There are many
opinions on the relevance or validity of historical reconstruction of IE
cultures and their influences on modern Paganism. They are as varied as there
are those who study these paths. In some traditions of Paganism actual
historical evidence is of little importance compared to the personal
experiences of those involved. While in other traditions the historical
evidence and reconstruction of the ‘old ways’ far outweighs any of the personal
side. ADF’s goal is to create a tradition that is inclusive of all the
Indo-European cultures by creating a common set of practices that were shared by most, if not all, of these cultures.
To a degree there has to be a modern reconstruction of the past to even begin
to make this possible.
Much of what we know about IE Cultures points to the
importance of ancestry and tradition. These traditions come from years and
generations of practice that are handed down over time. To create a modern
tradition that resembles these IE cultures we have to look at the past. We have
to ask ourselves “What did our ancestors do? What did they believe? Why did
they do these things?” Without these basic questions being answered we cannot
hope to start creating a modern practice based on the past. Even to understand
the body of mythologies we have from the ancient cultures, we have to look at
the past to understand the context in which they were created. When modern
people just take the mythologies for what they see, much of the original
meanings can be lost.
When I first began my study of Druidry, specifically
ADF, I believed that the attempt to use historical evidence to reconstruct
traditional practices was impossible and not nearly as important as what I
might experience on a personal level. Through my studies in the Clergy program
I began to realize what Indo-European cultures were, how they were all linked,
and that through study we could create a foundation based on the past that
could work. It has allowed me to develop a much more meaningful and powerful
personal religious practice that is based upon ancient Hellenic traditions.
Even today we can see hints of ancient IE culture, though
perhaps perverted from their original form. When we look at Hindu culture,
there is still very much a separation of class. They are still very
polytheistic in the majority of their spiritual paths. In most of Europe and
America you can see hints of the class separations. There are the ruling
classes, the warriors, and then the ‘commoners’. Even in the dominate religion
Christianity; you can see the tripartition of the divine. And if you look at
the languages of these nations you will see there are still a great many
similarities in structure and words. The example I gave is from Mark Damen in
Question 1 of this series is: One of the primary examples Mark Damen from Utah
State University uses is the term “three”. In his example he says:
"Threes,"
again, demonstrate the point well. Besides Latin (tres),
Greek (treis) and Sanskrit (trayas), there are Spanish (tres), Danish, Italian and Swedish
(tre), French (trois), German (drei), Dutch (drie), Russian (tri), English (three) and several other
permutations all based on Indo-European *trejes.
That these words are cognate is self-evident, especially when they're compared
to "three" in non-Indo-European languages, such as Turkish (uc), Hebrew (shelosh), Malay (tiga) and Chinese (san).” (Damen, 2013)
He goes on further to talk about how the words for mother and father show a similar
root.
And though this comparison is from past language, not
much has changed in the modern structure of the cultures and nations.
Damen, M. (2013, December 2). Section 7 The
Indo-Europeans and Historical Linguistics. Retrieved 6 27, 2014, from Utah
State University:
http://www.usu.edu/markdamen/1320hist&Civ/chapters/07IE.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment