ABSTRACT
That the task of defining syncretism is an ambiguous affair should be obvious to the reader now after having read the essays of this book. In short, we have seen that there is a disagreement between the normality of the phenomenon, the fact that all religions are syncretistic formations, and the complexity of the notion which largely derives from the reluctance to accept the normality of the phenomenon. If we are to conclude anything from the readings of this volume, we shall find that there are two tasks involved in "defining syncretism"; one task concerns the phenomenon of syncretism, the other task relates to the notion of syncretism. The two are intimately related, of course, but they are also different.
