Panthea

1998: Ton Derks, Gods, Temples and Ritual Practices: The Transformation of Religious Ideas and Values in Roman Gaul, page 78 (Amsterdam University Press; ISBN 9789053562543)As an alternative for DumÃ©zilâ€™s functional classification, Oosten suggests a classification in terms of kinship relations. Such an approach corresponds to the perspective of the participants and enables the researcher to define not only the place of a god in the pantheon, but also his relation to other members of the pantheon. Our information, however, is so insufficient that there can be no question of any reconstruction of the complete panthea, let alone of the various kinship ties between their members. Yet we can take advantage of Oostenâ€™s observations. First, the conclusion that kinship is the primary organizing principle in all Indo-European panthea may draw our attention to the importance of relationships between male and female deities. If, as we shall see, the epigraphical sources give the impression that male and female cults were strictly separated, all to radical inferences are better avoided. Second, from Oostenâ€™s proposition the important conclusion may be drawn that the introduction of new gods was also conceptualized in terms of kinship.