182 Bt<.,WEI:NTEXTANDARTIFAcrthecountryside"andtherefore~uneduca{ed,uncivilized."Itisclearthat
paganuscannot bea self-expression but must comefrom nonpagans,
respeclively,Christians.Theword reflectsthe faci that in lateantiquity
mostChristianslivedincities,whileoftenthecountrysidewasstillpopu-
latedbyadherentsoftheoldreligiousworld.Consequently,paganus,just
liketheGermanicequivalentheathen,soonbecamea mostlyderogatory
expressionfornon-Christians.ThewordGentileisdirectlyinfluencedby
biblical languagewhere (inthe OldTestament)non-Jewsand(inthe
NewTestament)alsonon-Christiansarcoftencollectivelyaddressedas
"then~llions"(Hebrewgoyim).TheEnglishwordGentileisa directderi~
vationfrom LatingentiJis("belongingtothe nations^6 ). Usingtheterm
non~ChristianisalsonothelpfulbecauseitstilltakesChristianityasthe
focalpointandlevelsoutalldifferencesofthe"others."No"pagan"would
havewantedtobeaddressedwith a termthatwasforeigntohisorher
ownreligiousselr~understanding.
Moreover, therecertainlyis nogeneral, all~encompassingtermfor
"paganism" in theancient languagesthemselves, apart from the ones
derivedfromJewish(orChristian)conceptsofthe"religiousother."This
indeed is an important observation: using a single word to describe
"paganism^6 essentiallybindsphenomenatogetherthatintheperceplionof
theiroriginaladheremscouldnotbesubsumedundera singleheading.It
isonlyfromtheOil/sidethatanessentiallyplur'.J1worldofbeliefsandprac-
tices becomesunified On contrast to taday's "neopagans," who have
adoptedourmodernterminology).Studyingpaganismbringsoneintocon-
tact witha world that is largely plural and phenomenathat are local,
particular,andhavemultifaceted.(Thismayevenhelponetorecognize
diversitywithinChristianityandJudaism,too.)
Intheend,weshouldadmitthatourcommonvocabularyis inade~
quateandbiased.Withallthesedifficultiesandproblemsinmindandfor
thesakeofareadabletext,[ stilldaretousethetermpaganinitsmost
neutralanddescriptivesense.Inthatcase,severalobservationsmustbe
stressed.First, paganreligionsareno"subculture"persebutareaninte-
gral partoftheprivateandpubliclifeofa respectivesociety.Publicand
privatelifeareintertwinedinacomplexworldoflivingreligiosityonmul~
tiplelevels.Weadmirethebeautyoftempleserectedasa prideofcities
andrulers,and,ontheotherhand,wehearofsinistermagicandbloody
sacrifici;:llritualsandarealltooquicktoseparatetheonefromtheother.
However,wehavenorighttomakeqUickjudgmentsandnocriteriato
labeltheonepracticeastruereligiousdevotionandtheotherasartificial
andnOIserious. Fortheancients,supposedly"prosaic"civilreligionwas
nOI incontradictionwith theinwardnessofindividualreligiousfeelings.
Thatmeansthatsupposedly"schematic"dedicationsoninscriptionsorthe
performanceofage-oldsacrificialritualsmUSlnotbeSWiftlydismissedas