G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
…end…]
There are Akkadian words in European languages - “saffron” is from the place-name Azupiranu (which is Sumerian in origin, by the looks of it); “mesquin” is from mushkenum, by way of Latin & Arabic - but the validity of the general principle (that words can travel from culture to culture) does not prove that this is true of particular examples.
Hekal in Hebrew is from Sumerian E.GAL (= “great house” - i.e. palace, temple) by way of Akkadian ekallum. It should follow therefore (according to the logic of the Easter-Ishtar argument,that is) that the Jews worshipped the gods of Sumer & Akkad.
Many motifs in European sculpture - such as gryphons & lions - have Ancient Near Eastern sources or analogies: this is no reason to conclude that they are used in European sculpture *with the same set of associations *as inthe ANE. If associations always remained constant in that way, the use of Victoria as the name of a British monarch would be inextricably connected with the Roman goddess of the same name. But if Victoria, ruler of the British Empire on which the sun shall never set
is not named to honour the Roman goddess - why must Easter be connected with Ishtar in a way which proves that Ishtar is worshipped in the Church ? The structure of the argument that proves that Queen Victoria is a Roman goddess of war & victory, is the same in structure as the argument that proves Easter derives from Ishtar with what the worship of Ishtar involved.
But since Easter is connected to Ishtar in the same sense as “baby” is connected to “Babylon” - i.e. not at all - the question does not arise
There are Akkadian words in European languages - “saffron” is from the place-name Azupiranu (which is Sumerian in origin, by the looks of it); “mesquin” is from mushkenum, by way of Latin & Arabic - but the validity of the general principle (that words can travel from culture to culture) does not prove that this is true of particular examples.
Hekal in Hebrew is from Sumerian E.GAL (= “great house” - i.e. palace, temple) by way of Akkadian ekallum. It should follow therefore (according to the logic of the Easter-Ishtar argument,that is) that the Jews worshipped the gods of Sumer & Akkad.
Many motifs in European sculpture - such as gryphons & lions - have Ancient Near Eastern sources or analogies: this is no reason to conclude that they are used in European sculpture *with the same set of associations *as inthe ANE. If associations always remained constant in that way, the use of Victoria as the name of a British monarch would be inextricably connected with the Roman goddess of the same name. But if Victoria, ruler of the British Empire on which the sun shall never set
is not named to honour the Roman goddess - why must Easter be connected with Ishtar in a way which proves that Ishtar is worshipped in the Church ? The structure of the argument that proves that Queen Victoria is a Roman goddess of war & victory, is the same in structure as the argument that proves Easter derives from Ishtar with what the worship of Ishtar involved.But since Easter is connected to Ishtar in the same sense as “baby” is connected to “Babylon” - i.e. not at all - the question does not arise