Spirituality in Europe Past & Future. Neo-Paganism: a Spiritual Vacuum?

[Segomo]

[Edit: this thread is a follow-up split from The NEUSP forum, which in turn it is a follow-up split from Project Eurosiberia]
Hi Ederico.

I do not know exactly what answering. For the first point, the party defends a triple heritage, pagan, christian and humanist. However, historically, the bases of the european civilisation seem not to be christian. In fact, if Constantine had not chosen christianism or if Julian had won, Europe would have continued to exist, different from today probably, but european. Without christianism, Europe still lives. Without "paganism", Europe dies.

For the episode of the French Revolution,for me it is like the independant war of Brutus the ancient opposed to the etruscan kings. The return of the ancient world. It is not surprising that in 1789, the Church of the "Invalides" became "Temple of Mars", that a "campo marzio" was created, that a "School of Mars" was founded. The "marquis" de Sade in 1795 wrote: "give us back the old gods". From an euro-pagan point of view, 1789 was not bad but necessary. I agree you when you denounce the negative aspects of French Revolution (universalism for example), but do not limit your judgement about them.

I am an ultra-traditionalist revolutionary what is, I think so, coherent. As the revolution of the earth, a real political revolution comes back to the origins, to the bases, to the roots. A return to the Greeks, a return to the Romans, as made the Great Renaissance in Italy, as made a Friedrich II Hohenstaufen, as made a Napoleon.

Best regards.

[Siegmund]

Originally Posted by Segomo

However, historically, the bases of the european civilisation seem not to be christian. In fact, if Constantine had not chosen christianism or if Julian had won, Europe would have continued to exist, different from today probably, but european. Without christianism, Europe still lives. Without "paganism", Europe dies.

But he did convert. And thus we had 1,700 years of Christianity in Europe, not paganism. Without Christianity, the Europe of history would not exist. I say that as a matter of historical fact, not religious conviction.

For the episode of the French Revolution,for me it is like the independant war of Brutus the ancient opposed to the etruscan kings. The return of the ancient world. It is not surprising that in 1789, the Church of the "Invalides" became "Temple of Mars", that a "campo marzio" was created, that a "School of Mars" was founded. The "marquis" de Sade in 1795 wrote: "give us back the old gods".

The French Revolution did not bring back the old gods. It reshaped the classical mythos within the Romantic zeitgeist, and used the result to lend credibility to its nominally bourgeois but ultimately totalitarian politics. Simply to name something does not make it real; the lack of genuine historical connection to Antiquity is obvious.

[Segomo]

But he did convert. And thus we had 1,700 years of Christianity in Europe, not paganism. Without Christianity, the Europe of history would not exist. I say that as a matter of historical fact, not religious conviction.

Laconia remained heathen until 900 A.D. There were pagan revolts until 1300 in Russia. Lithuania was mostly heathen until 1700. There are yet pagan ingushs. All the saints hide the ancient gods. Saint Minerva is honoured inside the Pantheon in Rome. Saint Martin is honoured the day of a feast of Mars (11 november). Saint Venera in Rome beside a temple of Venus, Saint Dimitra in Eleusis (the high sanctuary of Demeter), Saint Oswald with a spear, two ravens and two wolves (as Odhinn/Wotan) in Germany, Christmas at the date of birth of Sol Indiges (become Invictus), Easter at the date of the feast of the germanic goddess Ostara... and so later.

Paganism is the true religion of Europe, as said Alain de Benoist et several european thinkers.

The French Revolution did not bring back the old gods. It reshaped the classical mythos within the Romantic zeitgeist, and used the result to lend credibility to its nominally bourgeois but ultimately totalitarian politics. Simply to name something does not make it real; the lack of genuine historical connection to Antiquity is obvious.

The French Revolution was more pagan than the christian monarchy, even if the XVIIIth century was neo-classic. For example, into my town, there is the most beautiful place in Europe, the Stanislas' place, with an Arch, the Arch Héré (name of the architect). Over the arch, four deities. On the left, Venus and Minerva and an inscription, "principi pacifero". On the right, Mars and Hercules and an inscription, "principi victori".

As for the socialismi nazionali in XXth century's Europe. The last words of the Pythia of Delphi were: "Apollo shall come back and this 'll be forever."

Best regards.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Segomo

Laconia remained heathen until 900 A.D. There were pagan revolts until 1300 in Russia. Lithuania was mostly heathen until 1700. There are yet pagan ingushs. All the saints hide the ancient gods. Saint Minerva is honoured inside the Pantheon in Rome. Saint Martin is honoured the day of a feast of Mars (11 november). Saint Venera in Rome beside a temple of Venus, Saint Dimitra in Eleusis (the high sanctuary of Demeter), Saint Oswald with a spear, two ravens and two wolves (as Odhinn/Wotan) in Germany, Christmas at the date of birth of Sol Indiges (become Invictus), Easter at the date of the feast of the germanic goddess Ostara... and so later.

... St. John's day (and the firebones related to it) is the Summer Solstice, St. Joseph Carpenter's day (and the firebones related to it) is celebrated around the Spring Equinox, and so forth..

And, by the way, it is also possible that Marian worship is a remnant of Paleo-European religions (pre-Indo) which was assimilated by Indo-Europeans (in various forms), and from the Indo-Europeans assimilated by Christianism.

If we are to return to the ancient origins then, wouldn't it be more logical to return to the beliefs in Mother-Earth/Mother-Goddess of the Paleo-Europeans rather than returning to the supplanting beliefs of Vishna.. ops! sorry I mean Odin, Zeus, .. ?

As you see, I'm using the same arguments as Indo-Paganists. Only that with a more solid argument since, as it appears, the "Paleo" DNA markers are stronger in most modern European populations.

Paganism is the true religion of Europe

Read above.

Neo-Paganism is anything but evolutive. One can think of Indo-European beliefs as evolutive in spiritual terms and with respect to Paleo-European ones. And consequently of Christian beliefs as evolutive in spiritual terms and with respect to Paganism.

If something must come to substitute Christianism, let us pray.. erh... hope that it will be yet another evolution in spirituality, and not an involutive process of return to a more primitive status.

Hint: nah.. better not say

as said Alain de Benoist et several european thinkers.

All of them of human nature. You know.. Errare humanum est

The French Revolution was more pagan than the christian monarchy

Indeed. And it has also been destructive to the ethnic diversity of Europe.

Liberté Fraternité Egalité.. Multiculturalité

[Siegmund]

Originally Posted by Segomo

Laconia remained heathen until 900 A.D. There were pagan revolts until 1300 in Russia. Lithuania was mostly heathen until 1700. There are yet pagan ingushs. All the saints hide the ancient gods. Saint Minerva is honoured inside the Pantheon in Rome. Saint Martin is honoured the day of a feast of Mars (11 november). Saint Venera in Rome beside a temple of Venus, Saint Dimitra in Eleusis (the high sanctuary of Demeter), Saint Oswald with a spear, two ravens and two wolves (as Odhinn/Wotan) in Germany, Christmas at the date of birth of Sol Indiges (become Invictus), Easter at the date of the feast of the germanic goddess Ostara... and so later.

Certainly, it is only natural and to be expected that there would be remnants and holdovers during the transitional period, before Christianity spread to all corners of the European continent.

But I ask you, as objectively as you can, to compare the richest and most vital of these holdouts against the least of the writings of St. Thomas, or one spire of the Notre Dame cathedral, and then tell me that the historic religion of Europe is paganism. Even heathens admit that theirs became largely a subterranean and unorganized religion once the armies of Rome had begun to carry the cross on their banners.

The French Revolution was more pagan than the christian monarchy, even if the XVIIIth century was neo-classic. For example, into my town, there is the most beautiful place in Europe, the Stanislas' place, with an Arch, the Arch Héré (name of the architect). Over the arch, four deities. On the left, Venus and Minerva and an inscription, "principi pacifero". On the right, Mars and Hercules and an inscription, "principi victori".

With respect, I believe you are again confusing art for history, and poetry for reality. The average Goth barbarian would be startled and confused at such sublimely Romantic depictions of his religion - indeed, he would not even recognize it as his own.

As I said earlier, naming a thing does not ipso facto transform it into what it has been named. An orchid is an orchid and not a rose, no matter that you and other Romantics and Aestheticists might wish to call it a rose.

[Segomo]

If we are to return to the ancient origins then, wouldn't it be more logical to return to the beliefs in Mother-Earth/Mother-Goddess of the Paleo-Europeans rather than returning to the supplanting beliefs of Vishna.. ops! sorry I mean Odin, Zeus, .. ?

Uh, this marija-gimbutas' theory... a reactivation of the myths of Bachofen about the pseudo-original matriarchat...

The Indo-europeans had their own mother-earth goddess, *dhghom *mater (as Demeter/Gaia, as Dana asl...), the wife of the father-sky god, *dyeus *pater (=> Zeus).

Only that with a more solid argument since, as it appears, the "Paleo" DNA markers are stronger in most modern European populations.

But the pseudo pre-indo-europeans could be as indo-europeans as the "kurganists".

Neo-Paganism is anything but evolutive. One can think of Indo-European beliefs as evolutive in spiritual terms and with respect to Paleo-European ones. And consequently of Christian beliefs as evolutive in spiritual terms and with respect to Paganism.

That's not evolution when there are imperial decrees to convert or to kill. Historically,christianism comes from Western Asia and not from Europe itself and is alien.

If something must come to substitute Christianism, let us pray.. erh... hope that it will be yet another evolution in spirituality, and not an involutive process of return to a more primitive status.

History is cyclic, euro-paganism is reborne.

Indeed. And it has also been destructive to the ethnic diversity of Europe.

Uh, that is the French Revolution which created the right of birth, because monarchy was founded with right of soil. What protects our "race" ? Right of birth or right of soil ?

Best regards.

[Segomo]

Certainly, it is only natural and to be expected that there would be remnants and holdovers during the transitional period, before Christianity spread to all corners of the European continent.

That is more than only remnants but deep roots. As the folklorists now know, christianisation was only a varnish above pagan Europe.

or one spire of the Notre Dame cathedral, and then tell me that the historic religion of Europe is paganism. Even heathens admit that theirs became largely a subterranean and unorganized religion once the armies of Rome had begun to carry the cross on their banners.

Notre Dame was built over the pagan sanctuary of a celtic goddess, the place was not random. The scholastic school of Chartres in medieval Europe defended neo-platonician themes (the microcosm-man). If Europe became officially christian, that is the fault of emperor Constantine.

With respect, I believe you are again confusing art for history, and poetry for reality. The average Goth barbarian would be startled and confused at such sublimely Romantic depictions of his religion - indeed, he would not even recognize it as his own.

I do not think that builing pagan statues (of Olympians) be simply artistic. Historically, numerous millenaries of indo-european paganism in Europe are more important than one millenar of pagano-christianism.

As I say, I recognize a triple heritage (pagan, [pagano-]christian, humanist) for Europe, but we must not forget from where comes christianism and how it had managed to gain power in the late antiquity.

Best regards.

[Menydh]

Segomo, ius sanguinis is a legal concept which in the Jacobine fashion of the French Revolution it was assimilationist. In fact the whole idea of state was forcibly and in nature assimilationist. You know, liberté, egalité, fraternité.

As for the spiritual beliefs of the Paleo-Europeans, I'm not suggesting a Paleolithic matriarchal society. Nor do I believe that Gimbutas suggested so either. Not important anyway.

But the iconography found from the times prior to the Bronze Age suggests a cult to a mother-goddess. Something that remained in some form or another in later Mediterranean Civilizations.

Now, even if we were to assume for a moment --and just for the sake of the discussion-- that such Paleolithic belief or cult was not based on a cult to goddesses, there is no case to say that the beliefs of the Paleo-Europeans were the same than those of the Indo-European immigrants.

Consequently, where you say that Christianism was imposed by force over the Indo-European Pagan beliefs, I can argue just by the same rule of thumb that Indo-European beliefs were imposed by force over the Paleo-European spiritual beliefs.

There are two things to consider here.

One thing is that while we do not know how Indo-European beliefs spread throughout Europe, it would be silly to say that it was through missionaries and not through the use of force. Therefore what you call the true spirituality of Europe is in fact a [set of] religion[s] imposed by force on the de facto true spirituality of Europe. The spirituality of the Paleo-Europeans (though only in accordance with your scheme of back to the ape, stopping by at the Indo-European ).

Another thing is that when a belief is imposed over another, it is because one is stronger and the other weaker. As such we could argue that Indo-European beliefs were stronger than Paleo-European ones, just as well as Christian beliefs were stronger than Indo-European beliefs. Why then being dysgenics in this issue and returning to a weaker belief?

Next you argue that Christianism comes from Western Asia and it is therefore is alien. Actually, you don't argue it but you just assert it.

Let us start by saying that the tale-version of Christianism does come from the Middle East, not from Western Asia. If something, it is the Indo-Europeans who come from (or by way of) Western Asia.

But then on the next post you contradict that assertion by saying that Christianization is only a varnish over Pagan Europe. If it is just a varnish, then it is Pagan Europe (and yes, there is something of that but not like you put it.. I'll comment on this later).. and yet alien to Europe? Oh.. hold on! You mean Indo-European Paganism which, since it comes from (or by way of) Western Asia, is alien in itself to Europe.

For a moment I thought that you meant Paleo-European spirituality.

Jokes apart, defining Christianism as alien because its tale-part is based in the Middle East denotes a lack of argumentation against Christianism itself and a will to argument against at any cost. Even at the cost of not being honest.

Either that or ignoring much the reality of Christianism. Ignoring that the spiritual-part (and not the tale-part) was shaped for its audience and after its audience. Its audience being the European peoples. And continued doing so in a long trip, until today when it is in a downwards slope of decadence just like its folk, the Europeans, are.

Originally Posted by Segomo

If Europe became officially christian, that is the fault of emperor Constantine.

I find this statement outrageous, and the product of little thinking before posting it.

It is therefore also the fault of Constantine that when the Huns came, Christendom (i.e. Europe, since there had been no idea of Europe prior to that, since the Indo-European Pagan Romans would consider taking an African or an Asian just the same) fought them off and did not fall under them. It is also Constantine's fault that when Islam came Christian Spain fought it off. It is also Constantine's fault that when the Tatars came Christian Russia rose and fought them off. It is also Constantine's fault that when the Ottomans came Christians fought them off west and east.

We should damn Emperor Constantinus for not being today Turks, Mongols and Moors. We wouldn't have problems with immigrants because they would be our brothers.

History is cyclic, euro-paganism is reborne.

All worship the zombies!

[Segomo]

Segomo, ius sanguinis is a legal concept which in the Jacobine fashion of the French Revolution it was assimilationist. In fact the whole idea of state was forcibly and in nature assimilationist. You know, liberté, egalité, fraternité.

There was two ideological groups inside FR, two groups of jurists, the adepts of the ius solis, which was the right under the monarchy, and the adepts of the ius sanguinis, jurists of roman right. Napoleon Bonaparte in his civil code chose only ius sanguinis, absolutely not assimilationist, as in the ancient Athens. The things are more complex.
The device of the first republic was only "freedom and equality", "brotherhood" has been added in 1848.

But the iconography found from the times prior to the Bronze Age suggests a cult to a mother-goddess. Something that remained in some form or another in later Mediterranean Civilizations.

In the basque pantheon, there are both a father-god and a mother-goddess (Urtzi and Lur/Mari), as at the Indo-Europeans', the Caucasians', the Finno-Ugrics' and the Cretans'.

Consequently, where you say that Christianism was imposed by force over the Indo-European Pagan beliefs, I can argue just by the same rule of thumb that Indo-European beliefs were imposed by force over the Paleo-European spiritual beliefs.

Do not mix, dear comrade, the facts with hypothesis. We do not know nothing about the hypothetic pre-indo-europeans and their hypothetic believes. And anyway, pre-indo-european and indo-europeans paganisms were both... paganisms. A monotheistic weltanschuung do not know pagan tolerance.

Another thing is that when a belief is imposed over another, it is because one is stronger and the other weaker.

Nietzsche has shown that the weak ones may win by the "bad consciousness" into the strong ones. Inversion of all the values.

Why then being dysgenics in this issue and returning to a weaker belief?

We have not any informations about an hypothetic paleolithic religion and for the professors Lothar Kilian and Jean Haudry, the Indo-europeans were in fact the paleolithic europeans. But, even if they were not, there is no reason to suppose that indo-european paganism replaced pre-indo-european paganism, because the gods were the same ones, only the names modified. There is only one sun, only one sky, only one earth, only one moon, only one dawn and so later

Let us start by saying that the tale-version of Christianism does come from the Middle East, not from Western Asia. If something, it is the Indo-Europeans who come from (or by way of) Western Asia.

Sorry, I use a bad term in english... by western Asia, I meant middle East. We agree, in fact.

Jokes apart, defining Christianism as alien because its tale-part is based in the Middle East denotes a lack of argumentation against Christianism itself and a will to argument against at any cost. Even at the cost of not being honest.

I speak about its origins, and its origins are alien, semitic, middle-eastern, as you prefer, what is well known, isn't it.

Its audience being the European peoples. And continued doing so in a long trip, until today when it is in a downwards slope of decadence just like its folk, the Europeans, are.

And what does it prove ? It does not change anything about its origins, no ?

I find this statement outrageous, and the product of little thinking before posting it.

However, all has begun with the victory of Constantine over Maxentius in 312, the edict of tolerance of Milano in 313, the victory of Constantine over Licinius in 325, the progressive conversion of Constantine (baptised on his bed of death in 337). Except the pagan reactions of the emperors Julian, then Eugenius, all the emperors of Rome were christian after Constantine. In 392, Theodosius forbade paganism, whose practice was punished by death. With the domination of christendom over roman Europe and Armenia, the princes and kings of the "barbarian" world, in order to access to roman culture and to christian organisation, converted themselves, from Clovis to Olof Skötkonung, (without forgeting Boleslaw of Czechia, Vaîk of Hungary (saint Stephen), Miezsko of Poland, Vladimir of Russia...).

We should damn Emperor Constantinus for not being today Turks, Mongols and Moors. We wouldn't have problems with immigrants because they would be our brothers.

I do not understand. I only said that Europe became christian because of the process borne from the conversion of emperor Constantine.

Do you think that most of the soldiers of Aetius faced to Attila were christian ? And the pagan lithuanian knights who created a massive empire in eastern Europe in medieval times ? They even resisted to Mongols.

About the Moors, the triumph of the muslim troops may be explained by the weakness because of the wars between Roman christian empire and Persian zoroastrian empire.

All worship the zombies!

The gods do not die, they're immortal (because they are gods).

Best regards, Mynydd. By Jove.

[Segomo]

For more information about christianisation of Europe:
http://www.rassias.gr/9011.html

There is on this page a large chronology in english, spanish, german and italian.

In french, I have made another chronology put on my forum:
http://socialiste.forumactif.com/viewtopic.forum?t=242

Best regards, dear comrades.

Post scriptum: we are far away from the subject of this topic, isn't it ?

[Siegmund]

Originally Posted by Segomo

That is more than only remnants but deep roots. As the folklorists now know, christianisation was only a varnish above pagan Europe.

How odd to dismiss virtually the entire range of European history in this way. Your argument ignores what is before you - the blood, the insitutions, the wars, the lives and deaths of countless people who would be astonished to find out that their faith, nay, their entire civilization, was only a varnish upon deep pagan roots.

Show me the works of pagan philosophy Europe produced in the past 1.700 years, the mighty cities, the institutions, the great pagan states that conquered the sea or the New World. They exist, surely, but only in your imagination.

Notre Dame was built over the pagan sanctuary of a celtic goddess, the place was not random.

And thus you prove my point against your own. Christianity was not merely a religious concept upon a smorgasbord of competing ideas. It conquered paganism, smashed it, destroyed it, so that only residue remains.

Unless of course you can show me the millions of pagans and their institutions, but of course, you cannot. They exist only as a folkloric fantasy, or rather, isolated and persecuted remnants, here and there.

I do not think that builing pagan statues (of Olympians) be simply artistic.

My friend, you continue to miss my point. These were Romantic expressions of the spirit of the times. There is little that is genuinely pagan in any of it. Beautiful, idealized sculptures, symbolizing the beauty of man apart from the so-called tyranny of the church. It was humanist, not religious by any definition of the term.

In other words, the gods were being used as images of the god of man - the true gospel of the Enlightenment. The spirit of man, the accomplishments of man - these are godlike, these make him a god, and thus we have no need of others. The pagan gods are thus dethroned, and man put in their place.

With all due respect, you must learn to see beyond the appearance of things if you wish to discover their true meaning.

[Segomo]

How odd to dismiss virtually the entire range of European history in this way. Your argument ignores what is before you - the blood, the insitutions, the wars, the lives and deaths of countless people who would be astonished to find out that their faith, nay, their entire civilization, was only a varnish upon deep pagan roots.

When you honour Christ the 25th december, the birthday of the sun-god, you act as a pagan. The first christians did not feast birthdays (a pagan custom). When you show Christ by a great nordic, blond-haired and blue-eyed, you act as a pagan. When you honour in France Saint-Michael, you honour in fact Belen(os). When you participate to the procession from Paris to Chartres, you make as the ancient druids going to the forest of Carnutes. When you link to Mary the miracles of the source of Lourdes, the gauls honoured the goddess Stirona of Lourdes for her miracles.

Officially christians but really pagans.

Show me the works of pagan philosophy Europe produced in the past 1.700 years, the mighty cities, the institutions, the great pagan states that conquered the sea or the New World. They exist, surely, but only in your imagination.

The medieval neo-platonicians (John Italus, Michel Psellus, Leon the grammarian), Gemistus Pletho, Montaigne, Machiavelli, Bruno, Voltaire, D'Holbach, Sade, Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger and so long ?
Democracy, republic, roman law, renaissance's humanism, enlightenment of the XVIIIth century ?
The mighty pagan cities ? Athenes, Sparta, Roma, Byzantium, Uppsala, Vilnius, Kiev. Great empires ? Lithuania, Viking conquests (and real discoverers of America), Russia of Sviatoslav, the anglo-saxon kingdoms.

And poetry ? When Dante Alghieri speak about "Jesus" as "Jupiter for us crucified" ? And the poetry full of paganism of Ronsard, Du Bellay, Byron, Goethe, Hölderlin, Nerval, Vigny, the french Parnassian school of poetry (Leconte de Lisle and so later).

And thus you prove my point against your own. Christianity was not merely a religious concept upon a smorgasbord of competing ideas. It conquered paganism, smashed it, destroyed it, so that only residue remains.

Correction, it persecuted paganism. The christianisation was the destruction of the ancient european world and no conscious european may applaud that. Your mission here is however as the emperor Julian against christians and barbarians, that is the same fighting, our world against the new "brave" world of the mondialists.

Unless of course you can show me the millions of pagans and their institutions, but of course, you cannot. They exist only as a folkloric fantasy, or rather, isolated and persecuted remnants, here and there.

If you go to conclusion, you should say that the real religion of today's is neither christian nor pagan but atheist. Then, if the mondialists win, they will be true ?

The question is simple: the victory of christianism over paganism was a good thing ? I do not think so. Simple.

My friend, you continue to miss my point. These were Romantic expressions of the spirit of the times. There is little that is genuinely pagan in any of it. Beautiful, idealized sculptures, symbolizing the beauty of man apart from the so-called tyranny of the church. It was humanist, not religious by any definition of the term.

Yes, it was not pagan, it was nostalgic of paganism. That's because the gods are immortal and even in a christian world they continued to fascinate. The father of the renaissance's philosophers, byzantine Gemistus Pletho, made a prediction. The religious of the future of Europe would be neither christian nor islamic, but not very different from the ancient paganism.

With all due respect, you must learn to see beyond the appearance of things if you wish to discover their true meaning.

But that's what I say. One may think that the statues of the gods are only artistic and romantic, but that proves only one thing, the power of the Muses is superior to the power of Christ. In fact, on my opinion, romantism was a prelude to repaganisation of Europe, parallel to the biological reeuropeanisation of our great fatherland.

Another visionary, Heinrich Heine, which wrote that:

Should the subduing talisman, the Cross, break, then will come roaring forth the wild madness of the old champions, the insane Berserker rage, of which the northern poets sing. That talisman is brittle, and the day will come when it will pitifully break. The old stone gods will rise from the long-forgotten ruin and rub the dust of a thousand years from their eyes; and Thor, leaping to life with his giant hammer, will crush the Gothic cathedrals [About Germany, p. 301].

Some interesting links (with caution about quality of informations):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecu...Roman_religion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Heathens
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecu...Greek_religion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polythe...onstructionism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asatru
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_...onist_Paganism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_Neopaganism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenic_polytheism

Best regards, comrade.