Nelson
Member
Thanks again to Alex and the Skeptiko community for having me over for a conversation about my work.
While the conversation at this point has taken some turns into questions of monotheism v polytheism, the validity of religion, and the general direction of the Skeptiko forum (which as a new participant I am not really qualified to opine upon), I very much appreciate the level of discourse that I've seen and the quality of insights and challenges that have been offered in engaging with my assertions and hypotheses.
I personally grow from engaging with different perspectives and rebuttals, and it helps me very much in my personal research and analysis. I also believe that when more than one person gathers around a subject to discuss it (even if "gathering around" in a virtual space as opposed to a campfire) then something emerges which is more than what could emerge from the individual participants researching or thinking by themselves in an isolated fashion (my mythical parallel for that is the myth of Kvasir in Norse myth, which I wrote about in a post here).
While we've gotten into some speculations and opinions, I would like to return to my first couple of posts here, where (in an effort to try to more clearly explain what I am talking about, as a response to comments that were saying things like "really not sure exactly what this guy is saying") I tried to emphasize that the main "provable" or "empirical" part of my research concerns the massive amount of evidence I've found suggesting that the world's myths are built upon a detailed system of celestial metaphor. This evidence is present in the myths themselves, which contain references that match directly with specific characteristics of certain constellations. The evidence is best seen when using the system of outlining the constellations that H. A. Rey published in 1952. The evidence is reinforced by artwork stretching back to ancient times which, I allege, matches up with the same characteristics which pertain to specific constellations. There is so much evidence to support the existence of this shared system of celestial metaphor that I feel it is difficult to dispute, if examined honestly and thoroughly (cursory dismissals should look at the full extent of the evidence across many cultures). It should also be pointed out that the existence of these connections have been understood (or at least sensed) by many writers in the past, even going back to ancient times.
From there, the rest of the interpretation and ramifications are subject to debate. I personally argue that this system appears to be a sophisticated metaphor which uses the heavenly cycles to portray the interplay of an invisible realm and this visible realm: the interaction of an infinite realm and a finite realm, a spirit world and the material world, a world of "potentiality" and a world of "manifestation," or an "implicate order" and an "explicate order." I find a lot of reasons to believe that this is part of what these ancient myths are doing -- but I could be wrong.
Other ramifications that appear to flow from the first "empirical" observations include the evidence that this system is extremely ancient -- arguing that it greatly predates earliest texts of ancient Egypt and ancient Mesopotamia -- as well as the assertion that if the myths are all based on celestial metaphor then they probably were not originally intended to be understood literally. I believe that familiarity with the "language" of celestial metaphor can help us better understand what the myths are saying, if they are indeed speaking a language of celestial metaphor (as I believe the evidence strongly argues them to be). I further believe that if they are speaking a metaphorical and celestial language, then trying to filter their message through a lens that demands them to be speaking of literal, terrestrial history risks misinterpretation or even inversion of their message (I believe the "Revelation 12" video that was offered in a comment is evidence of this -- thank you for that question as I had not seen that particular video previously).
From there, we can go in many other directions, but those are some of the main aspects to what I'm trying to explore in my own research and writing.
Again, big thank you to Alex and to everyone for "having me over" to this space -- I think it is a very valuable and positive place to discuss important subjects!
_/\_
Well met, David. And the more I look into your research, the more I think you’re onto something - even a “GAME CHANGER”! (hat tip to Alex).
And further to this discussion, I want to add some points (much of this you’re familiar with, but I’ll try to describe it so others can understand too):
-As we talked about, the ancient Greek visual evidence is problematic. Something I didn’t mention was a loosely adhered to artistic convention in combat scenes where the victorious figure moves from right to left in a scene, so this can interfere with constellation pictures. But nevertheless, as you suggest, the literary evidence is more helpful, and I agree:
One myth that is especially convincing (maybe a video could be made on this one?): A story that is otherwise so odd, but that fits the astrotheological interpretation so well: the 2nd labor of Herakles, in which Herakles fights a hydra AND a giant crab (so the hydra constellation and crab/Cancer in the zodiac)...
Perhaps the original 12 labors of Herakles were all astrological, not just some of them, but when people made up other heroic adventures, the most entertaining ones became the standard 12. (This creative storytelling process is evident in Theseus’ 12 labors, which are like a one-upmanship of heroism to those of Herakles’ 12. This also parallels the one-upmanship in politics, of Athens (Theseus’ homeland) versus the Doric city-states (where Herakles was most popular).
-Another point: whether by oversight or conspiracy, virtually NO textbooks on mythology explore how and why the planets and the days of the week share the same names as the gods. They don’t even MENTION this. Yet this is very important, and I think it reaches far back into our culture/psyche... That is because these are about the only explicit polytheistic references that survived in mainstream culture, since the systematic iconoclasms under monotheistic rule. (As you probably know, the Christian takeover of Europe took place in phases. During a forced conversion, at first you only had to do a couple of things to prove you were now “Christian”. But over generations more obligations were added and more polytheistic elements of our culture became outlawed and/or replaced. There is also a pattern that the polytheistic elements, many of which were explicitly connected with events in the heavens, now became literalist and quite disconnected from the heavens (e.g. “Christmas” instead of Yule, “Saint John’s Day” for the Summer Solstice, etc.).
And if one looks for a paper trail about these elements of our polytheistic past (especially the surviving ones/the deepest ones(?), such as days of the week and planet names), we have almost NO evidence remaining. Why is this? How could this be? And to make matters worse, monotheists claim that THEY “saved” the ancient knowledge for us! (They just have to pretend that the following never happened: the destruction of ALL the collections of the Great Library of Alexandria, plus other libraries, plus the systematic iconoclasms, plus the murder of Hypatia and other polytheists who had knowledge of the collections, etc…)
-So here we are, ANNO 2017, with hardly any ancient evidence left, and what we do have is typically devoid of explicit references to the stars and planets.
Yet we DO know that when ancient polytheists reported about different cultures, they’d often make connections about the divinities: e.g. god X in Greece is called god Y in Egypt and god Z in Germania, etc. So despite differences in languages and variations in the sacred stories, the ancient polytheist authors believed there was an overall pattern between the divinities. (This is still evident in our days of the week in European cultures: e.g. English “Monday”/Moon day = “Lundi”/Moon day (French); “Tuesday”/Tiu’s day/Germanic god of war = “Mardi”/Mars’ day/Roman god of war; etc. (And one can go through lists of other European languages and days of the week too.) So there are corresponding gods and days of the week (and they also refer to the same bodies in the heavens?)...
-One other characteristically polytheistic element:
What was the first thing the Muses reportedly said to the ancient Greek poet Hesiod (someone who was up there with Homer as the most influential source on the gods):
“You shepherds of the wilderness, poor fools, nothing but bellies, we know how to say many false things that seem like true sayings, but we know also how to speak the truth when we wish to.”
(Theogony, lines 26-8, Lattimore translation)
The same message comes through in Homer’s Odyssey, when Athena praises Odysseus for making up stories (Odyssey 13.330). In the Odyssey, the work of bards is also praised. And it is the bards who tell the polytheistic “theology”. One should also imagine Homer’s Odyssey and Hesiod’s Theogony being recited musically in front of an audience. So in both these very influential works, the audience is told that some stories are true (to be taken literally) and some aren’t (a coded language for an allegory maybe)...
And another typically polytheistic element:
There was tolerance between versions of the sacred stories. For example, the birth of Aphrodite differs greatly between Homer and Hesiod, but to the ancients this was no problem.
In Hesiod’s “Works and Days”, the poet tells us of the beginnings of people: One sacred story is recited, and then the poet tells another story to describe the beginnings, as Hesiod said it:
“Or if you will, I will outline it for you in a different story”… (line 106, Lattimore translation).
So no problem. But this is in stark contrast to monotheism, in which people were/are killed over points of theology.
-If we are to understand the loss of the original meanings of myths, I believe there was a natural forgetting process combined with a creative process too. There is also a centuries-long process of anthropomorphism which obscures the original myths: e.g. Roman religion began without anthropomorphic gods, and likewise in Greek myth. The sky gods: Ouranos (lit. heaven, not anthropomorphic) was first, then Kronos (more anthropomorphic), then Zeus (very anthropomorphic). Also the sea gods: Okeanos (lit. Ocean, not anthropomorphic) was first, then Pontos, then Poseidon (very anthropomorphic)... This anthropomorphism made the sacred stories more exciting but it also obscured the original meaning based on the heavens and Earth...
But then there is evidence of an INTENTIONAL obscuring, and this appears with monotheism.
-Akhenaton, the Egyptian pharaoh who propagated what seems to have been the first monotheism in history, the exclusive worship of the Sun... and in common with other monotheisms, Akhenaton began a campaign to destroy polytheistic temples, priesthoods, etc. So the Sun at the expense of the planets and constellations(?)…
Note also that during his reign, Akhenaton allowed a nomadic tribe called the Apiru (which some identify as the Habiru/Hebrews) to invade Egyptian-controlled Palestine, despite repeated pleas from local governors (as found in the famous Amarna letters). So an alliance of monotheism against polytheism?...
This may sound far-fetched, but it also seems to be paralleled centuries later, in what seems to have been an alliance between Christianity and Sol Invictus (again, like Akhenaton’s religion, explicit Sun worship!), in the monotheistic takeover of the Roman Empire…
Last edited: