ericmurphy

I don't think Dave has ever actually posted to this thread. That leaves one to suppose that Dave does not, in fact, have any evidence that monotheism predates polytheism.

And he has a further problem in that Judaism appears not to be monotheist anyway, but rather monolatrist, as indicated by the First (or Second, depending on whom you ask) Commandment.

Hex

Well, he did post a couple times on the first page. I'm going to guess he feels he's done his bit.

But, I'm in agreement. He's totally missed the Queen of Heaven in there too ...Or does AIG not mention her at all?

mountainman

There is always the inscriptions carved into the
one of the obelisks positioned outside a pizza bar
in Rome, that dates to around 1500 BCE and about
which Ammianus Marcellinus once (c.392) wrote:

Taken from here:

17. Now the text
of the characters cut upon the ancient obelisk which
we see in the Circus I add below in the Greek
translation, following the work of Hermapion. The
translation of the first line, beginning on the South
side, reads as follows:

FIRST LINE

18. The Sun speaks to King Ramestes.
I have granted to thee that thou
shouldst with joy rule over the whole earth,
thou whom the Sun loveth - and powerful Apollo, lover
of truth, son of Heron, god-born, creator of the
world, whom the Sun hath chosen, the doughty
son of Mars, King Ramestes. Unto him the whole
earth is made subject through his valour and boldness.
King Ramastes, eternal child of the Sun."

SECOND LINE

19. "Mighty Apollo, seated upon truth, Lord of
the Diadem, who hath gloroiusly honoured Egypt
as his peculiar possession, who hath beautiful Heliopolis,
created the rest of the world, and adorned
with manifold honours the Gods erected in Heliopolis -
he whom the Sun loveth."

THIRD LINE

20. "Mighty Apollo, child of the sun, all-radiant,
whom the Sun hath chosen and valiant Mars endowed;
whose blessings shall endure forever; whom
Ammon loveth, as having filled his temple with the
good fruits of the date palm; unto whom the Gods
have given length of life.
"Apollo, mighty son of Heron, Ramestes, king
of the world, who hath preserved Egypt by conquering
other nations; whom the Sun loveth; to who the Gods
have granted length of life; Lord of the world,
Ramestes ever-living."

WEST SIDE, SECOND LINE

21. "The Sun, great God, Lord of Heaven;
I have granted to thee life hitherto unforseen.
Apollo the mighty, Lord incomparable of the Diadem,
who hath set up statues of the Gods in this kingdom,
ruler of Egypt, and he ardorned Heliopolis just as
he did the Sun himself, Ruler of Heaven; he finished
a good work, child of the Sun, the king ever-living."

THIRD LINE

22. "The God Sun, Lord of Heaven, to Ramastes
the king. I have granted to thee the rule and the
authority over all men; whom Apollo, lover of truth,
Lord of seasons, and Vulcan, father of the Gods,
hath chosen for Mars. King all-gladdening, child of
the Sun and beloved of the Sun."

EAST SIDE, FIRST LINE

23. "The great God of Heliopolis, heavenly,
mighty Apollo, son of Heron, whom the Sun hath
loved, whom the Gods hath honoured, the ruler over
all the earth, whom the SUn hath chosen, a king
valiant for Mars, whom Ammon loveth, and he that
is all-radiant, having set apart the king eternal";
and so on.

Sun worship is monotheistic
except in binary solar systems.

Sauron

If you find evidence of a temple with multiple deity statues, that's pretty conclusive that the culture was polytheistic.

Roger Pearse: steering the conversation to the only topic he likes: (documents) and then trying to convince us that documents trump all other forms of evidence. Gee; didn't see *that* coming.

The problem, of course, with your approach is that documents can be wrong, incomplete, or outright propaganda. Especially in the context of religions; i.e., Amarna for example, where an entire city was destroyed and written out of existence.

Unlike written texts, what archaeology tells us is what the people *actually* worshippped - statues, amulets, evidence from burials, etc. This was the actual practice - not the propaganda from a temple scribe trying to advance his particular sect or deity.

Wrong. Time to trade in your hobbyhorse, hmm?

You're missing the same things you always miss, Roger:

1. documents are not nearly as reliable as you think;
2. archaeology tells us more than you like to admit

Amaleq13

How did you determine it was a "temple"?

How did you determine the statues were of "deity"?

Sauron

There are many cultures that we know existed, but left no written records. Archaeologists use different methods to infer the functions of various buildings or other items. Concentration of grain in one burned out area likely indicates a granary. In a real-world example, Iron slugs at the Viking new World settlement of L'Anse Aux Meadows helped to identify which building was the blacksmith, even though no records were left of the settlement.

Social clues, such as art. Is the image re-occuring? Is it prominent? It is fantastical (i.e., winged)?

Amaleq13

But what sort of evidence allows archaeologists to infer that a building was a temple?

All fantastical, prominent, recurring images are of deities?

I understand that such evidence can suggest worship or veneration which, in turn, suggests deity but surely you would agree that a tablet etched with the words "I worship Thibblewort" does more than merely suggest or imply the conclusion? It is certainly far stronger evidence which warrants far more confidence in the conclusion. I would think the closest one could come to that sort of strong support from evidence without explanatory text is a drawing of a figure bowing down before the same image. The less explicit the evidence, the more uncertain the conclusion.

spin

Archaeologists have excavated a lot of places in the Near East. They have typologies for buildings based on usage from better attested situations: public, cultual, private (subcategorized by class), functional (storage, defense)... The range is quite limited. Shape is a major indicator, as well as size and quality of construction. Internal fixtures indicate usage. Location, being isolated, being part of a clump of buildings, etc. Paraphernalia indicate usage. It's not strange for an archaeologist to compare known forms of buildings from one site with those of a site being excavated. There are similarities between temples from different periods throughout the Near East. Things that were left not clarified in one site will often become clarified with excavation in some other location.


spin

Amaleq13

What evidence "better attested" to the use of the comparison buildings as temples? Written records?

spin

By "better attested situations" I meant other archaeological sites which provide more evidence to make a judgment. Once a form has been categorized definitely due to sufficient pointers, it is highly probable that similar structures from other sites though with fewer indicators will have similar functions.


spin