Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

False Evidence

On page 7, Morey writes:

In the 1940's, the archeologists G. Caton Thompson and Carleton S. Goon made some amazing discoveries in Arabia (Morey p. 7).

On page 9 we discover he meant "southern Arabia" but we have already dealt with this discrepancy. What is important here is that these "amazing discoveries" are revealed by G. Caton Thompson in her 1944 book "The Tombs and Moon Temple of Hureidha." What did she reveal? Here is one thing, according to Mr. Morey:

An idol which may be the Moon-god himself was also discovered (see Diagram #6); (Morey, pp. 9-10 emphasis added).

Here he says only that the idol "may be the Moon-god himself." But he proudly labeled Diagram #6: An idol of the Moon-god (Morey, p. 10). Although Morey knows, according to his own words, that it is not certain that this idol was the Moon- god, yet he is prepared to label it as though it was for sure. There is no excuse for such carelessness. But I suspect a further discrepancy. I did not have occasion to read G. Gaton Thompson's 1944 book, but her companion archeologist Carleton S. Goon wrote in 1945 his treatise Southern Arabia, A Problem for the Future. Morey is aware of this writing, for he quoted from it several times.

The discrepancy is that what Morey leads us to expect in Thompson's book is denied in Goon's
treatise! Morey showed us a picture of a woman-like idol and claims that this may be the Moon-god himself which was discovered by Goon and Thompson and revealed in Thompson's book. Goon's treatise says no such thing was discovered! About the three astral deities of South Arabia, the Sun, the Moon, and the Star Venus, Goon writes:

There were no carved images of these three-the Semitic tabu against graven images, while by no means generally applicable, was in force in regard to the divinities themselves. What images we do find are of people (Goon, p. 399).

According to Goon, then, they found no graven images of gods but only of people. Then Morey shows us the graven image of a woman and tells us this "may be the Moon-god himself' (Morey, p. 10). So either Goon or Morey is wrong here. And I don't think it is Goon. He was there when he and
Thompson made those amazing discoveries, so he ought to know what he discovered.
I do not know where this leaves Thompson because, as I have said, I did not read her book. But it is rather odd that she would write something in her book and then her partner writing a year later would contradict her like that. Or, perhaps Morey does not mean to imply that either Goon or Thompson claimed any such thing. Perhaps it is only his words that mislead, not his intention. After saying that this idol may have been the Moon-god himself, Morey claimed:

This was later confirmed by other well- known archeologists (Morey, p. 10).

If "confirmed" here does not mean what it says, Morey should have used some other word we can hold him to. What is important, though, and for this I give him credit, is his reference in a footnote to three of these "well-known archaeologists." My concern for the moment is not whether or not they are "well-known" but my concern is to know what exactly they said about this idol. A direct quote please? I have developed a liking for checking such quotes. I find it rather interesting that when Morey refers to the idol later he says:

Now we have the actual idols of the Moon-god ... (Morey, p. 14 emphasis added).

What may have been is now actual, and it has multiplied: now "idols"! Is Morey never satisfied
adding to his cup of sins?

Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page