What’s Up With “Easter”?

No, really. What’s up with that word? The story is perhaps a little more complex than we are led to believe.

I think I’ve heard the common story. Easter, they say, is taken from the name of the goddess Ishtar. At some point in history, Christians took over the pagan holiday of Ishtar, and many of its symbols, and used it to celebrate Jesus’ resurrection.

Well, there seems to be a mix of truth and error here. Ok, some people would say the whole thing is complete bunk from beginning to end, but I’m going to take the middle path this time.

First of all, the link between the word Easter and the goddess Ishtar is very weak. In fact, so weak, it’s pretty much irrelevant. Some people try to claim that “Ishtar” is actually pronounced “Easter” – so … the ancient Babylonian word “Ishtar” is pronounced like the English word “Easter”? As far as I know, it’s not, by the way. But even if it was, the similarity with our modern English “Easter” is most assuredly coincidental.

Ok, so this proves that the word “Easter” has no connection to the goddess, right? So where does the word come from?

Not so fast. The word does probably have a connection to a goddess, but a different one.

This belief is based entirely on one passage from Bede, the English monk and historian from the 7th century. In his book Temporum Ratione, he writes:

Eosturmanath has a name which is now translated “Paschal month,” and which was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, in whose honour feasts were celebrated in that month. Now they designate that Paschal season by her name, calling the joys of the new rite by the time-honoured name of the old observance.

Bede, The Reckoning of Time

Sounds pretty straightforward, right? Well, kind of. One problem is that this is the only historical reference that we have of the goddess Eostre. Some claim that Bede just made her up, but that seems rather unlikely.

This passage is in a section about the months of the year and their names. So it’s a rather off-handed comment. Bede is otherwise anxious to stay far from any paganism – it’s a little odd at first glance that he would mention this without judgment. Unless – maybe it just wasn’t a big deal to him.

Why not? Well, because it’s likely that the connection between the name of the month and the goddess was so old and forgotten, that it was no longer relevant. This would be similar to the way many Christians think about “Sunday” as the Lord’s Day. The fact that the word Sunday may have had a pagan meaning at one time is largely irrelevant.

What Bede seems to be saying is that people simply connected the celebrations of Easter with the name of the month it was in – and the name of that month, by the way, happened to be originally related to a foreign goddess, whose worship had long since disappeared.

We associate Christmas with December – Valentine’s Day with February – but the original meaning of the names of the months (December – “ten”, February – “purification” — did you even know?).

And remember – the only evidence we have of the relationship between the name of this month and the goddess – and even the existence of the worship of this goddess – is this short comment in Bede.

And there’s more to the story. Although most scholars trust Bede and admit that there seems to be some connection with Eosturmanath and a now long forgotten goddess, it could be that the name also meant something else – maybe even originally. What if Eostre came from something else, and only later became associated with the goddess, as it later became associated with Holy Week?

One suggestion is that it comes from the word for resurrection. Nick Sayers wrote:

The German equivalent is Oster. Oster (Ostern being the modern day correspondent) is related to Ost which means the rising of the sun, or simply in English, east. Oster comes from the old Teutonic form of auferstehen/auferstehung, which means resurrection, which in the older Teutonic form comes from two words, ester meaning first, and stehen meaning to stand. These two words combine to form erstehen which is an old German form of auferstehen, the modern day German word for resurrection. The English Easter and German Oster go hand in hand.

Why we should not Passover Easter, Nick Sayers

There are many who would disagree with the whole oster/resurrection connection, but certainly the meaning of “dawn” is pretty clear, leading some to believe that the Eostre goddess was a deity of the dawn. But from ancient times, Resurrection morning has been linked to the dawn as well, when the tomb was discovered to be empty.

While it’s hard to discount Bede’s statement, it also seems that there is an ancient connection to our modern Easter and the idea of the dawn – and just maybe, the idea of resurrection. What is the more ancient meaning? If “dawn” or “resurrection” came first, the whole idea of pagan origins may be false. Then again, if the idea of the goddess was first, it may be that the word eventually lost that meaning and became more associated with dawn/resurrection.

Still reading? Ok, a couple more things, then.

This is a German, and therefore English, phenomenon. Most other languages use a word that clearly means “resurrection”, or they steal from the Hebrew “Passover” (as in Spanish, Pascua). This may lead credence to the theory of the “resurrection” origin.

But it should be noted that when Martin Luther translated the Bible, he had no problem with the word. In fact, he translated the Passover as Osterfest in Luke 2:41, and Christ our “Passover lamb” (1 Corinthians 5:7) becomes the Osterlamm. In English, Tyndale followed Luther, using ester and esterlambe. Much closer to the origin of the word, could it be Luther knew something we don’t? Or, for him, had the word become so associated with the Christian celebration that it no longer mattered?

With all these questions and unknowns, you may wonder why “everyone” speaks with such confidence about Easter’s pagan roots. And, by the way, there is no evidence that Ishtar or Eostre have any relationship with the secularized symbols of Easter that we see today – bunnies and eggs. That’s a whole other story.

But there is no one clear unifying story of the pagan roots of Easter.

In fact, some people make it sound like the whole celebration was created from pagan origins – a ridiculous claim historically.

It appears that, in German and English, the celebration became connected with the month in which it was held – an association which may have been strengthened by the connection of the month’s name with the “dawn”, when the tomb was found to be empty on Sunday long ago.

That brings us to the practical question – should we call this holiday “Easter” or not? Personally, I like the English “Resurrection Day” and “Holy Week” or “Passion Week”. “Resurrection” is not only descriptive, it’s also ancient and traditional around the world.

But maybe it’s not worth it to complain about those who use the term “Easter” – at least those who are using it innocently to refer to either the secular holiday or the Christian one. (And the other side shouldn’t be so hard on the “Resurrection Day” people – seriously, what’s wrong with that?) Like Luther and Bede and most Germans and English throughout history, they’re probably not trying to worship a long forgotten goddess at all. They just like pretty decorated eggs and if they’re Christians, they’re worshipping the Jesus who rose again.