Most interesting pantheon

Which pantheon is the most interesting one?

  • Greek

    Votes: 9 26.5%
  • Nordic

    Votes: 14 41.2%
  • Egyptian

    Votes: 1 2.9%
  • Hindu

    Votes: 2 5.9%
  • Christian

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Slavic

    Votes: 1 2.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 7 20.6%

  • Total voters
    34
  • Poll closed .
Wanted to say something meaningful, but seeing the poll options i see this isn't a serious thread.
 
The Egyptian pantheon is probably the weirdest of the list... apart the "furryness" of many gods, their stories are quite different from many others.
Their gods routinely kill each-other and then come back from the grave.
There is plenty of gods marrying between siblings, etc.

For example Seth kills Osiris, cut his body into pieces, and scatter them.
Isis, Osiris' wife and sister, searched the land for his body parts.
She was eventually able to piece together his body, whole save for the penis.
Isis then replaced the penis with a reasonable facsimile, and she was often portrayed in the form of a kite being impregnated by the corpse of Osiris (with hard-on).

If that's isn't at least a bit weird, I don't know what else it is!


The Christian "pantheon" is so boring in comparison with the others that it shouldn't even be listed!
I would have preferred a due mention of the Sumerian pantheon: their mythology is really interesting and their stories are the base of all religions of the region (including those in the bible).
They also have very interesting concepts like the me and very cool myths like the Epic of Gilgamesh that introduces themes like immortal humans, global flood, ark, and "zombies" (the goddess Ishtar threatens to raise the dead who will "outnumber the living" and "devour them").

The Greek pantheon is quite commonly known here in the west and probably are the most "human" of the gods.

Unfortunately I know almost nothing about the Slavic and Indian pantheons, so I went for the one that I know best and I like the most:

The Scandinavian pantheon!

Fantasy environment, epic fights, very deep myths, and cool characters.
The Scandinavian gods are not even completely gods, more like people that got superpowers and use them to rule a fantasy word.
For example Odin got his power by self-sacrificing: he hung himself from the world tree Yggdrasil for nine days and nights, pierced by his own spear, in order to learn the wisdom that would give him power in the nine worlds.

The Scandinavian myths also have a beginning and and in the Ragnarök s...t hit the fan in a final epic destruction that cause the death of the gods themselves.
 
that's pretty disgustingly reductionist (outside of being blatantly wrong but whatever) and something that you yourself go on to implicitly contradict later in the same post

:confused:

I beg to differ. I've, obviously, been reductionist so people could understand what I meant, but still there're why too many things in common among Indo-european religions (specially those that evolved in Europe) to consider them different religions, that's why I call them traditions.

I think you make a mistake due to our modern perspective. Nowadays, we have to use the written and archeological records in order to know these ancient religions. We have, therefore, a written bias that hinders us keeping in mind that all Indo-european traditions come from the same place as we know thanks to ethnic, genetic and linguistic evidence. In other words, it's as if the early sects of Christianity such as the gnostics or the non-trinitarians had survived and evolved but we didn't have a written record to tell us that they were the same religion in the past. I'm pretty sure that whatever sect(s) had appeared out of, let's say, batshit insane sects such as the valesians or the artotyrite montanists or even non-christians such as muslims or jews would have, in our POV, hardly anything in common with catholics or protestants if the written record didn't tell us so.

Such a thing is what happens with Indo-european traditions. There was never a religious authority to keep them united and polythesitic religions, unlike monotheistic ones, have fashions, which means that depending on time and place the same divinity may be more or less worshipped. This plus the most likely interference caused by interaction with pre-Indo-european peoples caused an increasing divergence among Indo-european religions in late prehistorical times. As soon as these cultures developed a writing system their traditions and cultures were so distinct that they didn't see them as the same religion anymore but they could still see the obvious analogues and they didn't mind adopting divinites from these traditions and even adding them to their own pantheon as we see in the case of Castor and Pollux.

Time ago, when I had decided to convert to paganism, I had a discussion with a colleague about what to do with my religious inclinations without violating our Latin mos maiorum. He made me see that all Indo-european traditions are the same and that, therefore, they cannot be considered as superstitio (even if ancient romans did treat the religion of persians as such due to xenophobic reasons). That's why I converted to germanic paganism, because it's kin to the Latin tradition and as a Catalan I'm descendant of both, Iberolatins and the Frankish and Gothic colonists that Charlemagne sent to his failtastic Gothia.
 
The Maori one! with Ra the sun god. (Which is also the sun god in egypt, which basiclly means aliens were involved)
 
Back
Top Bottom