When were the greek & roman gods worshipped?

There’s a strong thread among folks who gravitate to neopaganism: it’s not a different orthodoxy, a different box of obligatory dogmatic belief systems and concomitant rituals, that attracts us; but rather a sanctification of the notion that orthodoxy (any orthdoxy) is wrong. Evil, even. That whatever is sacred is something that has to be sensed anew and freshly understood, with those new experiences not forced to correspond or get filtered through a rigid structure of text and tradition and whatnot.

That also may not have been a key component of the beliefs of actual ancient wiccans and druids. I for one do not know and do not greatly care.

Sundays at 10:30am with a Greek service at noon, and Gothic at 2pm.

What, you thought that schedule was invented by Christians? :smiley:

For that matter, Stoicism (and for the more daring, Epicureanism) answered the “meaning of life” question most people expect from modern religious systems. Many Stoic ideas in fact were incorporated into Christianity from an early date.

Okay, other than neopaganism (which while interesting isn’t what I’m asking about), do folks have dates for when the gods were last widely worshipped by Greeks and Romans?

Quoth Dusty:

I sit corrected.

And it’s not the Greco-Roman gods precisely, but when my mom visited Iceland last year, she did run into a group of folks who still worship the old gods. The Norse old gods, of course, in this case: Odin, Thor, etc.

I thought that had been sort of covered above. It was a gradual thing, with no really reliable figures for what percentage of the population worshipped what, when. But loosely Greco-Roman paganism was probably the majority at the opening of the 4th century A.D. and undoubtedly the minority and technically illegal by the opening of the 5th. It survived, declining and increasingly oppressed, as a predominantly rural movement through the the 6th century, but with minor urban elements - Zosimus railed against Christianity while still serving as a civil servant under the emperor Anastasius ( 491-518 ) and as noted there was a pagan academy in existence in Athens until 529.

Really? I thought it had to do with sacrificing some of the first lambs of spring. I haven’t encountered the Ra explanation.

This last is doubtful. There were serveral dates for the Birth, all calculated by varied means. None of the calculations had anything to do with copting anything, there is no reason to suspect the dudes who did the calculations of anything like this. Now, then, of those various dates, the reasons why the Church picked Dec 25th are unknown, and it is possible that “co-opting” a Pagan holiday might well have entered into them.

But then why Dec 25th? The Solstice was a few days earlier (depends on what year we are talking about the calendar was mutable back then). The big holiday around that time was Saturnalia, which was Dec 17-24, not on the 25th at all. It could have been to co-opt Dies Natalis Solis Invicti, but that was only celebrated by the Mystery Sect of Mithraism,which only become popular about the time Christianity did. Besides the Imperial Roman calendar was littered with holidays- just about any day picked would have come within a week of some holiday.

I suppose it is possible, the Church fathers could have looked at the 3-4 possible dates given by the “experts” and picked the one that had the biggest chance of co-opting a Pagan holiday. But if so, then why didn’t they push Christmas? Christmas didn’t become the Big Holiday until sometime in the Middle ages, by which time any possible competition with Saturnalia or Dies Natalis Solis Invicti had been completely forgotten by almost everyone.

wiki "*The identification of the birthdate of Jesus did not at first inspire feasting or celebration. Tertullian does not mention it as a major feast day in the Church of Roman Africa. In 245, the theologian Origen denounced the idea of celebrating Jesus’ birthday “as if he were a king pharaoh.” He contended that only sinners, not saints, celebrated their birthdays.[citation needed]

The earliest reference to the celebration of Christmas is in the Calendar of Filocalus, an illuminated manuscript compiled in Rome in 354.[2][24] In the east, meanwhile, Christians celebrated the birth of Jesus as part of Epiphany (January 6), although this festival focused on the baptism of Jesus.[25]

Christmas was promoted in the east as part of the revival of Catholicism following the death of the pro-Arian Emperor Valens at the Battle of Adrianople in 378. The feast was introduced to Constantinople in 379, to Antioch in about 380, and to Alexandria in about 430. Christmas was especially controversial in 4th century Constantinople, being the “fortress of Arianism,” as Edward Gibbon described it. The feast disappeared after Gregory of Nazianzus resigned as bishop in 381, although it was reintroduced by John Chrysostom in about 400.[2]In the Early Middle Ages, Christmas Day was overshadowed by Epiphany, which in the west focused on the visit of the magi. But the Medieval calendar was dominated by Christmas-related holidays. The forty days before Christmas became the “forty days of St. Martin” (which began on November 11, the feast of St. Martin of Tours), now known as Advent.[26] In Italy, former Saturnalian traditions were attached to Advent.[26] Around the 12th century, these traditions transferred again to the Twelve Days of Christmas (December 26 - January 6).[26] The evening of January 5 was called Twelfth Night, a festival later celebrated in the play of that name by William Shakespeare. The fortieth day after Christmas was Candlemas.

The prominence of Christmas Day increased gradually after Charlemagne was crowned on Christmas Day in 800. King William I of England was crowned on Christmas Day 1066. Christmas during the Middle Ages remained a public festival, incorporating ivy, holly, and other evergreens, as well as gift-giving.[27] Christmas gift-giving during the Middle Ages was practiced more often between people with legal relationships (i.e. tenant and landlord) than between close friends and relatives.[27]

By the High Middle Ages, the holiday had become so prominent that chroniclers routinely noted where various magnates celebrated Christmas."
*

Cecil has said this http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_034b.html
"
*History records no observation of Christmas before 354, and by that time there was no one around who remembered exactly when Jesus was born. Today, historians have all but given up trying to figure it out. They give his birth date as 6-8 BC (good trick, but this was no ordinary dude) and leave it at that.

Nobody knows exactly why Christ’s birthday is celebrated on December 25. One theory holds that this is the right date, postulating that Zachary was high priest and that the Day of Atonement fell on September 24, ergo, John the Baptist was born on June 24 and Christ dropped in exactly six months later on December 25. Modern scholars use this theory to get laughs at cocktail parties.

Another guess works backward from the supposed date of the crucifixion (March 25), figuring that Christ was conceived exactly 33 years before he died, True Believers having no use for fractional numbers. According to the most tenable hypothesis, Christ’s birthday was assigned to the winter solstice (December 25 in the Julian calendar, January 6 in the Egyptian) because the date had a ready-made pagan holiday, the “Birthday of the Invincible Sun” (or “ancient Saturnalia debauch,” as you put it)."*

So, although I admit your hypothesis is popular, there is no solid evidence for it.

Actually, it was.

The Romans did not have names like ‘Sunday’ for days of the week, in fact they didn’t even have weeks at all. Their month was divided into 8-day sections, roughly corresponding to the phases of the moon. Days were just referred to as x days before or after the new moon (Kalends), half-moon (Nones), or full-moon (Ides).

Why, then, are the days of the week named after Roman gods in Romance languages (e.g., Spanish Miercoles (Wednesday) named for Mercury, French Mardi (Tuesday, as in Mardi Gras) named for Mars)? We even have Saturday named for Saturn in English.

They are actually named after the known heavenly bodies. The custom of naming the days is explained by Dio.

The ancients could observe seven “planets”, and deduced an order (in what they presumed was an earth-centric system) based on their apparent movement against the background stars. From farthest to closest: Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Sun, Venus, Mercury, Moon. Astrologers cast horoscopes based on the hour of birth, so each hour was assigned a planet. However, with seven planets and 24 hours, each day would begin its first hour with a different planet than the last day.

Astrologers kept track of this pattern and named days according to their first hour, to make the business of casting horoscopes easirer. If you start day 1 with Saturn, then move ahead in the order 24 mod 7 = 3, you end up at “Sun”; add another 24 mod 7 you get to “Moon”, etc.

Using the French names as an example, it’s easy to see the rest of the pattern: Mars -> Mardi, Mercury -> Mercredi, Jupiter (Jove) -> Jeudi, Venus -> Vendredi, and back to the beginning with Saturn -> Samedi.

Except that they are named after various Norse dieties mainly.

Not in the Romance languages, which is the question that was asked.

Because the Roman Empire did have a seven day week. When Constantine became emperor, he got rid of the old Roman nones-kalends system and adopted a seven day week, using the older astrological seven day week referred to by CJJ*.

Makes sense. However, since Dio seems to have written a century before Rome became Christian, this appears to suggest that the Romans made some use of the seven-day week in pre-Christian times. I suppose, though, that he could have been describing systems used by non-Romans. I always imagined that if anyone had adopted the week as part of converting to Christianity, they wouldn’t have used names of Pagan gods.

How about those Norse deities? Did anyone ever refer to the planet Jupiter as “Thor”, or did they name Thursday after a god rather than a planet?

I agree that this naming convention predates the widespread adoption of Christianity in the Roman empire. Dio’s description aside, I’m not aware of much evidence showing the system was in widespread use prior to the Christians.

The Geman tribes appear to have looked for deities equivalent to the ones whose names graced the planets associated with each day. Thor, for instance, is the god of thunder in Norse mythology, so it makes sense to identify him with Jupiter, who was known for throwing thunderbolts. Similarly, Frieda could be seen as somewhat equivalent to Venus (Friday), though I don’t know how Wotan and Mercury would be related (Wednesday).

If this is so, and if nobody referred to the planet Jupiter as “Thor”, then the days would in a sense be named after gods, not planets, in Germanic. This is one reason I imagined that they were named after gods in Latin as well. I suppose the distinction was unclear to the extent that people identified the planets with the gods.

In Andrew Robinson’s wonderful book Lost Languages, we learn that it was the Etruscans (the culture which preceded the Romans in north-central Italy) who bequeathed many of the practices (and words) related to augury to the Romans.

In part, yes.

It seems to me that in the ancient world, there was very little recognition that truly different religions even existed. Most Greeks and Romans seem to have assumed that the gods of other peoples were, if you like, simply the local versions of the gods they themselves worshipped - Heroditous, for example, says stuff like ‘the Sythians sacrificed to Apollo’, meaning that they sacrificed to their version of the god that was quite like Apollo (not a quote just my imperfect recollection).

To an extent this may have had a lot of truth in it, as there was probably some form of common ancestry of proto-Indo-European religion (some believe, for example, that the Druids were similar to the caste of Brahmans, or rather that they both shared a common ancestry).

This syncretism was also fueled by the habit of importing cults from one place to another to incorporate into the local pantheon - for example Dyonesos was supposed to come from India, and at a later date the cult of Isis was imported into Rome from Egypt.

The difficulty of course is how such a system would fare when confronted with a religion claiming exclusive monotheism. The answer appears to be that the “exclusively monotheistic” religion of Christianity simply absorbed most of the aspects of local cults into itself and recycled 'em as patron saints.