by

Ted Daniels, Ph.D.

Electronic version copyright © Ted Daniels 1997. All rights reserved
Originally published in Millennialism: An International Bibliography by Garland Publishing New York, 1992. Reproduced here by permission.
URL for this article is http://www.

Index to Entries

         678. Thrupp, Sylvia L. "Introduction÷Millennial Dreams in Action: A Report on the Conference Discussion." In Millennial Dreams in Action edited by Sylvia L. Thrupp. The Hague: Mouton, 1962b: 11-27.
        Millennial movements are "religious movementsÊ...Êanimated by the idea of a perfect age or a perfect land" (p. 11). The method is generally reductionist: the movements encompass participants's states of mind reflecting social disruption. But the cultural cosmology in which movement ideology is based does not reflect specific social situations. Instead, properly conducted study should take into account the nature and history of the ideas involved, the circumstances giving rise to action, the character of leadership and recruiting, and the career of the movement. The difficulties in this lie especially in the history, because available written accounts are never disinterested. Knowledge of passivist groups is weak.
        The primary question is what if any are the connections between millennial forms and the socially prevalent attitude to change? It is necessary to establish the patterning within cultures of continuity and change in ideas, forms of organization and the clustering of movements. At a higher level of generalization, what comparisons can be drawn of the patterns established in different cultures? How do they relate to other forms of unrest, or are they independent? Are they continuous? "Is there a connection between the forms that millennialism takesÊ...Êand the prevailing attitude to change, in that society at that time?" (p. 14). Another level is "limited and precise generalization" about the special characters of movements as abstractable from cultural tradition; and finally, why do they happen at all?
        Deprivation theory is at fault in that fails to account for the fact that millenarianism is only one of many ways to deal with deprivation, and that tension or anxiety (absent any "objective" cause) may be caused by the movement, not its result. Aesthetic appeal is another explanation, which has to deal with millennialism and "official" cosmology. Institutionalized tension between formal authorities and their rivals may also account for it in the proper circumstances.


Return to indexesReturn to Indexes