What do you think?
Rate this book
The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity: A Sociohistorical Approach to Religious Transformation
While historians of Christianity have generally acknowledged some degree of Germanic influence in the development of early medieval Christianity, Russell goes further, arguing for a fundamental Germanic reinterpretation of Christianity. This first full-scale treatment of the subject follows a truly interdisciplinary approach, applying to the early medieval period a sociohistorical method similar to that which has already proven fruitful in explicating the history of Early Christianity and Late Antiquity. The encounter of the Germanic peoples with Christianity is studied from within the larger context of the encounter of a predominantly "world-accepting" Indo-European folk-religiosity with predominantly "world-rejecting" religious movements. While the first part of the book develops a general model of religious transformation for such encounters, the second part applies this model to the Germano-Christian scenario. Russell shows how a Christian missionary policy of temporary
accommodation inadvertently contributed to a reciprocal Germanization of Christianity.
accommodation inadvertently contributed to a reciprocal Germanization of Christianity.
272 pages, Paperback
First published December 10, 1993
18 people are currently reading
688 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
July 4, 2010
This review appeared in Idunna 78 (Winter, 2008): http://stores.lulu.com/thetroth
I first heard tell of this book at one of Dan O’Halloran’s talks at Trothmoot and confused it with a reference from Kurt Oertel’s two articles on Arbogast in Idunna 61 & 62 (2004). I see now, checking my Idunnas, that Oertel didn’t list Russell’s book as a reference, but I’m very glad I had such a (somewhat misplaced) great interest in reading The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity.
If, after reading the title of the book, you immediately conclude that it’s one of those scholarly books which is more about theory than fact, you would be mostly – but not entirely – correct. The first half of the book is given over to framing Russell’s argument and placing it in context of other prevailing theories about Christian evangelism and conversion. Half the time, it reads like a belaboring history; half the time, it reads like a theology course; and this sentence is typical: “An anomic society with relatively low levels of scientific and economic development, a prevailing soteriological-eschatological world-view, and an indigenous religion that is waning in popularity, would seem to be the ideal candidate for proselytization by representatives of a universal religion” (page 24).
The gist of Russell’s argument, however, is this:
Christianity is a universal religion. Universal religions (e.g.: Christianity, Buddhism, the Hellenic mystery cults like the cult of Mithras) are focused on the individual and their personal relationship with the divine. This personal relationship with the divine typically emphasizes some kind of salvation, rejecting both the pain and pleasures of this world in favor of attaining spiritual ascendance after death.
Universal religions most easily take hold in societies that are under stress and/or disintegrating – e.g.: the last centuries of the Roman Empire – and are susceptible to a savior figure who can bring them out of their troubles. The appeal of universal religions is also in part the opportunity to form close social bonds with those of similar beliefs, substituting religious fellowship for the lost community of kith and kin.
In contrast, native Germanic paganism was a folk religion. Folk religions are world-accepting, rather than world-rejecting, and emphasize group solidarity – looking to the divine (whether gods, ancestors or others) for aid in health and well-being, success in war and politics, and continuation of the ancestral line.
In the effort to spread Christianity to the pagan North, missionaries were forced to adapt Christianity to Germanic culture before they could then attempt to make Germanic culture conform to Christian values. This Germanization of Christianity was necessary because a universal religion had little to no appeal among the Germans, whose society was self-sustaining and whose folk religion was more than adequately meeting their needs.
Out of this syncretism emerged the European Christianity of Charlemagne and the early Crusades: replacing the native gods of war with the Lord Thy God as the giver of victory, replacing the native gods of prosperity and health with the Lord Thy God as the giver of riches to the faithful – in addition to replacing other deities, ancestors, and locally revered wights with the cult of the saints, adapting the pagan holy days into Christian feasts, and building churches on pagan holy sites.
Part 2 of the book explores the last three points above in detail, covering relevant history from 376-754 a.d. after providing a background on Germanic culture and religion. This history is more revealing than one might expect, as one gets a very clear sense of early Germanic culture and values (if not specific religious practices) through the lens of (attempted) conversion. In fact, the Germanic cultural values which the early missionaries capitalized on – the feudal character of the warband and early Germanic state, the glorification of battle and the warrior’s prowess, the appeal to the gods for victory and wealth, etc. – directly reflect the tales about Sigurd which developed during this time: the heroic poems of the Elder Edda, the Saga of the Volsungs, and the Nibelungenlied.
While the second half of the book provides an excellent summary of the social aspects of Germanic religion, what struck me most was the contrast between universal and folk religions – especially in relation to neopaganism and contemporary Heathenry. I have no idea if the terms “universalist” and “folkish” among Asatruar have their origin in the terms “universal” and “folk” religions found in this book, but I was struck by the following observations while reading:
• Generally speaking (based on my experience), neopaganism is “universal”. It appeals to an individual’s desire to find others of like belief; its practice is focused on individual experience of the divine; and that experience of the divine typically takes an ecstatic form intended to transform the individual. These observations, in my opinion, apply equally to neopagan practice among both solitary individuals and small groups. In short, neopaganism broadly resembles the mystery cults of antiquity, themselves “universal”.
• In contrast, “the primary sacral locus of most folk religions, including Indo-European religions, is the folk community itself. The sacrality of the community is expressed in ritual ceremonies that celebrate its relationship with its own exclusive gods and that ‘promote a strong sense of in-group identification and loyalty’” (page 48). This quote from the book amply describes modern Heathenry – or, at least, it should.
The more I read of Russell’s contrast between universal and folk religions, the more I faced a riddle when it comes to Heathenry: as a “religious movement”, we are seeking to revive a folk religion. Even those on the universalist side of the old “folkish vs. universalist” debate emphasize the social, community-fostering aspect of our beliefs and practice. None of us, however, can claim Heathen grandparents. The kin relationships so key in a “folk” religion are not present in modern Heathenry except where we have re-defined our “kin” as those of like belief. Unlike our ancient ancestors, we are choosing our community far more than our community is choosing us. In this respect, Heathenry, like the rest of neopaganism, is “universal”. It will be generations before Asatruar might truly be members of a “folk” religious community in the old sense, in which kinship defines the community more than choice.
I suspect that most of us in Heathenry came to it with a desire for close-knit community, in which the continuity and solidarity of that community is more important than the individual achievements (or aspirations) of its members. It is the collective experience and the individual’s contribution to (rather than just participation in) the community that shapes what it means to be Heathen. But how do we define our community when our recent ancestors, at least since the Protestant Reformation, practiced a religion which replaced the folk community with one defined by doctrine? How do we revive a folk religion when our nearest blood relatives typically are not part of our religious community?
I have no answers to these questions. All of us in Heathenry are in the midst of seeking those answers, and only time will tell how we arrive at them – whether we accept the universal character of defining our communities by choice or seek continuity with our ancient ancestors’ folk community by emphasizing lineage or ethnicity. Howsoever you choose, I encourage you to read The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity – especially the theoretical discussions – as you may find, as I did, more than you expected.
I first heard tell of this book at one of Dan O’Halloran’s talks at Trothmoot and confused it with a reference from Kurt Oertel’s two articles on Arbogast in Idunna 61 & 62 (2004). I see now, checking my Idunnas, that Oertel didn’t list Russell’s book as a reference, but I’m very glad I had such a (somewhat misplaced) great interest in reading The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity.
If, after reading the title of the book, you immediately conclude that it’s one of those scholarly books which is more about theory than fact, you would be mostly – but not entirely – correct. The first half of the book is given over to framing Russell’s argument and placing it in context of other prevailing theories about Christian evangelism and conversion. Half the time, it reads like a belaboring history; half the time, it reads like a theology course; and this sentence is typical: “An anomic society with relatively low levels of scientific and economic development, a prevailing soteriological-eschatological world-view, and an indigenous religion that is waning in popularity, would seem to be the ideal candidate for proselytization by representatives of a universal religion” (page 24).
The gist of Russell’s argument, however, is this:
Christianity is a universal religion. Universal religions (e.g.: Christianity, Buddhism, the Hellenic mystery cults like the cult of Mithras) are focused on the individual and their personal relationship with the divine. This personal relationship with the divine typically emphasizes some kind of salvation, rejecting both the pain and pleasures of this world in favor of attaining spiritual ascendance after death.
Universal religions most easily take hold in societies that are under stress and/or disintegrating – e.g.: the last centuries of the Roman Empire – and are susceptible to a savior figure who can bring them out of their troubles. The appeal of universal religions is also in part the opportunity to form close social bonds with those of similar beliefs, substituting religious fellowship for the lost community of kith and kin.
In contrast, native Germanic paganism was a folk religion. Folk religions are world-accepting, rather than world-rejecting, and emphasize group solidarity – looking to the divine (whether gods, ancestors or others) for aid in health and well-being, success in war and politics, and continuation of the ancestral line.
In the effort to spread Christianity to the pagan North, missionaries were forced to adapt Christianity to Germanic culture before they could then attempt to make Germanic culture conform to Christian values. This Germanization of Christianity was necessary because a universal religion had little to no appeal among the Germans, whose society was self-sustaining and whose folk religion was more than adequately meeting their needs.
Out of this syncretism emerged the European Christianity of Charlemagne and the early Crusades: replacing the native gods of war with the Lord Thy God as the giver of victory, replacing the native gods of prosperity and health with the Lord Thy God as the giver of riches to the faithful – in addition to replacing other deities, ancestors, and locally revered wights with the cult of the saints, adapting the pagan holy days into Christian feasts, and building churches on pagan holy sites.
Part 2 of the book explores the last three points above in detail, covering relevant history from 376-754 a.d. after providing a background on Germanic culture and religion. This history is more revealing than one might expect, as one gets a very clear sense of early Germanic culture and values (if not specific religious practices) through the lens of (attempted) conversion. In fact, the Germanic cultural values which the early missionaries capitalized on – the feudal character of the warband and early Germanic state, the glorification of battle and the warrior’s prowess, the appeal to the gods for victory and wealth, etc. – directly reflect the tales about Sigurd which developed during this time: the heroic poems of the Elder Edda, the Saga of the Volsungs, and the Nibelungenlied.
While the second half of the book provides an excellent summary of the social aspects of Germanic religion, what struck me most was the contrast between universal and folk religions – especially in relation to neopaganism and contemporary Heathenry. I have no idea if the terms “universalist” and “folkish” among Asatruar have their origin in the terms “universal” and “folk” religions found in this book, but I was struck by the following observations while reading:
• Generally speaking (based on my experience), neopaganism is “universal”. It appeals to an individual’s desire to find others of like belief; its practice is focused on individual experience of the divine; and that experience of the divine typically takes an ecstatic form intended to transform the individual. These observations, in my opinion, apply equally to neopagan practice among both solitary individuals and small groups. In short, neopaganism broadly resembles the mystery cults of antiquity, themselves “universal”.
• In contrast, “the primary sacral locus of most folk religions, including Indo-European religions, is the folk community itself. The sacrality of the community is expressed in ritual ceremonies that celebrate its relationship with its own exclusive gods and that ‘promote a strong sense of in-group identification and loyalty’” (page 48). This quote from the book amply describes modern Heathenry – or, at least, it should.
The more I read of Russell’s contrast between universal and folk religions, the more I faced a riddle when it comes to Heathenry: as a “religious movement”, we are seeking to revive a folk religion. Even those on the universalist side of the old “folkish vs. universalist” debate emphasize the social, community-fostering aspect of our beliefs and practice. None of us, however, can claim Heathen grandparents. The kin relationships so key in a “folk” religion are not present in modern Heathenry except where we have re-defined our “kin” as those of like belief. Unlike our ancient ancestors, we are choosing our community far more than our community is choosing us. In this respect, Heathenry, like the rest of neopaganism, is “universal”. It will be generations before Asatruar might truly be members of a “folk” religious community in the old sense, in which kinship defines the community more than choice.
I suspect that most of us in Heathenry came to it with a desire for close-knit community, in which the continuity and solidarity of that community is more important than the individual achievements (or aspirations) of its members. It is the collective experience and the individual’s contribution to (rather than just participation in) the community that shapes what it means to be Heathen. But how do we define our community when our recent ancestors, at least since the Protestant Reformation, practiced a religion which replaced the folk community with one defined by doctrine? How do we revive a folk religion when our nearest blood relatives typically are not part of our religious community?
I have no answers to these questions. All of us in Heathenry are in the midst of seeking those answers, and only time will tell how we arrive at them – whether we accept the universal character of defining our communities by choice or seek continuity with our ancient ancestors’ folk community by emphasizing lineage or ethnicity. Howsoever you choose, I encourage you to read The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity – especially the theoretical discussions – as you may find, as I did, more than you expected.
May 25, 2016
Concise, superbly well-researched. The heavy footnoting throughout the book should help the reader build an extensive to-read list about the topic.
January 10, 2018
Nothing is as clear-cut as B/Wers might have it, especially when it comes to religion and its emergence and development in history. People who deny the fuzziness are typically blase panhandlers of depthless who can't be bothered with nuance and nowhere in historical study is this more glaring than with the emergence of that singular, peculiar and oh-so-special snowflake-of-a-religion as Christianity.
Russell does much to muddy this up and it's a welcome achievement. The basic idea of the book is straightforward: Christianity and its mission in Europe came up against already existing beliefs and faiths and had to inculcate them into itself in order to have any kind of an appeal. Whether it was the comitatus/warrior ethos of the Germanic tribes, resulting in the curious idea of the "warrior Christ", or the incorporation of an existing pantheon into Catholic hagiographies, or the adoption of non-Christian feasts and holidays into the liturgical calendar, it's a given that there were accommodations made on both sides. Especially on the Christian one. Differing from Islam's convert-because-it-feels-right-at-the-moment-and-you're-not-treating-us-as-badly-as-the-Church-does appeal, Christianity and its devotee were hard pressed to make inroads with the various "barbarian" peoples roaming around conquering Europe in the first millennium. So they did what they had to, they subsumed their mission partially in the cultural milieu of the time.
Russell does much to muddy this up and it's a welcome achievement. The basic idea of the book is straightforward: Christianity and its mission in Europe came up against already existing beliefs and faiths and had to inculcate them into itself in order to have any kind of an appeal. Whether it was the comitatus/warrior ethos of the Germanic tribes, resulting in the curious idea of the "warrior Christ", or the incorporation of an existing pantheon into Catholic hagiographies, or the adoption of non-Christian feasts and holidays into the liturgical calendar, it's a given that there were accommodations made on both sides. Especially on the Christian one. Differing from Islam's convert-because-it-feels-right-at-the-moment-and-you're-not-treating-us-as-badly-as-the-Church-does appeal, Christianity and its devotee were hard pressed to make inroads with the various "barbarian" peoples roaming around conquering Europe in the first millennium. So they did what they had to, they subsumed their mission partially in the cultural milieu of the time.
August 17, 2020
This is an academic study of reciprocal process that occurred when Christianity spread north to Europe, whereby the early missionaries encountered very different cultural "soil" in which they attempted to plant the church, and as a result changed their tactics to be more accommodating to the worldview of the Germanic people in the hopes of achieving full conversion as a gradual process. The result was that at least in the early years Germanic culture could potentially have had as great an impact on Christianity as vice versa. The book deals more with the question of worldview transformation than on specific culture practices or religious traditions although some are touched upon, and while some historical narrative is provided it is not central to the discussion except in isolated places.
July 9, 2022
Excelent. If you ever wondered how and why our Nordic ancestors became Christian, or better said, how they assimilated into and transformed it, this is your book.
June 28, 2023
This is a very intriguing, fun and controversial book, with a subject that extends far beyond what is suggested by its narrow and specific title. The first part of the book offers an excellent overview of sociological theories of religious development and expansion, accompanied by insightful descriptions of late ancient society. The second part applies the theory to explain how an ascetic, apocalyptic Middle-Eastern religion was transformed into a livable syncretic system through its interaction with the Indo-European folk religiosity prevalent among the Germanic peoples. The book received a significant number of negative academic reviews criticizing its lack of supportive evidence and exaggerated, ambitious claims. Furthermore, it is understandable why some readers might find offense in its simplistic, romanticized portrayal of Germanic culture, its somewhat negative attitude towards Eastern religions, and its radical reinterpretation of the nature of European Christianity. However, most of the criticisms can be ignored and rejected because it is a very fun book.
Russell explains that Roman and Greek society after the death of Alexander already lost most of their traditional Indo-European religiosity. The masses became attracted to Eastern mystery cults, and the educated elite sought refuge in new philosophical schools focused on individual, ethical self-fulfillment. Traditional structures collapsed in urban, immigrant societies, anomie and sense of decay became widespread. Such societies quickly succumbed to the new religion, which originated in a similar intellectual climate among dissatisfied Jews in Judaea. Imperial rulers even began promoting it as a universalist religion could unite and pacify the large, heterogeneous population. However, as the new religion spread northwards it faced radically different societies – rural, tribal, warlike and vibrant – whose members were not really seeking salvation. It is one of the points that other authors and reviewers criticized, claiming that German society was also in crisis during the migration period and ripe for a religious change. Russell does not actually make much distinction between Germanic, Celtic and Slavic paganism but focuses on the Germans because he believes that their religion exhibits fundamental and authentic characteristic of early Indo-European culture, and also because of their later political and ecclesiastical influence.
Europe was not Christianized by imposing a finished Middle-Eastern product on the pagan peoples; it was a complicated process of interaction that resulted in a syncretic religion which included numerous Indo-European elements. Baptism often took the form of a superficial mass event, in which a tribal ruler's embrace of Christianity automatically meant the conversion of thousands of his followers. Considering that the notion of shame and kin-oriented moral values of Indo-Europeans were less connected to their supernatural, religious beliefs, those who were baptized probably did not even understand that by adding Jesus to their list of gods they were expected to radically change their system of values. Illiterate peasants often persisted in their pagan folk practices throughout the medieval era, without grasping even the basic tenets of official Christianity. Aristocrats reimagined Jesus as a powerful god who would grant them military victories, also associating the new religion with Roman imperial power and prestige. Missionaries had to tactfully adapt their preaching to prevailing social aspirations and traditions, which were difficult to suppress; otherwise, Christianity might never have spread throughout Europe. They downplayed the soteriological and eschatological aspects while emphasizing immediate worldly rewards and divine omnipotence. They carefully used imprecise words and euphemisms when translating religious texts. However, their sneaky plans for progressive long-term Christianization failed to materialize. Rather than gradually imposing a true orthodox religion on the Germanic population, Christianity itself became increasingly influenced by their pagan culture. Russell explains the most significant new elements of this syncretic Christianity, such as proprietary churches, feudal relations, concepts of kingship and knighthood, crusader ideology, hagiographies, and the veneration of saints and relics. There were other differences as well; for example, Germans intellectually struggled with the idea of sin, perceiving it less as a matter of personal indulgence and more as a disrespect for rules and rituals. From the tenth century, German Emperors spread this syncretic Christianity and made it standard for the Western world. Opposition was occasionally offered by radical Catholic orders and later by Protestant reformists, all of them seeking to restore the original, pure Christianity.
Russell does not deny that Christianity was had already undergone changes before coming into contact with the Germanic peoples. Clearly, early Christians already had to adjust their views as the apocalypse failed to meet its expectedly short deadline. It was also not surprising that the sectarian and ascetic lifestyle became somewhat moderated as the religion spread among the masses. Romans had already introduced ideas and customs which are hardly attributable to Jesus, although they might have found inspiration in the Old Testament. Constantine accepted Christianity because he believed it will grant him military victories. In early Christianity there already existed a tradition of military saints, like George, Sergius and Bacchus, who were highly popular among the warlike tribes, like the Ghassanids. While orthodoxy was taking shape a variety of alternative Gospels, competing interpretations, and heterodox movements emerged within the Roman Empire. The religious changes were not unique to Christian contact with the Germanic peoples; however, according to the book, they did act as a significant, visible catalyst for change, even if it sometimes took centuries for certain effects to fully materialize. Russell addresses these issues and potential criticisms quite briefly. The book would be even better if it had a broader scope and provided more detailed explanations of certain aspects of the thesis. It is a revised doctoral thesis, and unfortunately it seems that the author did not continue writing on this fascinating subject. Goodreads currently lists "Review of Rat Invasion Biology" and "Tom, the Orphan Cat" among the more intriguing titles under his name, but it is highly possible that it is just another case of mixing up the authors with the same name. Overall, this is an excellent, captivating book. Although there are some controversial parts and valid objections to it, my main complaint is that it is too short. If you have an interest in the subject of religious conversion and transformation, or the relationship between Christianity and paganism, I highly recommend it.
Russell explains that Roman and Greek society after the death of Alexander already lost most of their traditional Indo-European religiosity. The masses became attracted to Eastern mystery cults, and the educated elite sought refuge in new philosophical schools focused on individual, ethical self-fulfillment. Traditional structures collapsed in urban, immigrant societies, anomie and sense of decay became widespread. Such societies quickly succumbed to the new religion, which originated in a similar intellectual climate among dissatisfied Jews in Judaea. Imperial rulers even began promoting it as a universalist religion could unite and pacify the large, heterogeneous population. However, as the new religion spread northwards it faced radically different societies – rural, tribal, warlike and vibrant – whose members were not really seeking salvation. It is one of the points that other authors and reviewers criticized, claiming that German society was also in crisis during the migration period and ripe for a religious change. Russell does not actually make much distinction between Germanic, Celtic and Slavic paganism but focuses on the Germans because he believes that their religion exhibits fundamental and authentic characteristic of early Indo-European culture, and also because of their later political and ecclesiastical influence.
Europe was not Christianized by imposing a finished Middle-Eastern product on the pagan peoples; it was a complicated process of interaction that resulted in a syncretic religion which included numerous Indo-European elements. Baptism often took the form of a superficial mass event, in which a tribal ruler's embrace of Christianity automatically meant the conversion of thousands of his followers. Considering that the notion of shame and kin-oriented moral values of Indo-Europeans were less connected to their supernatural, religious beliefs, those who were baptized probably did not even understand that by adding Jesus to their list of gods they were expected to radically change their system of values. Illiterate peasants often persisted in their pagan folk practices throughout the medieval era, without grasping even the basic tenets of official Christianity. Aristocrats reimagined Jesus as a powerful god who would grant them military victories, also associating the new religion with Roman imperial power and prestige. Missionaries had to tactfully adapt their preaching to prevailing social aspirations and traditions, which were difficult to suppress; otherwise, Christianity might never have spread throughout Europe. They downplayed the soteriological and eschatological aspects while emphasizing immediate worldly rewards and divine omnipotence. They carefully used imprecise words and euphemisms when translating religious texts. However, their sneaky plans for progressive long-term Christianization failed to materialize. Rather than gradually imposing a true orthodox religion on the Germanic population, Christianity itself became increasingly influenced by their pagan culture. Russell explains the most significant new elements of this syncretic Christianity, such as proprietary churches, feudal relations, concepts of kingship and knighthood, crusader ideology, hagiographies, and the veneration of saints and relics. There were other differences as well; for example, Germans intellectually struggled with the idea of sin, perceiving it less as a matter of personal indulgence and more as a disrespect for rules and rituals. From the tenth century, German Emperors spread this syncretic Christianity and made it standard for the Western world. Opposition was occasionally offered by radical Catholic orders and later by Protestant reformists, all of them seeking to restore the original, pure Christianity.
Russell does not deny that Christianity was had already undergone changes before coming into contact with the Germanic peoples. Clearly, early Christians already had to adjust their views as the apocalypse failed to meet its expectedly short deadline. It was also not surprising that the sectarian and ascetic lifestyle became somewhat moderated as the religion spread among the masses. Romans had already introduced ideas and customs which are hardly attributable to Jesus, although they might have found inspiration in the Old Testament. Constantine accepted Christianity because he believed it will grant him military victories. In early Christianity there already existed a tradition of military saints, like George, Sergius and Bacchus, who were highly popular among the warlike tribes, like the Ghassanids. While orthodoxy was taking shape a variety of alternative Gospels, competing interpretations, and heterodox movements emerged within the Roman Empire. The religious changes were not unique to Christian contact with the Germanic peoples; however, according to the book, they did act as a significant, visible catalyst for change, even if it sometimes took centuries for certain effects to fully materialize. Russell addresses these issues and potential criticisms quite briefly. The book would be even better if it had a broader scope and provided more detailed explanations of certain aspects of the thesis. It is a revised doctoral thesis, and unfortunately it seems that the author did not continue writing on this fascinating subject. Goodreads currently lists "Review of Rat Invasion Biology" and "Tom, the Orphan Cat" among the more intriguing titles under his name, but it is highly possible that it is just another case of mixing up the authors with the same name. Overall, this is an excellent, captivating book. Although there are some controversial parts and valid objections to it, my main complaint is that it is too short. If you have an interest in the subject of religious conversion and transformation, or the relationship between Christianity and paganism, I highly recommend it.
March 27, 2013
Refreshlingly cerebral, and well-grounded, in a world where so much is written on this subject in pure unfounded fluff and fairytale.
April 11, 2023
Excellent, clearly argued, immensely footnoted, full of fascinating historical detail and a major contribution to the understanding of European history.
November 17, 2023
Essential to understanding the post Antiquity Christian church.
May 25, 2024
This was such a strange book. It is full of strange tangents, questionable comparisons, and little discussion of the actual conversion process of the public from Germanic paganism to Christianity, or of the differences in worldview between the two religions. Most of the book consists of the author going on tangents about modern proselyting, the Roman and Hellenistic world, and why the acceptance of mystery cults into Roman religion was the folly of a failing Roman state.
I felt uncomfortable tones of racism in the early chapters, including the author discussing the apparent 'genetic component of personality and religion,' and the author going into a strange amount of detail about the "successes" and "failures" of modern-day Christian proselyting outside Europe. There is also a pretty apparent Christian bias throughout the entire book. Pagan religions are referred to as primitive, less developed, and their adherents being "resigned to misfortune" and with little to no sense of community welfare.
Chapters 6 and 7 are the only parts of the book I found very useful or interesting. This is largely the only portion of the book that discusses the ways in which the general public were converted to Christianity and the differences between the German pagan and Christian worldviews, which is what I picked up the book for. It's a shame, because these last chapters are actually quite interesting and has made me aware of some further reading.
tldr: It should've just been the last 90 pages at the end of the book that were published, not the full 200+ which is largely made up of strange tangents stewed in problematic bias and racism.
I felt uncomfortable tones of racism in the early chapters, including the author discussing the apparent 'genetic component of personality and religion,' and the author going into a strange amount of detail about the "successes" and "failures" of modern-day Christian proselyting outside Europe. There is also a pretty apparent Christian bias throughout the entire book. Pagan religions are referred to as primitive, less developed, and their adherents being "resigned to misfortune" and with little to no sense of community welfare.
Chapters 6 and 7 are the only parts of the book I found very useful or interesting. This is largely the only portion of the book that discusses the ways in which the general public were converted to Christianity and the differences between the German pagan and Christian worldviews, which is what I picked up the book for. It's a shame, because these last chapters are actually quite interesting and has made me aware of some further reading.
tldr: It should've just been the last 90 pages at the end of the book that were published, not the full 200+ which is largely made up of strange tangents stewed in problematic bias and racism.
March 1, 2023
This book would is here to stay for decades. 10/10
Quite possibly one of the best books to understand the framework for proselytisation. I repeatedly get dragged into osmosis territory when I think about this book. The beauty of this book is the huge number of sources it has cited in the footnotes. I am not sure if there are other books in this topic which reach this level of profundity. The only complaint I have about the book is you keep getting distracted into exploring the sources. And I'm saying it in a good way. Part of the reason I spent a lot of time with this book. Pretty sure I will make several sweeps on it in the times to come. Great reference.
Would be really glad if someone out there gets to read this comment, this is for them... please recommend books on similar lines.
Quite possibly one of the best books to understand the framework for proselytisation. I repeatedly get dragged into osmosis territory when I think about this book. The beauty of this book is the huge number of sources it has cited in the footnotes. I am not sure if there are other books in this topic which reach this level of profundity. The only complaint I have about the book is you keep getting distracted into exploring the sources. And I'm saying it in a good way. Part of the reason I spent a lot of time with this book. Pretty sure I will make several sweeps on it in the times to come. Great reference.
Would be really glad if someone out there gets to read this comment, this is for them... please recommend books on similar lines.
February 1, 2024
A lot of helpful ideas in here. I did read a review castigating it for naive trust in some of its source material, but hey, if my questions get answered I’m happy. We’re in the realm of propaganda and conviction here..
It overpromises somewhat in its early chapters. Maybe that’s inevitable since no writing from the Germans themselves survives to really fill out the thesis. But it holds a mirror up to us today: narrative creation, social dislocation, propaganda and persuasion, accommodation to power, unforeseen blowback, institutional takeover, etc. Plus ça change.
It overpromises somewhat in its early chapters. Maybe that’s inevitable since no writing from the Germans themselves survives to really fill out the thesis. But it holds a mirror up to us today: narrative creation, social dislocation, propaganda and persuasion, accommodation to power, unforeseen blowback, institutional takeover, etc. Plus ça change.
April 25, 2023
Important book for anyone interested in missiology, or church history in general. Valuable insights for religious transformation whose implications and relevance to our modern times are not stated explicitly but are nevertheless clearly implied.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews