Did Ancient "Pagans" Really Worship Nature? - Tales of Times Forgotten
Ancient "Pagans" did not have the same romantic notion of Nature that many contemporary Neopagans maintain, it is not historically accurate. The Gods were not seen as extensions of Nature, even if their supernatural status was aligned with some natural phenomena (ie Zeus/Lightning)
And actually part of why I have been more drawn to traditional Polytheism, as opposed to Nature worship (as a whole), or utilizing things such as the Elements, Elemental cross, etc. Even though I absolutely hold Nature in high esteem.
" This heavily romanticized nineteenth-century view of what ancient “paganism” was like eventually gave rise to the modern Neopagan movement. Thus, the idea that most people today have in mind when they hear the word “pagan” is one that has been irrevocably shaped by the Romantic movement and by contemporary Neopaganism. This idea, however, is not generally an accurate reflection of what ancient pre-Christian religions were like.
Most deities worshipped by ancient pre-Christian peoples were not seen as personifications of natural phenomena, but rather as supernatural beings governing specific areas of human endeavor. Furthermore, ancient pre-Christian peoples saw the deities as dangerous, capricious, and untrustworthy.
Deities that were particularly closely associated with nature were often seen as especially frightening and unpredictable. Entities like Pan, satyrs, and nymphs were seen as frightening and potentially dangerous. They could never quite be trusted and people sought not to make friends with them, but rather to appease and avoid them whenever possible.
The idea that ancient pre-Christian peoples worshipped nature is, for the most part, an invention of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth-century western European Romantic movement and is, for the most part, not a very accurate reflection of historical reality."
Ancient "Pagans" did not have the same romantic notion of Nature that many contemporary Neopagans maintain, it is not historically accurate. The Gods were not seen as extensions of Nature, even if their supernatural status was aligned with some natural phenomena (ie Zeus/Lightning)
And actually part of why I have been more drawn to traditional Polytheism, as opposed to Nature worship (as a whole), or utilizing things such as the Elements, Elemental cross, etc. Even though I absolutely hold Nature in high esteem.
" This heavily romanticized nineteenth-century view of what ancient “paganism” was like eventually gave rise to the modern Neopagan movement. Thus, the idea that most people today have in mind when they hear the word “pagan” is one that has been irrevocably shaped by the Romantic movement and by contemporary Neopaganism. This idea, however, is not generally an accurate reflection of what ancient pre-Christian religions were like.
Most deities worshipped by ancient pre-Christian peoples were not seen as personifications of natural phenomena, but rather as supernatural beings governing specific areas of human endeavor. Furthermore, ancient pre-Christian peoples saw the deities as dangerous, capricious, and untrustworthy.
Deities that were particularly closely associated with nature were often seen as especially frightening and unpredictable. Entities like Pan, satyrs, and nymphs were seen as frightening and potentially dangerous. They could never quite be trusted and people sought not to make friends with them, but rather to appease and avoid them whenever possible.
The idea that ancient pre-Christian peoples worshipped nature is, for the most part, an invention of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth-century western European Romantic movement and is, for the most part, not a very accurate reflection of historical reality."