Talk:Pagan survivals

	This Folklore related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

Most pagan survivals

... are actually 'the plebs' finding an excuse to have fun, alcohol and games, and amusing themselves partly at the expense of 'the authorities' and 'folklorists willing to pay for such entertainments especially when provided with a suitable yarn.'

As such they have probably existed since traditions first got invented (and patricians had to be given excuses to). 82.44.143.26 (talk) 18:29, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

So the Maypole isn't a cock spraying spunk over little kiddies after all? Scherben (talk) 02:32, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Needs a clear definition.

The introduction states: "A belief that local customs and folklore concealed pagan survivals was a favorite hypothesis of nineteenth and early twentieth century folklorists, and lasted far longer among amateur enthusiasts. The basic idea was that local customs and stories could be interpreted as vestiges of pagan rituals that have either been repurposed or continued under invented rationales."

But the final sections includes in its first paragraph: The past continues to influence the present. In one sense, there are plenty of "pagan" survivals in religion and culture. All religions, including Christianity, share features with earlier faiths such as the use of altars, hymns, processions, and devotional images. When some Christian denominations use such things as incense or consecrated water, the people who Christianized these practices knew that they were used by other faiths

Which says that lots of things have, in fact, been repurposed. So what exactly is a "pagan survival" in the context of this article?--Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

I've just read the article again and I must say I have the same question. I'm assuming that "pagan" in this sense means "anything from a pre-christian religion". But pretty obviously Christianity didn't invent every aspect of the Christian religion. The very concepts of the existence of "God", "prayer", "miracles" or virtually any religious concept you might want to come up with existed before Christianity incorporated it.--Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 16:03, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

It's easier to get a feel for this through the list of examples. Basically, the assumption was that most folk customs should be interpreted as half-forgotten vestiges of fertility rites, with the stock characters of The Golden Bough featuring prominently. - Smerdis of Tlön, ^{LOAD "*", 8, 1.} 20:20, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

So ... there are plenty of "pagan survivals" - but most of them somehow exist within Christianity and not within society?Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 08:08, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

All religions probably co-opt aspects of other faiths already extant in the locality/incoming faiths - especially if 'the locals' "have always done it this way/it is familiar" (which 'Dark Ages missionary' was advised to build churches on the sites of existing temples because people were used to going there?) or 'the other faith does this and are attracting the punters' etc. This will include co-opting "the peasants rituals" some of which probably have been around for millennia (sometimes for good reason - 'we have brought all the harvest in, let's have some fun' and all the other reasons we can think of); some will be back-formation explanations; some will be 'the religious books do not cover this option - what shall we come up with - the local cunning folk do this/have this story, let us co-opt it'; and some will be 'the academics and others trying to explain away what they don't particularly care for but which the proponents for some obscure reason wish to enjoy.' There will be a few cases of 'the locals' cocking a snoot at the authorities - the traditional story of 'fishing for the moon' (actually the smuggled goods and the customs officer), 'trying to appear so mad that the rulers decide #not# to build a palace in the locality and thus appropriate all your food and young persons' or even 'they will pay us good money for our stories, so we must cultivate this crop (of academics).' Anna Livia (talk) 11:34, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

The basic concept to refute here is the way 'pagan survivals' became a framework that all sorts of random things were stretched onto, in the entire absence of evidence that any of them could be traced back to a time when popular paganism was even plausible. - Smerdis of Tlön, ^{LOAD "*", 8, 1.} 03:45, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

There will always be 'local events, beliefs and activities which do not conform to the established religion promoted by the ruling and middle classes' - some will be of considerable antiquity (though may have evolved over time) - 'harvest festivals, equinoxes and solstices' and others of more recent development/arise for the reasons mentioned above and others (eg mumpsimus and suchlike).

The question is - do #the locals# regard the activities as 'pagan survivals' or as 'the custom of the place, and our ancestors did this because of (famous person saying so/granting the land if we do this) - and besides it is fun - and also we prefer academics to being the subjects of Midsomer Murder type events' or 'the academics and TV-series writers/authors seeking to get rich from describing an invented tradition.' Anna Livia (talk) 16:17, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Repurposed buildings etc

Should there be some mention of [1]? There are more modern examples of places of worship being taken over by other faiths as populations change.

There are also cases of 'traditional tunes' (and 'why should the devil have them?') repurposed.

Probably a fair number of 'traditional customs, local pursuits and amusements etc' were co-opted at the time - but they have then been repurposed and evolved.

What is the likelihood that there was discussion of '(these peasants etc) and their pagan survivals' among the elites of empires in the ancient world? Anna Livia (talk) 10:32, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

I have tried to keep this article focused on a single and rather esoteric framework: the rise and fall of 'pagan survivals' as an interpretive framework for folk customs, as a sort of conspiracy theory and the origin of an influential body of woo. The people who converted temples into churches, or churches into mosques, almost certainly ought to be covered in an article somewhere. Not sure this is the best place for that, especially since the folks that did those things thought they were making a clean break with 'paganism'. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱs. 05:11, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Horse sacrifice

There was a discussion on History StackExchange about horse sacrifice in Europe as a pagan survival.[2] Supposedly in the high-late Middle Ages and even into the modern period some kings and generals were buried with their horses, killed for the occasion, which has been linked with earlier pagan sacrifices of horses, although others question the truth of this. If anyone can research, this would seem to fit this article. --Annanoon (talk) 10:29, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Very one sided article

The obvious answer is that "it's complicated". Folk tradition is in a constant state of flux and is not isolated from later history, or from other countries, and is constantly mutating and being filtered. This happens in some African tribes today: there is evidence the Dogon's rituals have changed over the course of the past century for example.

As someone says above, a lot of these sre about having fun at the most basic level. I doubt however, that the first written records have much to do with when these events that these events first started. In the case of Arthur, the names of some of the characters correspond with those in Irish mythology - Morgan in particular with the Morrigan. Some of these European rituals are not without some resemblence to those practised by primitive peoples in modern times.-Albannach (talk) 21:49, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

We do one sided a lot here. That said, I've tried to keep the article focused on the flights of fantasy made during the twentieth century, and show how reasonable people could come to be convinced of such stuff. Read the Trubshaw reference if nothing else. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 05:26, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Given the nature of the topic there will be a certain amount of cherry picking, and 'some activities' will happen in any religion, or be co-opted by incoming faiths ('this is a very good reason for some jollities'; 'we always did something (here), and there is no reason to stop doing so' etc).Anna Livia (talk) 09:32, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

The whole thing is very Christian-centric. As if there is Christianity on one side and all other religions on the other. Obviously all religions have always fed off and developed from each other. I don't think the attempt to draw a ling between "Christianity" and "Paganism" is very useful. I know that the article attempts to talk about how people have failed with the line in past - but the subtext is that "Christianity" is somehow special.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 15:29, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

The subject really relates strongly to Western Europe, with a particular focus on the British Isles. As such the contrast between Christianity and 'paganism' will be the most salient. I did try to make the point that Britain is filled with multiple, poorly preserved 'paganisms' that were not all alike. This sort of thing would struggle to take root in, say, France or Italy. They know their pagans too well. 18:34, 2 August 2021 (UTC)^{— Unsigned, by: Smerdis of Tlön / talk / contribs}

At least 'the Romans' were open about co-opting/merging foreign gods to those of their own pantheon.

Some components of modern religions will have their origins in the festivities of Doggerland and Neanderthal practices. 18:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)^{— Unsigned, by: Anna Livia / talk / contribs}

That's probably true, but we will never know for certain. That being said there are elements of our culture we can say for certain had origins in the Paleolithic, like the myth of the Cosmic Bear and its association with the constellation of Ursa Major, and the association of the Pleiades with the Seven Sisters (this one in particular is a strong candidate for the label of "world's oldest story still being told", with the myth being dated back as far as one hundred thousand years ago.) Carthage (talk) 13:44, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

As I said a long time ago this is very Christian-centric. As if "Christianity" were something special and not simply a descendent of multiple prior religions.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 13:56, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

"Pagan" is, generally speaking, a term used by Christians to describe non-Abrahamic religions, particularly the religions that existed prior to Christianity dominance in Europe. So of course it is going to be based on countries that at the time were Christian-centric in a bit of a snobby way.

However, the subject seems to address a particular aspect of various folk revival movements that were popular in the late 19th to early 20th century. There's something about that time period where it seems that some things "opened up" a little bit culturally (due to improved global transportation I suppose among other things) and people were absorbing influences, but in too many cases not enough for people to get a good solid grasp on the subject matter. EG: Orientalism was also pretty rife during that period, and the results were often (not always) kind of cringe-y to modern eyes. The late 19th to early 20th century was also a popular period for certain flavors of "occultism" like theosophy (which also was mish-mashing various non-Christian religious philosophies together, not always coherently).

In short, while this is Christian centric, I am thinking perhaps that this subject is a side of certain people in Christian centric countries that was "poking holes" in the dominant dogma. Even if some of the "poking" was retrospectively as silly as some of the orientalism and theosophy stuff. BobJohnson (talk) 17:36, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Noah's flood

I'm not quite sure what the section on "Noah's flood" is doing at the end of the article.

Either the biblical flood myth was inspired by some real-world historical event or it wasn't. What does that have to do with the possible survival of pagan myths one way or the other?Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:02, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

That story had to be related down to the Bible one way or another. The story itself is a regional (and therefore has pagan origins) myth. I included it because of that pagan origin plus the possible historical origins of the myth. The section in particular discusses the possible historical origins of Noah's Flood (do you think the people who were possibly victimized by the Black Sea deluge were Abrahamic?). IMO that qualifies as a possible cultural survival. I included some skeptical caveats because this is a skeptic's wiki, and so there is reason for doubt. Carthage (talk) 14:09, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

I do not understand your sentence "That story had to be related down to the Bible one way or another." I mean it's obviously in the bible so I don't know what you are trying to say. The next sentence is a simple non sequitur "The story itself is a regional (and therefore has pagan origins) myth." The fact that a story has a regional origin by no means means that it had a pagan origin. So if you could clarify exactly what you are trying to say that would be useful.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 15:22, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

What I mean is that the story has obvious extrabiblical origins. It's a regional (as in, beyond Abrahamic) myth. The Sumerians, the Akkadians, Assyrians and whatnot all had their own versions of the myth. There's a hypothesis that this myth has a historical origin. The people who experienced the possible historical event that inspired this myth were obviously not Abrahamic. They retold this story over countless millennia down to the writers of the Bible. The fact it has a possible historical origin I think qualifies it for this article. Unless you want to qualify "pagan survival" to mean only European cultural survival, which you have argued against, then I think covering the possible non-Abrahamic and historical origins of the Noachian deluge myth is fair game. Carthage (talk) 16:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

To be honest I don't particularly like the word "pagan" at all as it implies that Christianity (or Abrahamic religions) are somehow special and all other religions are pagan. When in reality all religions are a continuously developing spectrum with older ones constantly evolving into new ones.

The flood myth is actually a case in point. The Jewish authors stole it from Gilgamesh flood myth, and put it in the Torah. The Christians then took the Jewish flood myth and incorporated it into the bible and the Muslims incorporated it into the Quran.

That is really why I have mentioned earlier in this talk page that I don't particularly like this article with its Christian-centric worldview anyway. So I guess your addition doesn't make it very much confusing than it was before and I'll leave it at that.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 18:27, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

One suggestion I came across 'somewhere': when the peoples in ancient times met up and discussed 'life, the universe and everything' they would mention 'the great flood my grandparents told me about' to which the response was 'must be the same one #my# grandparents told me about...' and so several different local floods at different times were conflated/comingled. Anna Livia (talk) 11:08, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Could be, but it also might be due to conflation when writers compiled and/or re-recorded the stories. A similar case is used to explain certain interpolations as a result of margin notes that were incorporated (possibly by mistake) into the main body text by later writers. ScepticWombat (talk) 11:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Various forms of conflation, deliberate and otherwise (Romans and other peoples' gods being a visible example), 'that is a neat story explaining this [superficially similar] phenomenon, so we will co-opt it' and all the other reasons we can think of will apply. And I understand that in the Marxist text the sentence 'Discuss in the evening' is actually written in a different hand to the main text. Anna Livia (talk) 13:53, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

It remains a pretty bizarre addendum to an already confused article.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 15:35, 25 February 2024 (UTC)