Reghini's 'Imperialismo Pagano' was first published in the review
'Salamandra', January-February 1914, then in 'Atanor', March 1924, as
a whole. It has been published here in four parts for editorial reasons.
Now that the whole text is available to Anglo-Saxon readers, some of
those who have read the first chapter of 'Heathen imperialism'
(http://thompkins_cariou.tripod.com/id27.html/) may wonder
understandably on what Reghini based his judgment to accuse Evola of
having plagiarised him, and may realise, in the light of our previous
posts about so-called 'paganism', why it is legitimate to translate
Reghini's 'Imperialismo pagano' as 'Pagan Imperialism', and Evola's,
as 'Heathen Imperialism'. Reghini tried to justify his accusation in
the review he made of the latter, and which we will publish in due time.
In the meantime, it is hardly necessary to mention that the tradition
to which Reghini referred is not the same as the tradition in which
Evola claimed to have his roots. Leaving aside Dante, the 'great
Italians' glorified by Reghini as the main representatives of 'Italic
tradition', from Telesio to Bruno, from Cagliostro to Campanella, all
rank among the most sinister characters of Renaissance, whose actions
and writings contributed deeply to load, with the lowest influences of
the relics of Roman heathenism and of the non- and anti-Aryan paganism
of the matriarchal type, that historical period which Evola criticised
in the light of the Aryo-Roman tradition in 'Revolt against the Modern
World', all the while showing that there are two ways of going beyond
Christianity, either upwards, by restoring communication with the
formative force which shaped the Aryan tradition, or downwards, by
secularising and rationalising to the core the Semitic spirit in which
this religion originates, as did Reghini, following on the footsteps
of those who, he claimed almost with a certain naivity, "inaugurated
that western secular culture which is slowly disinfecting from
Christianity European mentality".