It has always been suspicious why Christmas – the celebration of the birth of Jesus – should take place in December. A rather obvious suggestion (or what should have been an obvious suggestion) was made by James Frazer in his “Golden Bough,” that Christians/the Church appropriated an earlier holiday. This would have been done mid-4th century, as the then Church was about to take over the Roman Empire.
Such a move would have made sense since if people were going to have a celebration anyway, one might just celebrate the “right way” (i.e., the Christian way). My guess is that this was initially a “competing” holiday designed to provide an alternative to earlier celebrations and eventually, with the help of the state, it took over as the sole holiday of that season. On the plus side, the people could still celebrate during a time they would have celebrated anyway. On the downside their holy time was appropriated by another set of beliefs. (An accommodation to earlier pagan polytheism may also have been the concept of the Trinity and, earlier, of the Three Wise Men). In the same way the Church routinely appropriated “pagan” worship places. Idols were destroyed and replaced – in the same location – with Christian crosses and churches. You could look at it as either allowing the previously non-Christian population to continue to come to the same place for worship or, in a less benevolent way, as denying access to the holy cultic area by having it appropriated for Christianity. Thus, did the Church likely take over the earlier holy times/rites and places. (Most successful religions, like most successful ideas, attract their “consumer” with something to offer and, if they want to thrive, have to be flexible. Christianity survived so long for precisely these reasons).
But what came before? Well, Frazer gives a rather convincing answer that the Europeans celebrated various Deities that were connected to the yearly (north hemispheric) agricultural cycle and the consequent fertility. He finds this fertility God to be Osiris, Aton, Adonis and Dionysos. Each of these may be associated with the Sun (and the Moon perhaps even more so! Of course, the portfolios of Osiris and others varied somewhat over the millennia of Egyptian history) and with rebirth. The story of Iasion and Demeter is very similar. For Osiris you, of course, have Isis. For the Polish Jassa, you, possibly have Lada and so on.
The Church fathers suggest as much of the identification of the pre-Christian beliefs as well as validate the suspected mechanism for taking over the pagan beliefs for the Church. For example, Ambrose speaks of Jesus as being the true and only Sun. Or was that Tertullian? (“[pagans] …believe that the Christian God is the Sun, because it is a well-known fact that we pray turning towards the rising Sun, and that on the Sun’s day we give ourselves to jubilation.” (Ad Nationes, 1, 13).
But, I suspect, this design did not just first appear in the 4th century. It would not be surprising to learn that Christianity was, from the (almost) get go purposely set up in this way.
After all, the followers of Jesus saw their Lord die and made their way fast out of the country most likely not to share in the same fate. They may have been depressed to see their way of life crushed and themselves exiled. But, Paul was resilient enough and smart enough to repackage the concept and take his revenge – in the form of a giant middle finger – on the Jewish priest class (and on the Romans). Paul as well as his acolytes would have been aware that there were more liberal Jewish communities throughout the Mediterranean at the time. To what extent they took to the new Messianic faith I do not know (I am sure there are books about that) but it is possible that the evangelists also noted the possibility of going beyond the niche market of local pre-kabbalah and making the message universal.
They would certainly have known of the popularity of Dionysos, Bacchus, Osiris and the like. The existence of the local Indo-European fertility/rebirth cults also made Christianity’s transition to a true universal religion easier by making the concepts understandable to the non-Jewish Roman population. And here the evangelsits had their own Dead God available. What a perfect marketing opportunity for an upstart religion. So, it seems, with Jesus’ death, a new Christ-figure was born (Jesus had to be reborn because you obviously can’t kill a God but also to better match the Reborn God story), packaged in a (then) New Age way for the more liberal Jewish groups outside of Palestine and their non-Jewish fellow cosmopolitans. Since Judaism, already then, had a claim to antiquity as well as an aura of sophistication, this latter Roman group may have well taken to Christianity as a way of getting in on the action. Once the upper classes became involved the game was won and paganism was relegated to, well, the pagus where the “deplorables” clung onto their unreformed ways.
A related question is whether Esus/Iasion and others have anything to do with the Jewish God Yehova (the namesake of Yehoshua, that is Jesus). Some have claimed that Jesus escaped and taught in France. While one can apparently make money peddling this kind of nonsense in the form of bestselling books, there is zero actual proof to prop up this idea.
Nevertheless, I suspect that there may, in fact, be a slightly more subtle connection. There have been rather suggestive connections between the Middle Eastern and the Indo-European world. This is unsurprising. After all, one sits next to the other. What can such proximity result in? Some folks – most recently Theo Vennemann – have suggested that – before the Indo-Europeans – Europe had been settled by Basque and Semitic speaking peoples. The proof, apparently, is in various place names which also appear in the Middle East. While the Phoenicians did in fact travel up and and down European coasts , their presence there did not seem to translate to a lasting, material influence. Neither are there significant signs of other Semitic travelers. Are these plac names really Basque or Semitic (see the discussion of some Suavic words below) or is there so ething else going on?
The interaction is, no doubt, much more complex and likely ran both ways, but I strongly suspect that the story should be examined by looking at it from rather the opposite angle – that of an IE influence on thr Middle East.
The potential connections of Indo-Europeans with Mesopotamia and the Levant reach far back into antiquity. Proto-Euphratean anyone? Gutians/Guti? Mushki/Moschoi/Muški/Meshech/ Mosoch? Names like Lugal-anne-mundu? Deity Ištaran of the “bright visage” (“stretching out a hand to Ištaran of the bright visage being taken away on the barge”) who is also associated with a dragon? (Incidentally, it is not that difficult to imagine people gazing at the sky and thinking of, for example, the Milky Way, as akin to a giant “glowing” serpent and even pre-Freud the connection between a snake (if not ncessarily a lizard) and a fertily/agricultural Deity/rite ought have been obvious).
These above are speculation and some of them are probably stretches but we do know that Indo-Europeans eventually established a presence in the North of Mesopotamia and may have penetrated as far as Egypt. In fact, they seem to have done this in multiple invasion waves.
Take, for example, the Hyksos and the Hurrians. Perhaps some of these were not IEs (Hyksos just means “rulers of foreign lands”) but an IE component seems firmly present among them. As regards the Hurrians, their most famous kingdom is that of the Mitanni whose Gods’ names, listed circa 1380 B.C., include Mitra, Varuna, Indra, and Nasatya. Take the name of some of the various Deities of north Canaan. In Palmyra one of the principal Gods was Yarhibol. He was “depicted with a solar nimbus” and called the “lord of the spring“. The connection to Yarillo, Gerovit/Yerovit/Yarovit or Yassa is obvious. Another local God was Bel (not Baal) whose name sounds very much like that of Belobog.
Take the name of the city of Jericho which is derived from the Canaanite reaẖ meaning “fragrant” (the Arabic may be derived from the same). This is obviously connected with the above-mentioned Yarhibol though a somewhat alternate explanation connects the name of the city with the local lunar Deity (the Canaanite word for the moon was Yareaẖ. That the moon was often worshipped in the context of “fragrance” (morning dew) is rather well shown. Compare this too with the Suavic town name of Jerichow an der Elbe (apparently, not named after ancient Jericho).
Incidentally, both Osiris and the Polish Jassa may have an even stronger connection to the Moon than to the Sun. Compare this too with Swiatowit (Morning Lord? hence Rana?), whose white horse roamed free at night throughout Rugia only to return for the morning when his mane was found to be rather “sweaty” – again, like the morning dew – in the horse’s case apparently a result of his nightly excursions).
What should give us all pause is the similarity of these “Canaanite” words and their patent IE counterparts like “jary” “yarki” or “year“. The Online Etymological Dictionary has this uncontroversial entry for “year“:
year (n.) Old English gear (West Saxon), ger (Anglian) “year,” from Proto-Germanic *jēr “year” (source also of Old Saxon, Old High German jar, Old Norse ar, Danish aar, Old Frisian ger, Dutch jaar, German Jahr, Gothic jer “year”), from PIE *yer-o-, from root *yer- “year, season” (source also of Avestan yare(nominative singular) “year;” Greek hōra “year, season, any part of a year,” also “any part of a day, hour;” Old Church Slavonic jaru, Bohemian jaro “spring;” Latin hornus “of this year;” Old Persian dušiyaram “famine,” literally “bad year”). Probably originally “that which makes [a complete cycle],” and from verbal root *ei- meaning “to do, make.”
On the south side of the Levant, a little later, we have the infamous Sea Peoples, most of whom, likely were Mediterranean or Anatolian IE raiders with names such as Pelesset, Lukka, Sherden, Shekelesh, Denyen and others. The Pelesset, once resettled by the pharaohs in south(ish) Canaan, may have become the Phillistines. It is certainly plausible that these groups, while initially IE, contained many “locals” and hangers on who swelled their ranks and, in time, may have become thoroughly Semitized, if you will. (Could the Hebrews themselves have come from Caucasian Iberia?) But the story may well be the same as the story of the Varangian Rus who, in time, became Suavicized but produced rulers for the East Suavs for years to come (and, arguably, brought or at least rekindled the worship of Thor/Piorun).
In fact, to bring this back to Jassa and Jehova, there are intriguing hints in the Bible itself that this is the same God in original conception – an Indo-European God of the agricultural lifecycle (perhaps associated with both the Sun and the Moon). The Bible, of course, does not deny that the Bible’s variant – Jehova or YHWH – had been worshipped throughout the world before appearing to Abraham (obviously so given the adventures of Adam, Cain and Noah with his children). Abraham, moreover, is Abram before he (or God) throws in Ham into his name. He is married to Sarai who becomes Sarah (can it be Šarrat – queen?). Yet, the match of Abram and Sarai is suspiciously close to that of Brahma (which, for example, in Polish to this day means as much as “gate”) and Sarasvati.
Curiously, Moses (whose name is probably Egyptian in origin) does not know the Name of God. He finds out the name when cavorting with Jethro whose name suggests an IE root as well as connection with Yahwe. And Jethro is, supposedly, a priest. He is a “priest of Midian.” But what kind of a priest is he? Scholars have for a number of years suspected that he was a priest of Yahwe and that it was from him that Moses (assuming historicity) learned of Yahwe’s worship. Midian is in the SE of the area – towards Arabia (but East) but the MIdianite name is suggestive of IE roots. After all, we have the Medes who are known to ancient writers as residing east of the Pontic-Caspian steppe. (We also have Media and Jason).
Even the name Yahwe (apparently with no certain etymology so far in any Semitic language), seems to be explainable through IE as in the Polish jawa (java) meaning “consciousness/awareness/reality.” Alternatively, a connection could be made to the Suavic – chować – “to hide” or “to protect.” (Brückner is confused in assuming that ch < sk). Perhaps, Jaś hides or Is Hidden or it is a prayer for protection. The Name appears in the Levant about the same time (roughly – not to overstate it) as the Sea Peoples’ invasions.
Incidentally, I have never been a believer that Jove comes from Deus. Deva in Suavic has a female connotation and Devus/Zeus might simply mean the “Womanizer”. Just think of Thor. The fact that a Thunder God is a womanizer could be explained by an association of lightning strikes against the Earth with, well, you know what. More likely, we have here two separate Deities – of the Sky (Jove/Sol Indiges/Jassa/Odin, perhaps too Janus) and of Thunder (Zeus/Piorun/Thor). The fact that the Romans over hundreds of years screwed this up in their panoply of Deities should not confuse the issue. (Whether the Thunder God was originally an aspect of the Sky God, I leave to others). Some signs of this may, arguably (ok, very arguably, all this is, of course, rather major speculation), found in the Bible. For example, we have the strange mention that “God came from Teman, and the Holy One from Mount Paran.” Contrary to the monotheistic interpretation, this suggests Two separate Persons. Looking at Suavic mythology (and IE more generally) what this looks like is God – Jassa – Iasion – Esus and another Deity. The name of the other Deity is suggested by the name of the mountain – Paran meaning as much as Piorun/Peron (living in the Pyrennes) – the IE Storm God. That is Jassa/Piorun, Odin/Thor, Esus/Taranis.
Putting the dual character of the Sky and Storm Divinity aside, there is, in fact, a whole series of books designed to suggest that Yahwe – at least as originally brought into the ME region – was a Sun (but also maybe a Moon?) God and did have a consort or, at least, a (female) counterpart – Ashera (Astarte/ Aušra/ Aušrinė/ Ostera/ Isis/ Demeter/ Lada?). Of course, each people will develop their Gods to their liking and, of course, the later (especially Deuteronomistic/2nd Temple) monotheistic (monopolistic) Yahwe may well be different from the initial conception.
The name David itself could be interpreted as “Gift of God” or of the Lord with the IE “da” to give and “vit” as in vitas (Baltic). One could also explain Isra-el with the genitive, that is, El (God) of Iser. This is, of course, a major stretch and huge speculation. Nevertheless, the words issa/issera appear throughout Europe and it is hard to believe that they reflect any Semitic Exodus into Europe. A more likely correct theory is that they are IE. In Suavic, for example, you have jezioro/ozero meaning “lake”. This word also appears in Anatolia. Krahe referred to these hydronyms as Old European but that just means he did not know what to do with them. Others have used the term “Illyrian” – another placeholder for our ignorance. (This hypothetical influence on the Levant, if in fact true, is IE – not Suavic per se, of course, as there likely were no Suavs back then, at least as we understand them today).
(Similarly rooted words designate eating (jeść), being (jest) or mouth (usta). Other curious connections can be drawn to “egg” (jajo/jajko – itself a strange connection to the idea of the “origin” – at least of a “lizard/bird” type of origin) and ride but also, in effect, move/flow (jechać). These are all ancient and I suspect predate the 2nd millennium B.C.)
To be sure the influences could have been mutual. For example, the river Ister is also known as the Donau/Danube which, like the much more eastern Don (a source also of words like the Italian “don”) is sometimes derived from the same root. Now, we do know that Adonis/Adonai have a Semitic etymology and refer to a (or the) Lord. We further known that IEs (Suavs being one well known example) worshipped rivers and so here you have an “Ister” the Don (compare Tamissa and other similar names; remember too Isaac). So does this mean that the word “don” is really IE or, does it mean that some Semitic speakers were up north by the Danube (and Vennemann is right) or, does it mean that the concept behind the word don was incorporated (along with Adonis) into the Greek and then other IE vocabulary?
(Other interesting examples exist; there is a chronic IE (Vedic) Deity called Yama (the origin of which Deity may be a word like the Polish jama, meaning “cave” or “opening”). In the Canaanite religion there is a somewhat comparable Yam or Yamm who is a water/sea God).
A connection may also exist from genetics. The haplogroup R1a was discovered in large proportions in some Jews. This, of course, immediately got politicized into the so-called Khazar hypothesis whose primary purpose seemed to be (or at least quickly became) to delegitimize Israel. A more in depth analysis seems to have revealed that the R1a version found was not, in fact, European. So the Khazar crap is gone but the question still remains – who were these people? After all, R1a did not originate in Judea and Samaria. Maybe it came from the Exile in Babylonia but maybe it arrived much earlier – note that the type of R1a is of the same (general) branch (Z93) that the Indian Brahmins (and others in India/Pakistan/Afghanistan) sport and we do know that India was at that time invaded (or, if you prefe, immigrated into) by at least some Pontic-Caspian steppe dwellers.
Modern historians generally believe that the Exodus was a myth and that most of the ancient Israeli population was, in fact, local. While this counter-biblical narrative may suit the current political needs, it is, perhaps, also correct. However, that does not mean that there is no kern truth to the story or that, if such story were in some aspect correct, that the people who set out as part of this exile group were, in fact, the same people that later became part of the Israeli kingdoms – the vast majority of whom may well have been local – again, the Rus conquest of the Suavs may be suggestive of the possible answer. (Tacitus mentions a story of Jewish origin in Crete which by mid 2nd millenium B.C. would almost certainly have been IE).
In other words, I suspect that not only was Esus not Jesus but that Jesus was named for a Deity of the Sun/Moon/Rebirth – perhaps originally a human hero such as Jason – introduced, perhaps, into the Levant – in different forms – by polytheistic Indo-European marauders (either from Egypt (“Sea Peoples”) or from the North) – a Deity whose worship/memory kept on going on the Continent in the form of Esus in Gall, of Iasion (Jason too perhaps) in Greece, of the Aesir in Scandinavia and of Jassa in Poland.
Thus, neither the Suavs nor any other northern tribe are any “lost tribe of Israel” which would have been a much more recent post-Exilic concept (that is from the 2nd Temple time; putting aside the notion that such tribes would likely not have existed by the time of Babylonian Captivity). More likely, unless, of course, Vennemann is right, the origin of all three of Levant’s religions is to be sought away in the North – perhaps in Mycenae, perhaps in Anatolia (the north part of which – incidentally, the “Venetic” part – was “Ashkenaz”), or even further north. The fact that Mycaneans used the hexapetal rosette – later identified with Esus – a few hundred years before any possible Exodus, is, at the very least, suggestive.
Naturally, the locals subsequently shaped their religions as they saw fit/appropriate for their circumstances and needs. Yahwe may have initially been a fertility/rebirth/Sun God as conceived by the IEs, may then have become a war God and, as Jews were exiled, Yahwe’s characterisics may have changed again to fit the requirements of the moment. That reworking served also after the fall of the Second Temple. Similarly, Jassa/jasion the rebirth/fertility/Sun/Moon Deity of the Suavs also, with the advent of the Frankish/Saxon wars, seems to have been forced into an Ares/war God form under the later name Gerovit.
Of course, this may all just go back to Osiris. (I leave the question of an earlier Egyptian – Mesopotamian connection to others).
Copyright ©2018 jassa.org All Rights Reserved
