Special Editor’s Introduction: Legitimation Strategies within the Cultic Milieu Sean E. Currie University of South Florida Legitimacy plays an important role in the ideological and organizational dynamics of religious movements, especially within the transient and unstable “cultic milieu” (Campbell 2002 [1972]). Traditional, charismatic, and rational appeals to legitimate authority, introduced by Weber (1947) and applied to NRMs by Lewis (2003), provide a useful framework to understand how movements gain adherents, retain members, and prevent defection. Similarly, studying the contexts in which legitimation strategies weaken or fail can also provide insight into religious conflict and change, such as schisms, disaffiliation, deconversion, and religious innovation. In this issue, we will explore the how a variety of alternative religions and spiritualties employ legitimation strategies, and the resulting outcomes. Traditional appeals to legitimacy are described in the first essay of this issue by Malcom Hadden. He examines controversies surrounding the origins of the Hare Krishna movement and its claims to traditional religious heritage in India. He explains that the hagiography and history of their founder, Srila Prabhupada, are difficult to separate, and that many academic studies of the movement during its inception drew upon Prabhupada’s official biography, which the movement regards as a sacred text. ISKCON argues that Prabhupada’s religious heritage was accurately replicated by his Western devotees, which, in turn, serves to legitimate its existence. This claim has caused much sectarian tension within the Hare Krishna movement, along with the crises of succession that followed Prabhupada’s death, but not without benefit to the movement and to the broader Hare Krishna milieu. Next, Kjersti Hellesøy analyzes a critical moment in the history of the Church of Scientology (CoS)—the 1982 Mission Holder’s Conference—and the role it played in subsequent schisms within the organization. She discusses how the death of the CoS’ founder, L. Ron Hubbard, created a crisis of authority, moving from a single source of authority to multiple, contesting sources. Hellesøy explains that David Miscavige set out to centralize the church and quell opposition to his newly-assumed leadership, either by silencing or excommunicating dissenters—strategies often used in hindering or fomenting schisms. Consequently, this shift motivated significant numbers of members to