| History of Tunisia | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANCIENT HISTORY OF TUNISIA | |||||||
| Early eras | |||||||
| Berbers: origin, language, society, religion | |||||||
| Punic Era | |||||||
| Phoenicia, City of Carthage; Berbers; Romans | |||||||
| Roman Era | |||||||
| Berber kings; Africa Province; Vandals; Byzantines | |||||||
| MEDIEVAL HISTORY OF TUNISIA | |||||||
| Early Islamic Era | |||||||
| Ifriqiya: Umayyad, Aghlabid; Berbers; Fatimid | |||||||
| Medieval Era | |||||||
| Berber states: Zirid, Almohad, Hafsid; Ibn Khaldun | |||||||
| Ottoman Era | |||||||
| Pasha & Dey; Muradid, Husaynid; Modern reform | |||||||
| MODERN HISTORY OF TUNISIA | |||||||
| French Era | |||||||
| Protectorate; Independence movement | |||||||
| Modern Era | |||||||
| Republic: Bourghiba, Ben Ali; Revolution; Society & Culture | |||||||
Punic-Ear Tunisia: state, and religion addresses the historical and cultural creations of the people of the city-state of Carthage. Unfortunately very few writings from that era survived. Hence, a history of its Punic literature is impossible. Most presently-existing works that address civic and religious life in Punic-era Carthage come from Greek and Roman sources. The views presented there, of course, are those of foreign writers whose own people were generally hostile to the Carthaginians.
The constitution of the city-state of Carthage, however, did find ancient admirers, notably Aristotle. The governmental institutions studied by this famous philosopher of the 4th century BCE had already undergone significant developments since the first state structures of earliest Carthage. These were probably taken from those existing in Phoenicia at the time of the city's origins. Aristotle's description of the government of Carthage is given in terms of ancient Greek political thinking. The ancient sources leave many questions unanswered, allowing for competing interpretations of its history.
Punic religion also begins in Phoenicia, which shared several Semitic features in common with the religious history of its neighbor Ancient Israel. As religion at Carthage developed in its new African environment, some mutual influence arose between the Punic and the native Berber views of worship and deity. Carthaginians understood themselves as a religious people. At the peak of the city's fame and prosperity, Tanit was recognized as the queen goddess of Carthage.[1]
Contents |
Most ancient literature concerning Carthage comes from Greek and Roman sources. Considering the rival political-economies of Hellenic Sicily versus Carthage, and of Republican Rome versus Carthage, both Greek and Roman authors generally viewed Carthage as the antagonist. Yet only in this light can we perceive many of the fascets of the Punic city, that is, by the early light given us by various ancient Greek and Roman authors.[2][3]
Apart from inscriptions, hardly any Punic literature has survived, none in its own language and script.[4] A brief catalogue would include: three short treaties with Rome (Latin translations);[5] several pages of Hanno's log-book on his fifth/forth century maritime exploration of the Atlantic coast of Africa (Greek translation);[6] fragments quoted from Mago's fourth/3rd century treatise on agriculture (Latin translations);[7] the Roman playwright Plautus (d.184 BC) in his Poenulus incorporated a few speeches in Punic, which are transcribed into Latin letters; and the many inscriptions in Punic script, many, but extremely short usually, e.g., a dedication with divine or personal names.[8] Once "the City Archives, the Annals, and the scribal lists of suffets" existed, but evidently these were destroyed in the horrific fires during the Roman capture of the city in 146 BC.[9]
Punic books (Latin: libri punici) reportedly did survive the fires; these works were given by Roman authorities to the newly augmented Berber rulers.[10][11] Over a century after the fall of Carthage, Gaius Sallustius Crispus or Sallust (86-34) reported seeing volumes written in Punic, which once had been in the possession of the Berber king, Hiempsal II (r.88-81). By way of informants and translators, Sallust used these books to write his brief sketch of Berber affairs.[12][13][14] Yet in the end most Punic writings that survived the destruction of Carthage "did not escape the immense wreckage in which so many of Antiquity's literary works perished."[15] Accordingly, the long and continuous interactions between the Punic citizens of Carthage and the Berber communities surrounding the city, their political life, economic arrangements, cultural ties, social interactions, and as kin, are not known to us from Punic accounts.[16]
Regarding Phoenician writings, few remain and these seldom refer to Carthage. Reportedly a Phoenician History by Philo of Byblos (64-141) existed, but only fragments of this work survive.[17][18] The highly valued works of Sanchuniathon, a Phoenician who wrote on religion and the origins of civilization, are themselves completely lost, but some little content endures twice removed.[19][20] An explanation proffered for why so few Phoenician works endured: early on (11th century), archives and records began to be kept on papyrus, which does not long survive in a moist coastal climate.[21] Also, both Phoenicians and Carthaginians were well known for their secrecy.[22]
The celebrated ancient work on agriculture written by Mago of Carthage survives only via quotations in several later Roman works written in Latin. His book is discussed in the "Economy and society" section of the History of Punic-era Tunisia.
The government of Carthage was undoubtedly patterned after the Phoenician, especially the mother city of Tyre, but Phoenician cities had kings and Carthage apparently did not.[23] An important office was called in Punic the Suffets (a Semitic word agnate with the Old Hebrew Shophet usually translated as Judges as in the Book of Judges). Yet the Suffet at Carthage was more the executive leader; but he also served in a judicial role. Birth and wealth were the initial qualifications.[24] It appears that the Suffet was elected by the citizens, and held office for a one year term; probably there were two of them at a time; hence quite comparable to the Roman Consulship. A crucial difference was that the Suffet had no military power. Carthaginian generals marshalled mercenary armies and were separately elected. From about 550 to 450 the Magonid family monopolized the top military position; later the Barcid family acted similarly. Eventually it came to be that, after a war, the commanding general had to testify justifying his actions before a court of 104 judges.[25]
Aristotle (384-322) discusses Carthage in his work, Politica; he begins: "The Carthaginians are also considered to have an excellent form of government." He briefly describes the city as a "mixed constitution", a political arrangement with cohabiting elements of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, i.e., a king (Gk: basileus), a council of elders (Gk: gerusia), and the people (Gk: demos).[26] Later Polybius of Megalopolis (c.204-122, Greek) in his Istoria would describe the Roman Republic in more detail as a mixed constitution in which the Consuls were the monarchy, the Senate the aristocracy, and the Assemblies the democracy.[27]
Evidently Carthage also had an institution of elders who advised the Suffets, similar to a Greek gerusia or the Roman Senate. We do not have a Punic name for this body. At times its members would travel with an army general on campaign. Members also formed permanent committees. The institution had several hundred members from the wealthiest class who held office for life. Vacancies were probably filled by co-option. From among its members were selected the 104 Judges mentioned above. Later the 104 would come to evaluate not only army generals but other office holders as well. Aristotle regarded the 104 as most important; he compared it to the ephorate of Sparta with regard to control over security. In Hannibal's time, such a Judge held office for life. At some stage there also came to be independent self-perpetuating boards of five who filled vacancies and supervised (non-military) government administration.[28]
Popular assemblies also existed at Carthage. When deadlocked the Suffets and the quasi-senatorial institution of elders might request the assembly to vote; also, assembly votes were requested in very crucial matters in order to achieve political consensus and popular coherence. The assembly members had no legal wealth or birth qualification. How its members were selected is unknown, e.g., whether by festival group or urban ward or another method.[29][30][31]
The Greeks were favorably impressed by the constitution of Carthage; Aristotle had a separate study of it made which unfortunately is lost. In his Politica he states: "The government of Carthage is oligarchical, but they successfully escape the evils of oligarchy by enriching one portion of the people after another by sending them to their colonies." "[T]heir policy is to send some [poorer citizens] to their dependent towns, where they grow rich."[32][33] Yet he continues, "[I]f any misfortue occurred, and the bulk of the subjects revolted, there would be no way of restoring peace by legal means." Aristotle remarked also:
"Many of the Carthaginian institutions are excellent. The superiority of their constitution is proved by the fact that the common people remain loyal to the constitution; the Carthaginians have never had any rebellion worth speaking of, and have never been under the rule of a tyrant."[34] Here one may remember that the city-state of Carthage, who citizens were mainly Libyphoenicians (of Phoenician ancestry born in Africa), dominated and exploited an agricultural countryside of composed mainly of native Berber sharecroppers and farmworkers, whose affiliations to Carthage were open to divergent possibilities. Beyond these more settled Berbers and the Punic farming towns and rural manors, lived the independent Berber tribes, who were mostly pastorialists.
In the brief, uneven review of government at Carthage found in his Politica Aristotle mentions several faults. Thus, "that the same person should hold many offices, which is a favorite practice among the Carthaginians." Aristotle disapproves, mentionting the flute-player and the shoemaker. Also, that "magistrates should be chosen not only for their merit but for their wealth." Aristotle's opinion is that focus on pursuit of wealth will lead to oligarchy and its evils.
"[S]urely it is a bad thing that the greatest offices... should be bought. The law which allows this abuse makes wealth of more account than virtue, and the whole state becomes avaricious. For, whenever the chiefs of the state deem anything honorable, the other citizens are sure to follow their example; and, where virtue has not the first place, their aristocracy cannot be firmly established."[35]
In Carthage the people seemed politically satisfied and submissive, rarely exercising the few opportunities to assent to state decisions given them in their assemblies. Popular influence over government appears not to have been an issue at Carthage. Being a commercial republic fielding a mercenary army, the people were not conscripted for military service, an experience which can foster the feel for popular political action. But perhaps this misunderstands the society; perhaps the people, whose values were based on small-group loyalty, felt themselves sufficiently connected to their city's leadership by the very integrity of their social fabric. Carthage was very stable; there were few openings for tyrants. Only after defeat by Rome devastated Punic imperial ambitions did the people of Carthage seem to question their governance and to show interest in political reform.[36]
In 196, following the Second Punic War (218-201), Hannibal Barca, still greatly admired as a Barcid military leader, was elected Suffet. When his reforms were blocked by a financial official about to become a Judge for life, Hannibal rallied the populace against the 104 Judges. He proposed a one year term for the 104, as part of a major civic overhaul. Additionally, the reform included a restructuring of the city's revenues, and the fostering of trade and agriculture. The changes rather quickly resulted in a noticeable increase in prosperity. Yet his incorrigible political opponents cravenly went to Rome, to charge Hannibal with conspiracy, namely, plotting war against Rome in league with Antiochus the Hellenic ruler of Syria. Although Scipio Africanus resisted such maneuver, eventually Roman intervention forced Hannibal to leave Carthage. Thus corrupt city-state officials efficiently blocked Hannibal Barca's efforts to reform Carthage.[37][38]
The above description of the constitution basically follows Warmington. Largely the earlier descriptions are given by Greek foreigners who likely would see in Carthage reflections of their own institutions. How strong was the Hellenizing influence within Carthage? The basic difficulty is the lack of adequate writings due not only to the secretive nature of the Punic state, but also to the utter destruction of the capitol city and its records. Another view of the constitution of Carthage is given by Picard as follows.
Mago (6th century) was King of Carthage, Punic MLK or malik (Greek basileus), not merely a SFT or Suffet, which then was only a minor official. Mago as MLK was head of state and war leader; being MLK was also a religious office. His family was considered to possess a sacred quality. Mago's office was somewhat similar to that of Pharaoh, but although kept in a family it was not hereditary, it was limited by legal consent. Picard, however, believes that the council of elders and the popular assembly are late institutions. Carthage was founded by the King (MLK) of Tyre who had a royal monopoly on this trading venture. Accordingly, it was the royal authority stemming from this traditional source of power that the MLK of Carthage possessed. Later, as other Phoenician ship companies entered the trading region, and so associated with the city-state, the MLK of Carthage had to keep order among a rich variety of powerful merchants in their negotiations over risky commerce across the seas. Under these circumstance, the office of MLK began to be transformed. Yet it was not until the aristocrats of Carthage became wealthy owners of agricultural lands in Africa that a council of elders was institutionalized at Carthage.[39]
The Phoenicians of Tyre brought their inherited customs and habitual understandings with them to north Africa. The religious practices and beliefs of Phoenicia were cognate generally to their neighbors in Canaan, which in turn shared characteristics common throughout the ancient Semitic world.[40][41][42] "Canaanite religion was more of a public institution than of an individual experience." Its rites were primarily for city-state purposes; payment of taxes by citizens was considered in the category of religious sacrifices.[43] Unfortunately, much of the Phoenician sacred writings known to the ancients have been lost.[44][45]
Like their Hebrew cousins the Phoenicians were known for being very religious. While there remain favorable aspects regarding Canaanite religion,[46][47][48] several of its reported practices have been widely criticized, in particular, temple prostitution,[49] and child sacrifice.[50] The tradition of temple prostitution became forbidden in Hebrew religion, e.g., by the reforms instituted under King Josiah.[51] In the foundation story of Abraham and Isaac,[52] it is shown that the ancient, regional, religious practice of child sacrifice was not required by the Hebrew Deity.[53][54] Notwithstanding these and other important differences, cultural religious similarities between the ancient Hebrews and the Phoenicians persisted.[46][55]
Canaanite religious mythology does not appear as elaborated compared with existent literature of their cousin Semites in Mesopotamia. In Canaan the supreme god was called El, which means "god" in common Semitic.[56][57] The storm god Baal, meaning "master".[58] Other gods were called by royal titles, as in Melqart meaning "king of the city",[59] or Adonis for "lord".[60] On the other hand the Phoenicians, notorious for being secretive in business, might use these non-descript words as cover for the secluded name of the god,[61] known only to a select few initiated into the inmost circle, or not even used by them, much as their neighbors the ancient Hebrews used the word Adonai (Heb: "Lord") to place a cover over the name of their God.[62]
The Semitic pantheon was well-populated; which god became primary evidently depended on the exigencies of a particular city-state or tribal locale.[63][64] Due perhaps to the leading role of the city-state of Tyre, its reigning god Melqart was prominent throughout Phoenicia and overseas. Also of great general interest was Astarte (Heb: Ashtoreth), (Bab: Ishtar), a fertility goddess who also enjoyed regal and matronly aspects. The prominent deity Eshmun of Sidon developed from a chthonic nature for agriculture into a god of health and healing. Associated with the fertility and harvest myth widespread in the region, in this regard Eshmun was linked with Astarte; other like pairings included Ishtar and Tammuz in Babylon, and Isis and Osiris in Egypt.[65]
Religious institutions of great antiquity in Tyre, called marzeh (MRZH, "place of reunion"), did much to foster social bonding and "kin" loyalty.[66] These institutions held banquets for their membership on festival days. Various marzeh societies developed into elite fraternities, becoming very influential in the commercial trade and governance of Tyre. As now understood, each marzeh originated in the congeniality inspired and then nurtured by a series of ritual meals, shared together as trusted "kin", all held in honor of the deified ancestors.[67] Later, at the Punic city-state of Carthage, the "citizen body was divided into groups which met at times for common feasts." Such festival groups may also have composed the voting cohort for selecting members of the city-state's Assembly.[68][69]
Religion in Carthage was based on inherited Phoenician ways of devotion. In fact, until its fall embassies from Carthage would regularly make the journey to Tyre to worship Melqart, bringing material offerings.[70][71] Transplanted to distant Carthage, these Phoenician ways persisted, but naturally acquired distinctive traits: perhaps influenced by a spiritual and cultural evolution, or synthesizing Berber tribal practices, or transforming under the stress of political and economic forces encountered by the city-state. Over time the original Phoenician exemplar developed distinctly, becoming the Punic religion at Carthage.[72] "The Carthaginians were notorious in antiquity for the intensity of their religious beliefs."[73] "Besides their reputation as merchants, the Carthaginians were known in the ancient world for their superstition and intense religiousity. They imagined themselves living in a world inhabited by supernatural powers which were mostly malevolent. For protection they carried amulets of various origins and had them buried with them when they died."[74]
At Carthage as at Tyre religion was integral to the city's life. A committee of ten elders selected by the civil authorities regulated worship and built the temples with public funds. Some priesthoods were hereditary to certain families. Punic inscriptions list a hierarchy of cohen (priest) and rab cohenim (lord priests). Each temple was under the supervision of its chief priest or priestess. To enter the Temple of Eshmun one had to abstain from sexual intercourse for three days, and from eating beans and pork.[75] Private citizens also nurtured their own destiny, as evidenced by the common use of theophoric personal names, e.g., Hasdrubal, "he who has Baal's help" and Hamilcar [Abdelmelqart], "pledged to the service of Melqart".[76]
The city's legendary foundress, Elissa or Dido, was the widow of Acharbas the high priest of Tyre in service to its principal deity Melqart.[77] Dido was also attached to the fertility goddess Astarte. With her Dido brought not only ritual implements for the worship of Astarte, but also her priests and sacred prostitutes (taken from Cyprus).[78] The agricultural turned healing god Eshmun was worshipped at Carthage, as were other dieities. Melqart became supplanted at the Punic city-state by the emergent god Baal Hammon, which perhaps means "lord of the altars of incense" (thought to be an epithet to cloak the god's real name).[79][80] Later, another newly arisen deity arose to eventually reign supreme at Carthage, a goddess of agriculture and generation who manifested a regal majesty, Tanit.[81]
The name Baal Hammon (BL HMN) has attracted scholarly interest. The more accepted etymology is to "heat" (Sem: HMN). Modern scholars at first associated Baal Hammon with the Egyptian god Ammon of Thebes, both the Punic and the Egyptian being gods of the sun. Both also had the ram as a symbol. The Egyptian Ammon was known to have spread by trade routes to Libyans in the vicinity of modern Tunisia, well before arrival of the Phoenicians. Yet Baal Hammon's derivation from Ammon no longer may considered the most likely, as Baal Hammon has since been traced also to Syrio-Phoenician origins, confirmed by recent finds at Tyre.[82] Baal Hammon is also presented as a god of agriculture: "Baal Hammon's power over the land and its fertility rendered him of great appeal to the inhabitants of Tunisia, a land of fertile wheat- and fruit-bearing plains."[83][84]
"In Semitic religion El, the father of the gods, had gradually been shorn of his power by his sons and relegated to a remote part of his heavenly home; in Carthage, on the other hand, he became, once more, the head of the pantheon, under the enigmatic title of Ba'al Hammon."[79]
Prayers of individual Carthaginians were often addressed to Baal Hammon. Yet this deity was recipient of the very troubling practice of child sacrifice.[85][86][87] Diodorus (late 1st century BCE) wrote that when Agathocles had attacked Carthage (in 310) several hundred children of leading families were sacrificed to regain the god's favor.[88] Modernly, the French novelist Gustave Flaubert's 1862 work Salammbô graphically featured this god as accepting such sacrifice.[89]
The goddess Tanit during the 5th and 4th centuries became queen goddess, supreme over the city-state of Carthage, thus outshining the former chief god and her associate, Baal Hammon.[91][92] Tanit was represented by "palm trees weighed down with dates, ripe pomegranates ready to burst, lotus or lilies coming into flower, fish, doves, frogs... ." She gave to mankind a flow of vital energies.[93][94] Tanit may be Berbero-Libyan in origin, or at least assimilated to a local deity.[95][96]
Another view, supported by recent finds, holds that Tanit originated in Phoenicia, being closely linked there to the goddess Astarte.[97][98] Tanit and Astarte: each one was both a funerary and a fertility goddess. Each was a sea goddess. As Tanit was associated with Ba'al Hammon the principal god in Punic Carthage, so Astarte was with El in Phoenicia. Yet Tanit was clearly distinguished from Astarte. Astarte's heavenly emblem was the planet Venus, Tanit's the crescent moon. Tanit was portrayed as chaste; at Carthage religious prostitution was apparently not practiced.[99][100] Yet temple prostitution played an important role in Astarte's cult at Phoenicia. Also, the Greeks and Romans did not compare Tanit to the Greek Aphrodite nor to the Roman Venus as they would Astarte. Rather the comparison of Tanit would be to Hera and to Juno, regal goddesses of marriage, or to the goddess Artemis of child-birth and the hunt.[101] Tertullian (c.160-c.220), the Christian theologian and native of Carthage, wrote comparing Tanit to Ceres, the Roman mother goddess of agriculture.[102]
Tanit has also been identified with three different Canaanite goddesses (all being sisters/wives of El): the above 'Astarte; the virgin war goddess 'Anat; and the mother goddess 'Elat or Asherah.[103][104][105] Her being a goddess, or symbolizing a psychic archetype, accordingly it is difficult to assign a single nature to Tanit, or to clearly represent her to consciousness.[106]
A problematic theory derived from sociology of religion proposes that as Carthage passed from being a Phoenician trading station into a wealthy and sovereign city-state, and from a monarchy anchored to Tyre into a native-born Libyphoenician oligarchy, Carthaginians began to turn away from deities associated with Phoenicia, and slowly to discover or synthesize a Punic deity, the goddess Tanit.[107] A parallel theory posits that when Carthage acquired as a source of wealth substantial agricultural lands in Africa, a local fertility goddess, Tanit, developed or evolved to eventually became supreme.[74] A basis for such theories may well be the religious reform movement that emerged and prevailed at Carthage during the years 397-360. The catalyst for such dramatic change in Punic religious practice was their recent defeat in war when led by their king Himilco (d. 396) against the Greeks of Sicily.[108]
Such transformation of religion would have been instigated by a faction of wealthy land owners at Carthage, including these reforms: overthrow of the monarchy; elevation of Tanit as queen goddess and decline of Baal Hammon; allowance of foreign cults of Greek origin into the city (Demeter and Kore); decline in child sacrifice, with most votive victims changed to small animals, and with the sacrifice not directed for state purposes but, when infrequently done, performed to solicit the deity for private, family favors. This bold historical interpretation understands the reformer's motivation as "the reaction of a wealthy and cultured upper class against the primitive and antiquated aspects of the Canaanite religion, and also a political move intended to break the power of a monarchy which ruled by divine authority." The reform's popularity was precarious at first. Later, when the city was in danger of immanent attack in 310, there would be a marked regression to child sacrifice. Yet eventually the cosmopolitan religious reform and the popular worship of Tanit together contributed to "breaking through the wall of isolation which had surrounded Carthage."[109][110][111]
"When the Romans conquered Africa, Carthaginian religion was deeply entrenched even in Libyan areas, and it retained a great deal of its character under different forms." Tanit became Juno Caelestis, "and Caelestis was supreme at Carthage itself until the triumph of Christianity, just as Tanit had been in pre-Roman times." [112] Regarding Berber (Libyan) religious beliefs, it has also been said:
"[Berber] belief in the powers of the spirits of the ancestors was not eclipsed by the introduction of new gods--Hammon, or Tanit--but existed in parallel with them. It is this same duality, or readiness to adopt new cultural forms while retaining the old on a more intimate level, which characterizes the [Roman era]."[113]
Such Berber ambivalence, the ability to entertain multiple mysteries concurrently, apparently characterized their religion during the Punic era also. After the passing of Punic power, the great Berber king Masinissa (r.202-148), who long fought and challenged Carthage, was widely venerated by later generations of Berbers as divine.[114]
"Thus the winged figure of Tanith, the Carthaginian goddess of heaven, standing beneath the vault of heaven and the zodiac, holds the sun and moon in her hands, and is [flanked] by pillars, the symbols of the Great Mother Goddess. But on the lower plane of the stele, we find the same goddess stylized with upraised arms, possibly as a tree assimilated to the Egytian life symbol. Her head is the sun, an illusion to the tree birth of the sun, and she is accompanied by two doves, the typical bird of the Great Goddess." The "Egyptian life symbol" refers to the ankh.
"It seems probable, therefore, that Tanith was a pre-Phoenician goddess of fertility of the Hamites, ...that she was so popular that after the coming of the Phoenicians they too worshipped her to such a degree that she largely displaced their native goddess Astart." Barton (1934) at 305. Here the ancient Berbers were the local Hamitic people.
"In Ugaritic mythology, Anath is the by far most important female figure, the goddess of love and war, virginal yet wanton, amorous yet given to uncontrollable outbursts of rage and appalling acts of cruelty. She is the daughter of El, the god of heaven, and of his wife the Lady Asherah of the Sea. ... Her foremost lover was her brother Baal. ... She was easily provoked to violence and, once she began to fight, would go berserk, smiting and killing left and right." Patai (1990) at 60-62, who adds that the Phoenician Philo of Byblos (64-141) compared Anath to the Greek virgin war goddess Athena. Also, Patai at 63-66 identifies Anath with the biblical "Queen of Heaven". At 61 Patai, referring to Anath in her rôle as goddess of love, mentions the Babylonian goddess Ishtar, and remarks that both Astarte and Anath as "typical goddesses of love, both chaste and promiscuous... [were] perennially fruitful without ever losing their virginity."
"Asherah was the chief goddess of the Canaanite pantheon... at Ugarit... . ...Asherah figured prominently as the wife of El the chief god. Her full name was 'Lady Asherah of the Sea'--apparently her domain proper was the sea, just as that of her husband El was heaven. She was, however, also referred to simply as Elath or Goddess. She was the 'Progenitress of the Gods': all other gods... were her children... . Asherah was a motherly goddess... ." Patai (1990) at 36-37. In his chapter "The Goddess Asherah" at 34-53, Patai discusses widespread Hebrew worship of Asherah until the 6th century B.C.E. At 52-53 Patai notes ancient inscriptions (one found near Hebron) evidencing an early Jewish association of Asherah with Yahweh, a view repugnant to later orthodox Judaism.
It is an "illusion that an archetype can be finally explained and disposed of. Even the best attempts at explanation are only more or less successful translations into another metaphorical language. ... The most we can do is dream the myth onwards and give it a modern dress. And whatever [our] explanation or interpretation does to it, we do to our souls as well, with corresponding results for our own well being. ... Hence the "explanation" should always be such that the functional significance of the archetype remains unimpaired, so that an adequate and meaningful connection between the conscious mind and the archetype is assured. ... It represents or personifies certain instinctive data of the dark, primitive psyche, the real but invisible roots of consciousness." ... "The archetype... is a psychic organ present in all of us. ... There is no 'rational' substitute for the archetype any more than there is for the cerebellum or the kidneys."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||