Assyrian Soft Power
archaeology.org
archaeology.org
War is not the only means of conquest. Vietnam was manufacturing and drinking Coca-Cola in the 1960s, and as mentioned here, Germanic religion was interwoven with Christian culture during the Roman conquest of Europe.
One interesting and obscure connection is the origin of the words "hell" and "hall", as "hall" means "covered place" and "valhalla" means "hall of the dead" from Old Norse.
However, the original Hebrew and Greek is often "גֵּיהִנּוֹם" or "γέεννα" meaning "the valley of Hinnom." This is a physical place near Jerusalem where bodies denied a proper burial were burned, and some suggest it was even a region where human sacrifices took place.
You may be very surprised at what you find when you look into the origins of things that are taken for granted. Everything has some sort of origin, and historical roots can run very deep. Without looking at things on a deeper level, you are at the mercy of the surface-level understanding from your surrounding culture.
Yes ancient cultures are fascinating and should be more relevant in the zeitgeist; especially in respect to their knowledge and sophistication in thinking.
"Apocalypse" is also a great word. It means literally "the lifting of the veil" or removing the covering, so you can see what is underneath.
True story: I was once on vacation in Greece, and saw a strip club called Apocalypse. Based on the signage, they meant that in the sense of revealing hidden pleasures rather than some final battle, but I could also see some ways that visiting that club could lead to a nasty showdown.
You have just made weddings vastly more entertaining.
A strip club being called "αποκάλυψη" would bring to mind, literally a revelation of something.
It's not clear what connection you have in mind. You could make the case that "hell" and "hall" are connected to each other through their ancient ancestry, but "hell" is no more closely related to "valhalla" than it is to "hall". "Valhalla" is just a word that includes "hall".
Consider the Norse Hel (both the underworld and the name of the deity ruling over it). Compare with Old English hell, from Proto-Germanic haljō, from Proto-Indo-European ḱelnó, "room", in turn from the root ḱel -- "to cover".
Your comment sent me on a brief etymological excursion and the words sadly are indeed utterly unrelated.
I am reminded of St. Brigit [1], who was a Celtic goddess who was co-opted by the Catholic Church. Her pastoral associations have stayed intact, with the cultural 'need' for the deity protected, the co-opting makes a lot more sense.
Mughal Emperor Akbar's effort to synthesise Islam, Hinduism and other Indic beliefs to great Din-i-Ilahi [2] is yet another prominent example of hegemonic powers using their social clout to increase soft power by co-opting the beliefs of the locals.
The Millet system of Ottoman Empire [3], was geared towards 'respecting' local customs, personal law and protecting local systems of authority in lieu of their support to the Ottoman yoke. This was later adopted by the British in India and their other colonies, where they went to great lengths to establish Madrasas (Islamic education centres) [4] and Sanskrit colleges [5] to further this.
[1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/Brigit [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Din-i_Ilahi [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millet_(Ottoman_Empire) [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliah_University [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Hastings#Governor-Gener...
In the 9th century or so the catholic church cracked down on a number of these practices. They forced the priests to speak Latin rather than the vernacular (to reduce the doctrinal drift: local priests would adapt their message and anyway many priests had been illiterate) and adopted other practices to make the experience a bit more magical (facing away from the audience etc). And they really enforced the "no gods before me" bit, though not the ban on images.
And in a battle you often caused the loser to chuck out their gods and use only the christian one, or were the tables turned you were not to add to your collection of one god.
(Modern Catholicism _does_ allow this, but that came much later)
Is this something that ever happened? There are many documented cases of Christians railing against the names of the days of the week. They just didn't have the power to change them. When Christians did get to name the days of the week, in China, they named them "one", "two", "three", "four", "five", "six", and "day of worship".
I find it odd that the Christians reversed them though: easter is a death/rebirth festival (hence the bunnies, chicks, lambs etc -- people want their fertility symbols at that time) which would make more sense in the midwinter and their god's birth festival is in the middle of winter for some reason.
Interestingly, in Islam, Jesus is usually considered to have been born in the Spring or Summer.
Stories that we think of as "Christian", such as the star of Bethlehem, the 3 wise men and other stories from the life of Jesus, were based on stories that predated the birth of Jesus.
I think we underestimate how different people were compared to what we are used to today. When we tell a story today, we base it on facts. People back then might have a different view. They essentially re-used mythology and these stories to "prove" the credibility of Jesus. Basically confirming that he must be the "one", because these holy events have also happened to him.
So you can reason out a whole system of thought based purely on a couple of known symbols, even if they are completely unconnected in time and space. (Eg, there were three wise men and god is a trinity therefore it fits)
Cause-and-effect thinking came along later, with the Enlightenment, and relies on facts. Some people are still caught up in symbolic thinking to this day.