Table of ContentsIntroductionReligious Tolerance in Ancient RomeConclusion IntroductionThe polytheistic and polymorphous nature of Roman religion made it an extremely flexible religion from the start. The absence of dogmatic rituals and rigid structures made it possible to find countless forms of spiritual practices. Nevertheless, elites dominated the discourse that drew the lines between the acceptable and the unacceptable. Unacceptable religious practices were considered by the Romans to be the domain of superstitio – a supernatural, identity-defining force that corrupted men. However, as we will see, this conception was not fixed in Roman society. Nevertheless, the Roman state's struggle to adapt to a national identity in the context of an expanding empire meant that these practices, perceived as radically foreign to Roman tradition, were seen as dangerously subversive. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayReligious Tolerance in Ancient RomeAn analysis of the structures of Roman religion, the Bacchanalia, and Christianity will show us how, even if everything this was not considered superstitio was the subject of state action, the religions acted upon were considered outside the realm of acceptable religio in the context of the Roman state's struggle for an identity central imperial. Roman religion was characterized by its loose structures, which allowed for complex webs of beliefs linking different peoples and cultures within the Republic and the Empire. As Mary Beard points out, the rhetorical term used to describe "acceptable" forms of practice, religio, linked people to each other and their gods in organic ways. This “binding” process consisted of two mutually inclusive principles that illustrate the fluidity of Roman religion. The polymorphous nature of paganism allowed different people to worship their gods in different ways; this means that there was no need for individual or collective dogmatic commitments to any particular deity or form of worship. Implicitly, the polytheistic nature of Roman religion meant that Roman citizens could worship more than one god at a time. The Roman poet Catullus' prayer to Diana, which modifies the identity of the deity according to its different spheres, helps illustrate how the polymorphic and polytheistic characteristics of paganism worked together effectively to create a fluid, dogma-free religious environment in Rome . that, however, it must be established that belief was a fundamental element of paganism – as Charles King points out, belief (as opposed to religious dogma) was crucial to Roman prayer and implicit in the worship of the distinct deities who formed the Roman order. pantheon. The combination of dogma-free belief, polymorphism, and polytheism allows us to view Roman paganism as a largely unrestrictive belief system that appealed directly to individuals and did not value centralized religious institutions. to the regulations. To do this, political elites used the rhetoric of “Roman identity.” As Mary Beard argues, the limits of what was acceptable were set by elites who had their own personal attitudes toward belief and worship. It is at this point that a distinction between religio and superstitio becomes vital. Superstitio, unlike its "organically binding" counterpart, religio, was a term used fordescribe practices that were individually considered "un-Roman" or below the "standards" of the empire. Literally meaning "to stand above", the term superstitio was applied to practices that were seen as determining the identity of individuals. It should be noted, however, that these were mere terms of speech and their fluidity, rather than telling us about the state's official criteria for religious persecution, illustrates the personal biases of individuals in certain localities. For example, while the use of magic was considered by most to be "an inferior form of religion", its secret use was revived and spread throughout all layers of Roman society throughout the Empire. The traditional forms of worship that we usually associate with Roman paganism – ex-voto, public festivals, etc. – are also all linked by their public and community nature, which is implicit in the organic and binding purpose of religio as defined by these elites. The public condemnation of two Vestal Virgins after the loss of the Battle of Cannae suggests the way in which the Romans used their traditional religious rites as public acts of social cohesion, illustrating how the distinction between religio and supertitio by the elite also rested on the private dichotomy /audience. The mere existence of these polar terms allowed political elites to use them at will to regulate and attack belief systems that they saw to some extent as linked to the state and/or themselves. In this sense, we will see how the language of alienation is used through supertitio to promote and justify the purely political motivations of the State in the control and persecution of certain religious systems. The case of the Bacchanalia in Rome allows us to see how political fears about organized religion were influenced and condemned in terms of superstition. The political threat posed by the Bacchanalia is obvious almost at first glance. The cult transcended class and gender barriers to initiate disparate members of Roman society. Such unlimited inclusiveness, combined with the secrecy of rituals, was likely seen by political elites as a force of group consciousness that could define itself against the state and/or its norms. At a time when the Roman Empire was growing rapidly and demanding loyalty from all its citizens, this would have been unacceptable. John A. North identifies the Bacchanals as the "first religious group", drawing on the secretive and insular nature of the movement. . The concept of a group devoted solely to religion would have alarmed the political elite as an identity institution over which they had no control and about which they knew little. This fear of Bacchanalian institutionalism is implicit in the senatorial decree regulating the Bacchanalia, in which particular emphasis is placed on relationships with treasurers and organizational appointments within the cults in general. This fear in external identity formation, however, is implicitly also a fear or condemnation of superstition. It is easy to understand how the political elite would have identified the Bacchanalia as outside the religious realm: as the god of wine, madness and theatricality, Dionysus was often worshiped by the faithful through orgies and secret alcohol-fueled parties. In his damning account of the rites, Livy suggests that they were a clear departure from traditional and proper forms of worship in Rome. Nonetheless, the fact that the Bacchanals never incited citizens to violence suggests that the primary motivation for regulating them lay elsewhere. He is,.