INTRODUCTION
As a descriptive term within the linguistic canon of the history of religion,‘polytheism’ denotes symbolic systems that assume the ex- istence of several superhuman beings, included within a class of‘gods’ in the context of a particular culture. However, the implications of the term become apparent only when the definition is further refined, as by Burkhard Gladigow in his analysis of structural problems associ- ated with polytheistic religions: ‘We describe as polytheism a form of religion conceptually based on the actions of a number of gods with personal attributes. The gods’ actions are represented as inter- referential, directed at the“world”, and concerning humanity.’1This
makes it clear that such gods are not merely objects of the cult, but subjects, actors within the world order. Their influence on the human world, and their availability to human experience, cannot, within polytheistic symbolic systems, be reduced to an all-embracing, fun- damental principle: thus the actions of not entirely comprehensible, not fully identified divine individuals, who might even be in conflict one with the other, are available as explanatory models for contingent human experience.
In this form, polytheism appears to offer a model of pluralism in which even conflict at the level of fundamental principles does not destroy the integrity of the system. If, however, everything remains internal, the question arises as to how a religion of this type relates to situations where monotheistic religions also function within the same
cultural space, and more or less intensively dispute the existence of other personal gods. The term‘polytheism’ itself has always been a polemical one, having been created by the Jewish thinker Philo in Alexandria in the first century ce to describe non-Jewish religions, thus from the point of view of a theorist of a one-god religion, a monotheistic system.2
The polytheism criticized by Philo was the normal form for ancient religions in Europe. When polytheisms appear in later periods, they usually involve the reception of ancient forms or new importations from regions outside Europe, such as Asia. In city after city in the ancient world we find a core group of major gods, around which anything from a handful to hundreds of further gods and goddesses are worshipped: certainly tens of thousands in the entire Mediterranean world, if we are not to be too eager to imitate ancient thinkers in their discoveries of identifications. Functions or ‘areas of jurisdiction’ are the obvious distinguishing criteria. For instance, in Rome, Jupiter Optimus Maximus (‘the best and greatest’) might be the god to turn to in state crises, Venus for many women’s problems, Mars for war, and Dea Tertiana for three-day fever in infants. Half a dozen different Junos were represented with their own temples in Rome alone: Juno Lucina, Juno Lanuvina (Sospita), Juno Curritis, Juno Populona, Juno Regina with three temples in all, and finally Juno Moneta.3 But it was not
necessary for the gods worshipped to have long traditions. Lovers of the exotic could turn to the cult of Isis, or that of Epona, the Gallic goddess of horses, or to fasting on the Sabbath (this being a widespread inter- pretation of the Jewish ban on cooking on that day). The city of Rome, as the most important centre of an Empire embracing the entire Mediterranean region, was of course an exceptional case. Metaphors for the enormous scale of cult imports included the view of Rome as a ‘blend of the known world’, and the notion of the Syrian Orontes flowing into the (Italian) Tiber (Juvenal, Satire 3.62).
And the heir to this Antiquity was Christianity, the dominance of a monotheism developed from Jewish roots, expressed eventually, in Late Antiquity, in the legal codices enforcing orthodoxy and outlawing apostasy.
This astonishing historical development is not a new theme. Pos- sibly no other theme in the religious history of Antiquity has been so frequently discussed as the reasons for the‘triumph of Christianity’, or, more romantically, and looking more benevolently on the losing side, the‘downfall of paganism’.4But the reasons found—the need
for redemption, growing individuality, the spiritual sterility of the traditional cults, the organizational superiority of the Christian Church, the inspirational influence of martyrs—are not merely con- troversial: they are uninteresting. The entire quest for reasons is un- interesting. What is interesting in the historical relationship between polytheism and pluralism is not who triumphed and why, but why the contest happened in thefirst place and at what level was it fought?
THE POLYTHEISM OF THE ROMAN PRINCIPATE To return to the beginning: what is ancient polytheism and what characterizes it? Firstly, it is not a‘religion’, in the sense that we speak of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity as religions.5 Rather, ancient polytheism is the sum of cult acts performed in individual cities. Of course, each of these cities had a hinterland: the question of the polytheism of non-urbanized tribes remains an unanswered one; I wish only to indicate the problem.6
What distinguishes the polytheism of thefirst and second centuries ce? For the sake of brevity, and at the same time to establish a canvas for the developments that followed, I shall confine myself to a few key points and begin by indicating the following striking lacunae.