of Fundamental Problems and Methods of Science of Religion (Drijvers and
van Baaren 1973; cf. King 1984: 125–144). Ever since ‘methodological
agnosticism’ has been the standard framework for the non-confessional study
of religion in the Netherlands (Platvoet 1998: 343, 2002: 134), as elsewhere
(on ‘methodological atheism’, see Rudolph 1992: 90, Colpe 1980: 294,
Borgeaud 1999: 72). The Utrecht anthropologist Jan van Baal (1909–1992)
shared this anti-phenomenological twist and suggested a structuralist-inspired
theory of religion ‘based on the view that religion is a system by which humans
communicate with their universe’ (Hoftsee 2005: 724) and stressing the non-
verifiability of religious ideas (Platvoet 2002: 133). Nevertheless, the program
advanced by van Baaren and associates, such as Lammert Leertouwer, has not
produced the sort of scholarly output one would have hoped.
Apart from tacit neglect or explicit rejection, reinforced by feminism,
post-colonialism, and postmodernism, there have been some attempts to
rehabilitate the phenomenology of religion. The most influential is that of
Jacques Waardenburg, a student of Bleeker otherwise mainly known for his
work on Islam (1969, 2002, 2003). He has tried to redesign phenomenology
as the study of religious intentions (1972). However, it is not quite clear in
what respect such a study is phenomenological, and in a later textbook
Waardenburg (1986) refers to his project as ‘hermeneutical research’.
Some German scholars also propose hermeneutical approaches. The most
radical is Wolfgang Gantke’s (1998) project of an ‘open’, non-reductive study
of religion. Colpe also attempted to rethink the phenomenological heritage on
the basis of a rereading of Edmund Husserl (Colpe 1988). Unfortunately, this
essay is not easily accessible to non-initiates. In Italy, theologian and
comparative religious historian Aldo Natale Terrin, a prolific writer with wide
ranging interests, has tried to defend the epistemological and methodological
legacy of the phenomenology of religion by emphasizing the religiouspoint of
departure in the study of religion (Terrin 1998).
The eclipse of the phenomenology of religion paved the way for the study
of religion to enter the broader field of research in the humanities and social
sciences. In the course of this development, however, that study has to a large
extent lost sight of its comparative perspective and its general, cross-cultural
agenda. If such topics are addressed at all, it is done by discussing metho-
dological issues or editing multi-author volumes.
From structuralism to anthropology
After World War II structuralism gained prominence in France, spearheaded
by Claude Lévi-Strauss and Georges Dumézil (1898–1986), two extremely
prolific writers and brilliant storytellers. Both produced ambitious programs
of comparative mythology (e.g. Lévi-Strauss 1964, 1966, 1968, 1971; Dumézil
1968, 1971, 1973) covering wide empirical ground: in the case of Dumézil
1111
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1011
1
2
3111
4 5 6 7 8 9
20111
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
30111
1
2
3
4
35
6
7
8
9
40111
42222
3
411
WESTERN EUROPE
33
