Thanks for this interesting research. A lot of this must be down, as you say, to the Enlightenment project of disembedding religion from culture (although it's not a Protestant thing - the most famous example is the attempted reinvention by Jewish reformers of Judaism as a "religion" separate from an ethnic tradition).
The thing that strikes me here is that "Hellenic" terminology was used by mediaeval Greek Orthodox Christians to describe pre-Christian polytheism and attempts to revive it. From memory, you find this in the Synodikon of Orthodoxy, and the same language was used by Patriarch Gennadios in his letter on the case of Iouvenalios which I posted about a few weeks ago. There was evidently a convention of describing pre-Christian polytheism as "Greek", even among people who were themselves (Christian) Greeks.
Not that modern "Hellenismos" would know about this - it's much more likely that they got it from the translation of Julian - but it introduces an odd complication.
Thank you for your comment, Robin. My main concern is not on the medieval interpretation/reception of the terms such as Hellene, Hellenic, or Hellenism. Instead, I focus on the significance of Ἑλληνισμός as used by Julian and the interpretive harm inflicted by the 1913 Loeb translation, which translates it as “Hellenic religion.”
While the translation is not a problem in academia, scholars understand the complexity of Hellenism and its use in Julian’s program. I have yet to find a scholar of Late Antiquity claim that Hellenism was a religion in of itself; every scholar acknowledges the depth of the term and the nuances of its meaning. The issue with the translation occurs in modern pagan communities, which can’t tell the difference between the original and the translation, conflating the two as the same. Thus, when they see “Hellenic religion," they believe Hellenism refers to a system of belief akin to Christianity (confessional, centered on individual faith). This English translation projects a Protestant-influenced, post-Enlightenment notion of religion as a distinct, belief-oriented system onto the Greek. This was absent in Julian’s era and obscures the understanding of Ἑλληνισμός. I aim to decolonize the translation (undo the violence) so we do not project ideas onto a term that does not reflect Julian's lived reality and the context of the fourth century.
To address your point about Christian conflation with Hellenism/Hellenic/Hellene with pagan/paganisn, I would point to Gregory Nazianzus (staying in the fourth century, a direct critic of Julian), Gregory supports my claim that Ἑλληνισμός isn’t a religion or a term strictly constrained to religious matters. I will reference Susanna Elm’s Sons of Hellenism, where she shows that Gregory had to fight Julian’s civilizational use of Hellenism not by rejecting it outright, but by offering a transformed version. Gregory saw Ἑλληνισμός as encompassing the full range of elite paideia, political theory, and cultural identity. Gregory’s effort to transform Hellenism wouldn’t be possible if “Hellenism” were only about “religion.”
“Arguments over who truly owned logoi, the heritage of Homer, Hesiod, Plato, Aristotle, and so on (that is, Hellenism), were central for Julian and Gregory… to formulate what became, through Gregory’s writings, the intellectual foundation of the Byzantine world.” (Introduction)
As for your point on Judaism, you are talking about the separation of religion and ethnicity? I do not recall this occurring in antiquity. Is there a late antique example of this? Isn’t that a 19th-century development?
Completely agree, "Hellenismos" to describe a religion is anachronistic, and depends on an anachronistic idea of what a religion is. I was just musing about some of the historical background. It looks like you've done us all a service by identifying where the dubious use of "Hellenismos" comes from.
As to Judaism, yes, I meant the post-Enlightenment development, which has a very interesting and very tragic history. This stuff would have been incomprehensible in antiquity. As you probably know, some scholars won't even translate Ioudaioi in ancient texts as "Jews" (as opposed to "Judeans"). Incidentally, the first use of Hellenismos that I can remember (I don't know if it's the actual first use) comes in one of the Books of the Maccabees, where it definitely refers to an entire culture and not just religion.
there was such an extreme of Hellenization and increase in the adoption of foreign ways because of the surpassing wickedness of Jason, who was ungodly and no high priest (Revised Standard Version)
Thanks for this interesting research. A lot of this must be down, as you say, to the Enlightenment project of disembedding religion from culture (although it's not a Protestant thing - the most famous example is the attempted reinvention by Jewish reformers of Judaism as a "religion" separate from an ethnic tradition).
The thing that strikes me here is that "Hellenic" terminology was used by mediaeval Greek Orthodox Christians to describe pre-Christian polytheism and attempts to revive it. From memory, you find this in the Synodikon of Orthodoxy, and the same language was used by Patriarch Gennadios in his letter on the case of Iouvenalios which I posted about a few weeks ago. There was evidently a convention of describing pre-Christian polytheism as "Greek", even among people who were themselves (Christian) Greeks.
Not that modern "Hellenismos" would know about this - it's much more likely that they got it from the translation of Julian - but it introduces an odd complication.
Thank you for your comment, Robin. My main concern is not on the medieval interpretation/reception of the terms such as Hellene, Hellenic, or Hellenism. Instead, I focus on the significance of Ἑλληνισμός as used by Julian and the interpretive harm inflicted by the 1913 Loeb translation, which translates it as “Hellenic religion.”
While the translation is not a problem in academia, scholars understand the complexity of Hellenism and its use in Julian’s program. I have yet to find a scholar of Late Antiquity claim that Hellenism was a religion in of itself; every scholar acknowledges the depth of the term and the nuances of its meaning. The issue with the translation occurs in modern pagan communities, which can’t tell the difference between the original and the translation, conflating the two as the same. Thus, when they see “Hellenic religion," they believe Hellenism refers to a system of belief akin to Christianity (confessional, centered on individual faith). This English translation projects a Protestant-influenced, post-Enlightenment notion of religion as a distinct, belief-oriented system onto the Greek. This was absent in Julian’s era and obscures the understanding of Ἑλληνισμός. I aim to decolonize the translation (undo the violence) so we do not project ideas onto a term that does not reflect Julian's lived reality and the context of the fourth century.
To address your point about Christian conflation with Hellenism/Hellenic/Hellene with pagan/paganisn, I would point to Gregory Nazianzus (staying in the fourth century, a direct critic of Julian), Gregory supports my claim that Ἑλληνισμός isn’t a religion or a term strictly constrained to religious matters. I will reference Susanna Elm’s Sons of Hellenism, where she shows that Gregory had to fight Julian’s civilizational use of Hellenism not by rejecting it outright, but by offering a transformed version. Gregory saw Ἑλληνισμός as encompassing the full range of elite paideia, political theory, and cultural identity. Gregory’s effort to transform Hellenism wouldn’t be possible if “Hellenism” were only about “religion.”
“Arguments over who truly owned logoi, the heritage of Homer, Hesiod, Plato, Aristotle, and so on (that is, Hellenism), were central for Julian and Gregory… to formulate what became, through Gregory’s writings, the intellectual foundation of the Byzantine world.” (Introduction)
As for your point on Judaism, you are talking about the separation of religion and ethnicity? I do not recall this occurring in antiquity. Is there a late antique example of this? Isn’t that a 19th-century development?
Completely agree, "Hellenismos" to describe a religion is anachronistic, and depends on an anachronistic idea of what a religion is. I was just musing about some of the historical background. It looks like you've done us all a service by identifying where the dubious use of "Hellenismos" comes from.
Now if only the pagans would listen! Lol
As to Judaism, yes, I meant the post-Enlightenment development, which has a very interesting and very tragic history. This stuff would have been incomprehensible in antiquity. As you probably know, some scholars won't even translate Ioudaioi in ancient texts as "Jews" (as opposed to "Judeans"). Incidentally, the first use of Hellenismos that I can remember (I don't know if it's the actual first use) comes in one of the Books of the Maccabees, where it definitely refers to an entire culture and not just religion.
The term Ελληνισμός was used in antiquity first by the grammarians and Strabo to denote "correct Greek."
In 2 Maccabees 4:13 Ελληνισμοῦ appears, talking about, as you said, Greek culture, as customs and habits.
ἦν δ᾿ οὕτως ἀκμή τις ῾Ελληνισμοῦ καὶ πρόσβασις ἀλλοφυλισμοῦ διὰ τὴν τοῦ ἀσεβοῦς καὶ οὐκ ἀρχιερέως ᾿Ιάσωνος ὑπερβάλλουσαν ἀναγνείαν,
there was such an extreme of Hellenization and increase in the adoption of foreign ways because of the surpassing wickedness of Jason, who was ungodly and no high priest (Revised Standard Version)
Ah, thanks, that's interesting. I didn't know it was originally a language term.
Yes it was first a linguistic term and quickly spilled over those boundaries.