> > The Irish mionks also called the de/ithe other things, but they called
> > de/ithe and they speculated endlessly, over hundreds of years, as to
> > meant for a being to be called de/ and yet not be equal to the Christian
> > "DE/." *Eventually,* people stopped calling them de/ithe, but the
> > took hundreds of years. As late as the 12th c. they were still calling
> > de/ithe.
I know I'm nit picking here but the nom. sg. should be "día" in Old Irish
"dia" in Modern Irish. The nom pl in Old Irish was "dé" in Old Irish and
Modern "déithe". (orthographica variation aside)
> Well, basically, a Christian is supposed to be monotheist, this means that
> there is no other god that God. It means that for them, the terms "Dé" and
> "dé" do not have the same value.
You are right but the same goes for English - so when one says they were
considered gods of the ancient Irish (lower case "g") and the people writing
the texts in Old Iirsh used the word "día" (lower case "d") it is very
valid. Cormac of Sanas Cormaic said that all the Irish once worshipped a
goddess named Brigit he seemed well aware that although she was not
worshipped in his day and that good Christians should not worship her, she
was a goddess to the pagan Irish and was still called a "bandía" by him. I
don't believe that Francine is claiming they were still worshipped or that
she is suggesting that the Irish of the Old Irish period believed they were
gods in the upper case "g" sense of the word. But that they used the word
día/dé (dia/déithe) to describe at least some of them cannot be denied. Am I
off base, Francine?