Hi Mogg, Caroline et alia, and happy new year.

Mogg wrote:

>I wonder how you'd distinguish between the original >practitioners of a religion and the reconstructivists - >given that all religions change over
>time - [...] I wonder why we, as pagans, need see ourselves >as less connected to our historical past than others >cultists - perhaps it is the hiatus....

In folkloristics, when we examine traditions we distinguish between those with a relatively continuous connection to the past and those with a clear hiatus between past and present practitioners.  It seems to me that Pagan Reconstructionist movements are in the latter category.  It's absolutely true that all traditions change over time, but the kinds of changes one sees in continuous traditions differ somewhat from those evident in traditions that have been revived or reclaimed.  Both revival and reclamation are ultimately political in nature, and so must be understood as political acts -- in this case, intentionally oppositional or counter-cultural movements that present needed alternatives to the offerings of mainstream religions.

That said, I should also specify that distinctions between revived and relatively continuous traditions are a matter of degree; that everything has a political dimension; and that our relationship to our past is always a matter of cultural cosntruction.

For more on this, especially the Romantic revival of the late 18th - early 19th century, see Regina Bendix, _In Search of Authenticity_ (University of Wisconsin Press, 1997), and also the chapter "The Study of Folklore and the Reclamation of Paganism" in my book _Witching Culture_.

Best,
Sabina


---- Original message ----
>Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 22:44:50 -0000
>From: Mogg Morgan <[log in to unmask]>  
>Subject: Re: Pagan Reconstructionism  
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Greetings Caroline et al
>and happy new year
>
>I wonder how you'd distinguish between the original practitioners of a
>religion and the reconstructivists - given that all religions change over
>time - and pretty much all of them went through the debate about the
>ancestral cannibalism and human sacrifice - which they subsequently
>reframe - its an oft ignored fact that even the 'wicked' crowley' underlined
>the new covenant in which animal and human sacrifice was 'outlawed' in
>favour of the 'best blood' - and this echoes the work of (i think) francis
>barrett, who substituted 'fumigations' for 'pigeon blood' in the grimoires?
>
>I wonder why we, as pagans, need see ourselves as less connected to our
>historical past than others cultists - perhaps it is the hiatus - but even
>so, for example christianity (roman variety) has its breaks in its apostolic
>succession (as in the anti-popes) and yet has no porblems about styling
>itself christian. Isn't the idea of continuity a bit of a mental fiction?  I
>thinking of the book 'After Babel' in which the author talks about the
>paradox of translation.
>
>WE might all have our favourite practitioners as well as those we regard as
>less authentic or even positively in denial about magick - or just
>bowdlerising it all for their own commercial gain or so as not to offend
>some putative public taste - magick is still a taboo word for many
>supposedly magical practitioners - its maybe a hangover from the 1970s when
>there was maybe a concerted attempt to make paganism respectible - and that
>meant for many the denial of its quite recent magical past. At the moment in
>UK, the commercial tail (especially of wicca) is seemingly wagging the dog -
>its irritating but just that IMO a minor irritation that should not deflect
>us from the task in hand ; )
>
>'love and do what you will'
>
>
>mogg
>
>ps: on greek religion -
>i wonder if you know of
>Evangelos Rigakis and his Threskian project -
>
>pps: a conference is always fun - SASM had a rather fine one a year or two
>back
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>: ) .....................................: )
>Mandrake.uk.net
>Publishers
>PO Box 250, Oxford, OX1 1AP
>+44 1865 243671
>homepage: <http://www.mandrake.uk.net>
>Blogs =
>http://mogg-morgan.blogspot.com
>http://mandox.blogspot.com
>secure page for credit card <http://www.mandrake.uk.net/books.htm>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Caroline Tully
>Sent: 02 January 2006 01:54
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Pagan Reconstructionism
>
>
>Hi Caelum, Mogg...
>
>This is one of those topics on which I've got a lot to say, but which my
>fingers are unable to keep up with my thinking... sheesh! Bloody email
>communication. Do you think we could instead organise some huge
>international conference where we can all come and chat? (I'm in distant
>Australia so have hardly anyone to talk to in person regarding my particular
>interests). Hardly anyone is interested in Pagan Reconstructionism here in
>Australia. A friend and I set up an Australian Pagan Reconstructionism email
>list and had about 15 members subscribed, nobody said a word to anyone
>else... I've advertised for about 2 years in local zines regrading setting
>up a group interested in ancient Greek polytheism. I think I've had one
>response, or was that two... anyway, I've kinda given up and just do my own
>thang...
>
>I'm very taken by Pagan Reconstructionism, from both an academic and a
>practitioner angle, mostly Hellenic in my case, so I know of some of the
>problems with trying to be "historically correct". ie/ animal sacrifice,
>lots of people do not want to do that, so cakes in the shape of animals are
>often used instead. (I know some Recons - the 2 examples I'm thinking of are
>a Roman and a Heathen - do perfom animal sacrifice, according to historic
>prescriptions of their Recon religions of choice). Caelum, with the
>inability (legally) of you to perform human sacrifice, wouldn't you say that
>you are really *unable* to really reconstruct Aztec religious practices? (As
>I also think is the case with the other attempts at Recon). Even if
>practitioners *were* to perform *all* aspects of the cult in question... are
>we not simply too far divorced from the ancient culture to *truly*
>reconstruct that religion? If our mental space(s) are not the same as
>ancient practitioners, then aren't we *really* doing something else than
>actually re-constructing a series of ancient cult practices that constitute
>a polytheistic (in most cases) "religion"? Aren't we really re-creating? If
>I call a (water) spring here a "Nymph"... am I not really being horribly
>self-consciously "Classical" and pretensious and delusionary? (Although
>Chaos Magic - thank the gods for Chaos Magic, it has liberated me from
>feeling that I *have to* be anything at all.. unless I feel like it), Chaos
>Magic says that I can adopt whatever belief system I like without needing to
>keep it for eternity, so I can call a spring one day, "Nymph", and another
>day, "H2O", and another day.... umm..."hidey-hole of the Rainbow Serpent"
>(although that might be cultural appropriation because Australian
>Aboriginals still exist - unlike ancient Greek Pagans - although I guess
>Greek Pagan groups like "Dodekatheon" would argue that one...)
>
>I'm not saying that attempting Pagan Reconstructionism this is a bad thing,
>or that we shouldn't do it, (indeed, I think if we are going to call
>ourselves "Pagan" (assuming we are going to do that) then we owe it to
>ourselves and to "Paganism(s)" to actually research what we purport to be
>doing) but that with all the strictness about practice I see in various
>Recon discussions, isn't it really true that reconstruction of an ancient
>cult is actually not really possible? OK, even if we can reconstruct the
>*form*, our sensibilities regarding ritual action, apprehending deity,
>processing of experience, are going to be *entirely different*. Which does
>not mean that we should not do that - I mean ideas about say, the goddess
>Aphrodite in Classical Greece were reasonably different to how Aphrodite was
>perceived in say Hellenistic Egypt - does that mean that it was somehow
>"inauthentic"? No, just that people's perception had changed through time
>(which brings up the question, if a deity changes through time, are they
>still the same deity later on, including NOW?). I guess maybe I'm
>questioning the assumption that ancient religions can be "re-constructed" in
>entirety. Maybe it should be called "Pagan Re-vamping", or "Pagan
>Re-creating"....
>
>I guess that I am less annoyed about say "pop-Wiccan" reinterpretations of
>ancient deities than I used to be. If ancient Greek and Egyptian deities can
>be re-interpreted by the magicians of the Greek Magical Papyri (according to
>several authors, the PGM can be looked at not simply as magic, but as folk,
>as opposed to "state" or "public", _religion_), then I'm feeling more
>lenient toward soft pop-Wiccan re-writings of ancient deities. BUT I'm not
>entirely tolerant there. I HATE the lack of research and utter laziness
>evident in much popular Pagan/Wiccan writing, and the (IMO) totally surface,
>lets say "lip-service", approach that it *seems* is being adopted toward the
>deities that these neo-forms of Paganism purport to be about. Or do they
>purport to be about ancient Pagan deities at all? Perhaps not, maybe they
>are really about running round being sociable and creating social
>hierarchies (hey, I'm just telling it as I see it in Australia - and I've
>been watching and participating in it here for 20 years). Or maybe this
>mixture of ceremonial magic and ancient Pagan deity names that passes for
>"Paganism" today simply *is* the latest permutation of ancient Paganism?? I
>dunno, I'm just musing..
>
>So many interesting things to talk about....
>
>There's a lot of bossy fascism in Pagan Reconstructionism though (oh, like
>that's something new for modern Paganism? Not). What about the idea that
>ancient "Pagan Religions" did not approve or or perfom magic that I see so
>many Recons bandying about? From my reading on ancient Egyptian, Greek  and
>Roman magic it seems in many cases difficult to differentiate between cult
>practice and magickal practice (literary fictions of "witches" aside). And
>the idea in Recon of "purity"? Were any of thse ancient cultures culturally
>pure, and if so, for how long? Is syncretism OK?
>
>
>Happy 2006,
>
>~Caroline.
Sabina Magliocco
Associate Professor
Department of Anthropology
California State University
18111 Nordhoff St.
Northridge, CA  91330-8244