, are the same as Greek. There can be similarities, because I believe they help to represent humanity and humans worshipped them, regardless of culture, but they’re not the same.

So I do believe I’m somewhere in between hard and soft polytheism. Maybe I just need to view it as different gods spoke more and connected to different cultures, and so those gods formed pantheons based around that. But, overall, gods are gods. And Zeus/Jupiter can coexist with Thor without them stepping on each others toes because even though they’re storm gods, they have different cultures and people that respect them and worship them and that’s all that matters.

Or maybe I need to stop trying to put my mortal imaginings on gods that I can’t hope to ever truly understand 😅

Polytheism

Most pagan religions are polytheistic in nature, meaning they believe in multiple divine beings. This is one of the hardest parts of paganism for outsiders to understand. In a culture where strict monotheism is treated as the norm, it can be difficult to wrap your head around the idea of worshiping more than one god.

Ironically, monotheism — the belief in a single, all-powerful creator deity — is a relatively new invention. Zoroastrianism, the first monotheistic religion, is only about 4,000 years old. In the big scheme of things, that really is not a long time. Evidence for polytheistic religion dates back much, much farther (like, up to 40,000 years). We could argue that polytheism is the natural state of human spirituality.

Within pagan communities, polytheism is often described as a spectrum, with “hard polytheism” on one end and “soft polytheism” on the other. Hard polytheists believe that every deity is a distinct, separate, autonomous spiritual being. Soft polytheists believe that every deity is a part of a greater whole. As we’ve already discussed, extreme soft polytheism isn’t actually polytheism at all, but monism — the belief in a single divine source that manifests in different ways, including as different deities.

Hard polytheism is pretty straightforward. Norse paganism is an example of a hard polytheist system. Most Norse pagans believe that Odin is distinct from Thor, who is distinct from Freyja, who is distinct from Heimdall… you get the idea. Each of these gods has their own area of expertise over which they preside. If you’re dealing with a love matter, you’re probably going to seek out help from Freyja rather than Thor — unless you have a close, ongoing working relationship with Thor. (We’ll talk more about these types of close working relationships in a future post.)

Soft polytheism can be a little harder for people coming from a monotheist system to wrap their heads around. I think Jeremy Naydler describes it best in his book Temple of the Cosmos (here discussing Kemetic/Egyptian polytheism): “Shu and Tefnut are distinct essences dependent on Atum for their existence… The image often used in ancient Egyptian sacred texts concerning the gods in general is that they are the ‘limbs’ of the Godhead.” Shu and Tefnut, who are described in mythology as Atum’s children, are an extension of Atum’s creative power. However, they are also distinct beings with their own thoughts, feelings, and agendas. (It’s worth noting that we also have myths describing Atum’s birth. He is not a supreme being or a timeless force like the Abrahamic God.)

Monism is soft polytheism taken to its logical extreme. In her book, Wicca For Beginners, Thea Sabin describes it this way: “Think, for a moment, of a tree with a thick trunk that splits into two large branches. In turn, smaller branches grow from the large ones, and still smaller branches from the small ones, and so on. Deity is the trunk of the tree, and the God and Goddess are the two main branches. The smaller branches that fork off of the two big ones are the worlds gods and goddesses…”

If you’re not sure what the difference between soft polytheism and monism is, here’s a good litmus test: If you believe in the existence of a supreme divine force, you’re a monist. If not, you’re a polytheist.

Many pagans are somewhere in between hard and soft polytheism. For example, you may believe that Zeus and Jupiter are different versions of the same deity, filtered through the lens of Greek and Roman culture, respectively — but you believe that Thor is distinct and separate from Zeus/Jupiter, even though all three of them are gods of storms.

To make things even more complicated, there are some pagans (and some atheists, for that matter) who believe that the gods exist less as autonomous beings and more as archetypes within mankind’s collective consciousness. Their stories resonate with us because they serve as mirrors for different parts of ourselves. In this sense, we create the gods in our own image.

This belief is how we get “pop culture pantheons.” Some people work with fictional characters as archetypes in their spiritual practice. After all, if Sailor Moon is the ultimate representation of feminine power for you, what’s stopping you from putting her on your altar? Some pop culture pantheons have actually broken through into mainstream paganism — there are a lot of Wiccans who work with Merlin, believe me.

This interpretation is a bit different from polytheism, and could really be its own post (or several), so for the sake of keeping things short and sweet I’m not going to go any deeper into it. If this interests you, I recommend reading the work of Jungian psychologists like Clarissa Pinkola Estés and Robert A. Johnson. You may even want to check out The Satanic Bible by Anton LeVay for a particularly spicy take on the idea that we create our own gods and devils.

Just know that you can still practice paganism, even if you aren’t 100% sold on the idea that the gods literally exist.

Your take on polytheism doesn’t necessarily have to match up with the historical cultures you take inspiration from. For example, you may be a hardcore monist, but find that you’re drawn to work exclusively with the Norse gods. Or, you may be the hardest of hard polytheists, but find that the Kemetic gods are the ones who really speak to you. This is all totally okay! One of the benefits of paganism is that it allows for a lot of personalization.

Now that we’ve got the types of polytheism out of the way, let’s address the other big question that comes up when pagans discuss polytheism with monotheists: Does that mean you believe all those crazy myths are true? Once again, the answer depends on the pagan.

Just like some Christians are biblical literalists who believe that the Bible is a factual historical account, there are some pagans who believe that their mythology is factually true. However, many pagans accept that these stories have fantastical or exaggerated elements, but still convey a spiritual truth.

There are multiple Norse myths about men being transformed into dragons by their lust for riches, the most famous of which is probably the story of the dwarf-turned-dragon Fafnir. (Yes, Tolkien did steal that plot point from Norse mythology. Sorry.) These stories aren’t really about the dragons, though — they’re about the corrupting power of greed. The stories are true in that they teach a valuable life lesson that resonated deeply with ancient Norse culture. But did dragons really roam the earth in ancient times? Probably not.

This is one of the most important skills for any pagan: finding the spiritual truth in a myth or story. If you read a myth about Artemis transforming a man into a deer because he spied on her while she was bathing, what does that tell you about Artemis? Next time you read or listen to a myth or folk tale, try to find the message at the core of the story. You may be surprised by how this changes your understanding of the mythology.

If you’re interested in paganism but aren’t sure where to start, it might be helpful to gauge where you fall on the polytheism spectrum. Are you a hard polytheist, a soft polytheist, or somewhere in between? Are you a monist? Do you believe the gods function more as archetypes? Write it down so you can look back on it later.

When we talk about specific pagan traditions in future posts, I’ll point out where they fall on the polytheism spectrum. If you’re looking for a path that is compatible with your own beliefs, this is one thing to keep in mind.

Finally, know that your beliefs about the gods might change as you continue to learn and grow. That’s a natural part of religious exploration, so don’t try to fight it!

[shinyshrine]

[theanic-devotion]

So I’m in a predicament, I definitely believe in a high power but not like,,, one that exists already? I feel like there is an energy and I want to venerate it/build a relationship with it but it’s not like a named deity.

With a deity from a culture I can go off of myths to see what they might like. I kind of see it as different named deities being facets of this higher power.

So like, this energy is nature or the natural cycle of things. The Universe, sort of. I see Aphrodite as representative of love and beauty in that nature, Apollo as representative of the health and diseases. Etc.

I could just continue to worship them as separate entities, but I was wondering if anyone has any ideas of how to venerate all aspects?

Or something like that. Really I just want to know if others feel something similarly.

[silverthornwitchery]

i love syncretism so much tbh. It allows me to really just. Acknowledge the vastness of the gods, and see how they've ALWAYS been with me since childhood. From my first steps into paganism worshipping the Netjeru, to where i am now, acknowledging how the Neterju manifest within the Celtic and Germanic pantheons, the links to the Greco-Roman world, and vice-versa. There are no true names for the gods because having one true name would do them injustice, it would reduce them. All names for them are true, all hold power and value. I'd like to especially Acknowledge Freyja, who is syncretic with Bast-Sekhmet-Hathor and Isis/Aset, who guided me to my path. I understand that in the path I walk, these goddess, while separate at times, are also one. She represents the different aspects of the day + night cycle. Bast being the night, Sekhmet being the day, and Hathor (who is syncretic with Isis in a lot of materials due to their Queen of Heaven roles) being the twilight, the liminal. All of the gods have links to each other, they all overlap and intermingle. And its for us as worshippers, as devotees, to see how that effects us in the paths we walk. For some, they may only focus on one of the many forms the gods take, for others, they may focus on how they merge as one, or as many, etc etc. The gods love all their children, regardless of how they interpret their presence. The gods will not smite someone for being a soft polytheist, nor will they smite someone for being a hard polytheist. Each type of polytheism serves a purpose in whatever plans and needs the gods have, and thats beautiful to me

[wildwood-faun]

there's a spirit that... whenever I hear their name my heart skips a beat and the name keeps echoing in my head for hours or even days. starting to think it's time to reach out and make a formal introduction.

[lovewardeath]

Personally, I see God as a different entity compared to me saying The Gods. Confusing? Let me explain.

When I speak of The Gods, I am talking about The Gods I worship, which are the Hellenic ones…Hermes, Ares, Aphrodite, etc. They are the deities of something, love, war, etc.

But when I say God, I mean the Universe. To me, God is someone who created more Gods, (to help the workload lol), and or to make sure each person had a God that resonated with them. I get this belief from Hinduism.

But I still believe this, I believe God has different manifestations in order for each believer to relate too, to feel connected too. Some people see this as Soft Polytheism.

But I don’t. I don’t think each pantheon is the same, I don’t believe Aphrodite from Greek is the same as Freyja from Norse mythology. They are their own individuals.

I see it as God created pantheons for some groups of people who didn’t feel connected to the Norse deities, for example, so he created the Hellenic ones, etc etc.

This is just my belief! I have no intention to disrespect anyone!

I don’t know, it may seem bizzare. I guess you could say I created my own system of belief, but it’s omnism at like a strange way lol.

[sillysybilsden]

To Janus. To Jupiter. To the Roman gods.

🪔

𝐓𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬

I. Introduction

II. Gods

III. Mythology

IV. Calendar

V. Ritual

VI. Epilogue

VII. Resources

🪔

𝐈. 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

Hey there everyone! This is Sybil (fka Clever Crow). As a Roman polytheist, “Roman polytheism is just a carbon-copy of Greek polytheism” is something I hear on a weekly basis. Whether on YouTube, TikTok, Pinterest or, heck, even academic resources, there seems to be a widespread belief that these two religions are identical. Today, I want to focus on this piece of misinformation and try to debunk it by using historical evidence and examples.

Just a small disclaimer: I will be discussing this topic from a hard polytheistic and revivalist point of view. Soft polytheism is absolutely valid, but in this case it might not be of use when highlighting differences between gods.

Also, I want to thank the following people: Cristina, Mystix, @spiritual-entries and @camssecretcave . They made sure that all information provided here is factual and reliable, and I will be forever grateful to them for their help.

🪔

𝐈𝐈. 𝐆𝐨𝐝𝐬

“Are the Greek and Roman pantheons one and the same?” This is the first question we will attempt at answering within this chapter. To do so, we must introduce a very important concept in Roman religion: interpretatio romana. Before that, though, let me provide you with some historical context.

Ever since the founding of Rome in 753 BCE, Romans were exposed to influences from other Italic peoples: Sabines, Etruscans, Volsci and so on. Because of that, we can indeed say that there has never been a 100% “native” Roman religion.

We can nonetheless differentiate two “phases” of Roman polytheism: pre-hellenisation polytheism and post-hellenisation polytheism (“hellenisation” being the process that merged Greek and Roman cultures and religions during the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE). For simplicity’s sake, in this post we are going to compare the pre-hellenisation version of Roman religion and Hellenism.

Back to interpretatio: what is it? To put it simply, it is the comparison of two different pantheons (which is used to find matches between the gods). It was used so that, when describing other populations’ religions, one could just name a more familiar, local deity instead of fully describing a foreign one (which, obviously, would take much more time). Just imagine being a Roman historian and having to discuss Greek religion: instead of saying “Ares is a god of war, battle and courage”, you could just say “Ares is like our Mars”.

Does that mean that these gods were seen as identical? Absolutely not! Actually, this shows us that Roman gods were a thing long before Greek gods started being adopted in the pantheon (which is the reason why a god like Janus does not have a Greek counterpart).

Sticking with the same example we have used before, we can say that Mars was already Mars before he was equated to Ares. And, because of that, at a closer look, the two are extremely different: while Ares is blood-driven, Mars shows a much calmer nature; contrarily to Ares, Mars has some pretty important ties to royalty (his son being Romulus-Quirinus) and agriculture; while Ares has a relationship with Aphrodite, Mars is married to Nerio; and so on. It is only after hellenisation that these two (as well as all of the other gods) started merging into one single Greco-Roman figure.

As I said before, though, this does not mean that Rome was against syncretism. Quite the contrary, actually: whenever Romans ran into a deity who could be of use to them and did not have a counterpart in their pantheon, they would consider adopting them. This is the reason why Apollo was worshiped by both societies (Romans adopted him in 431 BCE in order to fight a pestilence; his Greek nature never went unacknowledged: for him, ritus graecus was performed).

Fun fact: interpretatio was not only directed to Greece. Roman priests tried to include the prophet Jesus Christ into the Roman pantheon. He was described to them as “a god of love”, so they used interpretatio to connect him to Venus.

🪔

𝐈𝐈𝐈. 𝐌𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲

As I said before, during hellenisation Greek and Roman gods started merging. As a consequence, so did their mythologies…

Actually, no, scratch that: except for a few exceptions, Roman gods did not have a mythology to begin with. Mythology that is Roman in origin revolves around men, not deities (and that is the reason why it is also referred to as “mythic history”, as the protagonists are pseudo-historical figures). Myths in Ancient Rome were used as exempla, examples to teach teens and men how they should behave in a virtuous way.

For example, one of the most famous figures from Roman mythology is Lucius Junius Brutus, the founder of the Republic: he was intelligent (he tricked the cruel king Lucius Tarquinius Superbus into sparing his life), loyal (he never deserted the Romans) and strong-willed (he took the matters into his own hands and kicked out of Rome the cruel king), and every Roman had to aspire to be like him.

In Greece, on the other hand, myths had the task of explaining why something happens. Why do we have a colder season and a warmer one? That is because Persephone comes back from and goes to the Underworld. How do we know how to use fire? Prometheus gave it to men. How did the hyacinth, the flower, get its name? It comes from Apollo’s lover Hyacinth. On top of that, Greek mythology revolves a lot more around deities than the Roman one (which is the reason why there is a pretty intricate divine family tree in Hellenism).

With this in mind, we can say that, with hellenisation, the Roman gods received myths and genealogies (as well as iconographies, in some cases) of their own for the first time ever. However, these myths and these genealogies were not altered to better fit the deity.

This is the reason why Nerio, Mars’ original wife, was forgotten in favor of Venus (Aphrodite’s Roman counterpart). This is why Saturn, an extremely benevolent agricultural deity, started being depicted as a cruel entity devouring his children (yes: I am looking at you, Goya). And this is also why Minerva, who used to have nothing to do with Medusa, started to be seen as she-who-cursed-Medusa (now I am looking at you, Ovid).

🪔

𝐈𝐕. 𝐂𝐚��𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫

Calendars were of extreme importance in polytheistic societies. After all, they were deeply intertwined with their religious mentality… which is the reason why we are briefly going to discuss this matter in this blog.

When it comes to Ancient Greece, the calendar we have the most evidence on is the Athenian one (which, because of this, has become the most widely used in modern Hellenic polytheistic communities). It is lunisolar (keep this in mind!). When it comes to Ancient Rome, on the other hand, we have quite some evidence on three different calendars that modern Roman polytheists can choose from: a lunar one, a lunisolar one and a solar one (the latter happens to be the calendar still in use today).

One similarity that needs to be addressed is the one between Noumenia and Kalends (both being a celebration of the first day of the month). In the Roman version, however, we would also have to add Nones and Ides as recurring monthly festivities.

Another similarity that many seem to highlight is the one between Kronia and Saturnalia, two festivities where abundance is celebrated (as well as, respectively, Kronos and Saturn, who later merged) and the Golden Age is remembered. However! Kronia is celebrated during the Summer, roughly during the Summer solstice; Saturnalia is celebrated during Wintertime, roughly during the Winter solstice. It might not seem like a big difference at first, but it is if we consider this: during Kronia, the harvest is celebrated while it is happening, while the mature crops are being collected; during Saturnalia, the harvest that has already happened during the past Summer is celebrated, as well as the one that is to come.

Last but not least, let us highlight a Roman-only peculiarity. Back in Ancient Roman times, every day had a “quality": they could either be faustus or nefastus (as well as a lot more nuances which we will not be taking into account here). They were of great importance on a religious level, as nefastus days could bring bad luck to a practitioner if they were to take big decisions. Something similar also happened with dies religiosi, during which it was forbidden to go to work (or do anything that was not a life-or-death matter).

🪔

𝐕. 𝐑𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥

Now that we have discussed the more ���theological” matters, such as the nature of the gods, myths and festivities, we can briefly talk about the more practical side of things.

Let us start with an all-time favorite: veiling. Nowadays, a lot of pagans (no matter their path or their gender) veil for a variety of reasons: protection, modesty or devotion. And that is, no doubt, valid. Historically speaking, though, things kind of different. While both in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome veils were used by women in order to express their modesty, in Italy they were also mandatory whenever performing rituals (for women and men alike).

Another big difference resides in the views of these two societies over divination. When we think of “divination” and “Ancient Greece”, one of the first things that comes to our minds is probably the Oracle of Delphi (and rightly so!). This figure was said to be able to channel the messages of the gods, and they did so by going into a trance-like state.

In Rome, this practice was seen as unreliable (even though, surprisingly, there are a couple of instances where Romans have asked the Oracle for guidance), as the only reliable forms of divination were those that could be performed when completely conscious (augury, haruspicy, etc). Dreams, too, were seen as an untrustworthy form of communication by Romans.

🪔

𝐕𝐈. 𝐄𝐩𝐢𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐮𝐞

There is something we still need to address: if these two cultures, societies, religions were so different, why do so many people believe otherwise?

Well, the answer can be found in 19th century’s anthropological and religious studies. Back then, scholars used to be very fond of the comparative approach (which is a “strategy where characteristics or parts are compared across different research situations to identify differences or similarities”, according to www.sciencedirect.com) and the Indo-European theory.

Too focused on stressing the similarities between Greeks and Romans, intellectuals “forgot” to highlight the differences. Even though nowadays, academically, these hypotheses have been marked as outdated, they are still ever-so widespread.

I hope that this blog will contribute to debunking this piece of misinformation. And I hope that I managed to introduce you, reader, to Roman polytheism… Not just a carbon-copy of Hellenism!

Sybil

🪔

𝐕𝐈𝐈. 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐬

The majority of my knowledge on Greek religion comes from “Archeologia greca” by Enzo Lippolis and Giorgio Rocco and theoi.com, as well as some high school classes dedicated to Hellenic mythology.

The following resources talk specifically about this post's subject:

Roman vs. Greek religion (YouTube)

Greek mythology: A second masterpost (Tumblr)

You can check out my full list of resources on Roman polytheism here.

🪔 Check out this post on Amino as well! 🪔