text:
Simon Marius

Simon Marius (latinized form of Simon Mayr; 10 January 1573 – 5 January 1625) was a German astronomer. He was born in Gunzenhausen, near Nuremberg, but spent most of his life in the city of Ansbach. He is best known for being among the first observers of the four largest moons of Jupiter, and his publication of his discovery led to charges of plagiarism.

Early life
Marius was the son of Reichart Mayr, a mayor of Gunzenhausen. On the recommendation of George Frederick, Margrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach, he was admitted to the Margrave's Academy in Heilsbronn in 1586, where he studied until 1601. During this time, he published observations about a comet as well as astronomical tables, which gave him a reputation as a good astronomer and mathematician, and the Margrave appointed him as his official mathematician. Marius wanted to attend the University of Königsberg, but was unable to get a scholarship. However, the Margrave wrote a letter of recommendation on 22 May 1601, so that Marius could study in Prague under Tycho Brahe, which he did for several months, although he may actually have worked directly with David Fabricius instead of Brahe himself.

By September 1601, Marius had already left Prague and he arrived in Padua in December 1601 to study medicine at the University of Padua. During this time, he tutored other students in astronomy, including one Baldassarre Capra, with whom he wrote a book on a new star (actually Kepler's Supernova) which they had observed in 1604. Capra had a dispute with Galileo Galilei (both of them learned fencing from Capra's father ) on the invention of the proportional compass and Marius took his student's side in the argument. Marius left the school in July 1605, returning to Ansbach to become the mathematician and physician to the new Margraves, Christian and Joachim Ernst.

In 1606, Marius married Felicitas Lauer (born 1590), the daughter of his publisher, in Ansbach, and in 1609 he published the first German translations of Euclid's Elements. That year, he also built his own telescope and in November made observations of the Galilean moons, slightly before Galileo did himself; this became the source of a major dispute between the two.

Dispute with Galileo
Capra published another book in 1607 which he actually plagiarised from Galileo, and Marius was implicated in the act due to his prior association with Capra, even though this was after Marius had left Padua. Galileo certainly was under that impression, as he referred to his "old adversary" (without explicitly naming Marius) as a "poisonous reptile", and an "enemy of all mankind".

In 1614, Marius published his work Mundus Iovialis (English: World of Jupiter) describing the planet Jupiter and its moons (he previously had published the discovery in 1611 in a local almanac ). Here he claimed to have discovered the planet's four major moons about a month before Galileo, who was naturally incensed. In The Assayer in 1623, he accused Marius of plagiarism.

Because of Galileo's stature in the scientific community, for nearly 300 years, Marius's reputation was tainted by Galileo's accusations. However, a scientific committee in the Netherlands in 1903 examined the evidence extensively and ruled in favor of Marius's independent discoveries, with results published by Johannes Bosscha in 1907. Apparently Marius discovered the moons independently, but did not start keeping notes until 29 December 1609. Marius used the Julian calendar, and that date is equivalent to 8 January 1610, in the Gregorian one used by Galileo, one day after Galileo's letter in which he first described the moons.

Regardless of priority, the mythological names by which these satellites are known today (Io, Europa, Ganymede and Callisto) are those given them by Marius:

Discoveries
Simon Marius also observed the Andromeda "nebula", which had also been known to Persian astronomers of the Middle Ages.

Discussion of Marius' work is scarce, but what exists tends to note his skill as an observer, including:
 * That in 1612 he measured the diameter of the Andromeda nebula and discerned it as having a dull, pale light which increased in brightness toward its center, like "a candle shining through horn".
 * That he detected spurious disks of stars created by his telescope.
 * That, from his observations of the Galilean moons he derived better periods of revolution and other orbital elements for them than did Galileo.
 * That he observed the location of Tycho Brahe's supernova of 1572 and found a star there which he estimated to be "somewhat dimmer than Jupiter's third moon".

Marius drew conclusions about the structure of the universe from his observations of the Jovian moons and the stellar disks. The stellar disks he observed were spurious (likely the Airy disk caused by diffraction, as stars are too distant for their physical disks to be detected telescopically), but Marius interpreted them to be physical disks, like the planetary disks visible through a telescope. He concluded that since he could see stellar disks, the stars could not be as distant as was required in the Copernican world system, and he said that the appearance of the stars as seen through a telescope actually argued against Copernicus. These findings are contrasting to those of Galileo, who utilized similar telescopic data alternatively to support the Copernican world system. This adherence by Galileo to the Copernican heliocentric theory arises due to its apparent mathematical grandeur and his prior commitment to the theory. Marius, however, showed no evident commitment to any theory but rather hypothesized based on telescopic observation. He also concluded from his observations of the Galilean moons that they must orbit Jupiter while Jupiter orbits the Sun. Therefore, Marius concluded that the geocentric Tychonic system, in which the planets circle the Sun while the Sun circles the Earth, must be the correct world system, or model of the universe.

Work

 * Mundus Iovialis anno MDCIX Detectus Ope Perspicilli Belgici (Die Welt des Jupiter, 1609 mit dem flämischen Teleskop entdeckt; Lateinisches Faksimile und deutsche Übersetzung; Hrsg. und bearb. von Joachim Schlör. Naturwiss. begleitet und mit einem Nachw. vers. von Alois Wilder), 1614
 * Zinner, E., "Zur Ehrenrettung des Simon Marius", in: Vierteljahresschrift der Astronomischen Gesellschaft, 77. Jahrgang, 1. Heft, Leipzig 1942
 * Bosscha, J., "Simon Marius. Réhabilitation d´un astronome calomnié", in: Archives Nederlandaises des Sciences Exactes et Naturelles, Ser. II, T. XII, pp. 258–307, 490–528, La Haye, 1907

title: Simon Marius


text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Cheeses task force

{| {| width=100% cellspacing=10 style="background-color: #EDF2FF;"
 * width="95%" style="vertical-align:top;border: 1px solid #668CFF; background-color:#EBF0FF; ;" |
 * width="95%" style="vertical-align:top;border: 1px solid #668CFF; background-color:#EBF0FF; ;" |

[[Image:Gtk-dialog-info.svg|20px|About]] About the Cheeses task force
Some Wikipedians have formed a task force to better organize information in articles related to cheese. This page and its sub-pages contain their suggestions; it is hoped that this project will help to focus the efforts of other Wikipedians. If you would like to help, please inquire on the Discussion Page, see the Task list below or just start editing articles and link them to the project using the WikiProject Food and drink/Cheeses task force banner.

[[Image:Namespace Wikipedia.svg|20px]] Scope
Unlike other WikiProjects, this task force does not attempt to define a rigorous, heading-driven outline for the article. Rather, it should be used as a set of guidelines to insure that all important details have been covered in a cheese article. An infobox template is linked below under the projects templates that may be included along the right side of the article. This template gives the basic facts of the cheese at a glance. Not all cheeses are the same, and not all items fit into one set framework. However, having some general set of cheese "basics" covered is ideal.

[[Image:Nuvola apps kuser.svg|20px]] Participants
You can join our project by adding your name to the participant list and placing the user box User WP Cheeses on your user page. Feel free to list any special interests after your name.

Goals
Here is a list of goals for this task force:
 * Consensus about the organization of cheese related articles
 * Categorization of cheese articles
 * Creation, expansion, and maintenance of cheese articles.
 * Helping to maintain the Portal:Food.

A note on article names
Cheese articles should be given a unique name that clearly differentiates them from other potential topics that may share the same name. This is especially important in the case of European cheeses, where cheese are frequently named after a town or region. The simplest method is to append "cheese" to the article name (e.g. Cheddar vs. Cheddar cheese). Whether you choose to append "cheese" to non-ambiguous titles (e.g. Sage Derby) is a left to individual authors. Note that the designation should not be applied where it is redundant, as in the case of "Queso blanco".

Article Structure
The article should start with a brief description of the cheese, including:
 * the nature of the milk (or substance) from which the cheese is produced (e.g. goat's milk, cow's milk, ewe's milk)
 * a high-level description of the cheese's flavor(mild, flavorful, sharp)
 * a rough notion of the cheese's texture (soft, semi-soft, hard, etc.)
 * if applicable, the region in which the cheese is made, and/or originates

Much of this information can be conveyed concisely in the first sentence(s) of the article. Example: "Roquefort is a flavorful ewe's-milk bleu cheese from the south of France."

The article should move on (over the first or first several paragraphs) to a more detailed description of the cheese, including:
 * description of the cheese's appearance (e.g., "shot with blue veins of mold", "inedible orange rind".)
 * (optionally) some attempt to describe the flavor of the cheese

The article should continue to list any unique details of the cheese, including:
 * A description of the production process
 * History (even if legendary) of the discovery/invention of the cheese
 * Variants of the cheese (e.g. US cheddar vs. English Cheddar)
 * A list of producers (where applicable-- don't bother with widely produced cheeses.)

Next, there is a table with quick facts about the cheese. A template for the table can be found at the bottom of this page. The contents are as follows:

 * The official full name of the cheese. If there are several official names, list all (e.g. port-du-salut/entrammes).
 * A picture of the cheese, where available. We have not yet located a source of public-domain or copylefted cheese images.  Do not grab images off the web unless you're sure they're not copyrighted!
 * Primary geographical production area. If the cheese has no center of production, specify "worldwide".  (At some point, a map might be helpful)
 * The milk (or non-milk substance) from which the cheese is made. Specify whole or skim milk where appropriate.
 * Pasteurization: Yes/No/Occasionally/Frequently or something more descriptive.
 * Texture (semi-soft, soft, hard, etc.)
 * Average fat content (as a percentage.)
 * Average protein content (as a percentage.)
 * Size/weight of a cheese wheel (where applicable)
 * Affinage/aging time (specify if there are multiple stages.)
 * Trademarks, production guilds, etc. (e.g. AOC for many protected French cheeses.)

Additional information
Categories:
 * Cheese by country, such as English cheese, etc.
 * Cheeses by milk type, such as Cow's milk cheese
 * Protected designation, if appropriate

Templates

 * Infobox Cheese - Infobox template for cheese articles
 * Navigational templates
 * Belgian cheeses - navbox template for those articles covering Belgian cheeses
 * Italian cheeses - navbox template for those articles covering Italian cheeses
 * French cheeses - navbox template for those articles covering French cheeses
 * British cheeses - navbox for those articles covering cheese from the United Kingdom}}
 * WPFOOD - Banner to tag article on its talk page to associate with this task force
 * User WP Cheeses - Place this template on your user page when you join the task force
 * Cheese-stub - Cheese stub template
 * - An award placed at another users talk page for improving Cheese-related articles.

[[image:Dialog ballons icon.svg|30px]] Community forums

 * }

 * style="vertical-align:top;border: 1px solid #668CFF; background-color:#EBF0FF; ;" |

 * }
 * }

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
First Moroccan Crisis

The First Moroccan Crisis or the Tangier Crisis was an international crisis between March 31, 1905, and April 7, 1906, over the status of Morocco. Germany wanted to challenge France's growing control over Morocco, aggravating France and Great Britain. The crisis was resolved by the Algeciras Conference of 1906, a conference of mostly European countries that affirmed French control; this worsened German relations with both France and Britain and helped enhance the new Anglo-French Entente.

Kaiser's visit
On 31 March 1905 Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany arrived at Tangier, Morocco and conferred with representatives of Sultan Abdelaziz of Morocco. The Kaiser toured the city on the back of a white horse. In a speech given at the German legation, the Kaiser declared he had come to support the sovereignty of the Sultan—a statement which amounted to a provocative challenge to French influence in Morocco. The Sultan subsequently rejected a set of French-proposed governmental reforms and issued invitations to major world powers to a conference which would advise him on necessary reforms.

French reaction
Germany sought a multilateral conference where the French could be called to account before other European powers. The French foreign minister, Théophile Delcassé, took a defiant line, holding that there was no need for such a conference. In response, Count Bernhard von Bülow, the German Chancellor, threatened war over the issue, although this was a bluff. Kaiser Wilhelm did not want war, stating in Bremen just before he set off: "My study of history hasn't encouraged me to strive for world domination. In the empire of which I dream, the German emperor will be trusted by other countries and must be seen as a honest and peaceful neighbour". The crisis peaked in mid-June. The French cancelled all military leave (15 June) and Germany threatened to sign a defensive alliance with the Sultan (22 June). French Prime Minister Maurice Rouvier refused to risk war with Germany over the issue. Delcassé resigned, as the French government would no longer support his policy. On 1 July France agreed to attend the conference.

The crisis continued up to the eve of the conference at Algeciras, with Germany calling up reserve units (30 December) and France moving troops to the German border (3 January).

The Algeciras Conference
The Algeciras Conference was called to settle the dispute, lasting from 16 January to 7 April 1906. Of the 13 nations present, the German representatives found that their only supporter was Austria-Hungary. A German attempt at compromise was rejected by all but Austria-Hungary. France had firm support from Britain, Russia, Italy, Spain, and the United States. The Germans decided to accept a face-saving compromise agreement that was signed on 31 March 1906.

Consequence
Although the Algeciras Conference temporarily solved the First Moroccan Crisis, it only worsened the tensions between the Triple Alliance and Triple Entente that ultimately led to the First World War.

The First Moroccan Crisis also showed that the Entente Cordiale was strong, as Britain had defended France in the crisis. The crisis can be seen as a reason for the Anglo-Russian Entente and the Anglo-Franco-Spanish Pact of Cartagena being signed the following year. Kaiser Wilhelm II was angry at being humiliated and was determined not to back down again, which led to the German involvement in the Second Moroccan Crisis.

title: First Moroccan Crisis


text:
USS Kentucky (BB-66)

USS Kentucky (BB-66) was an uncompleted battleship intended to be the last ship of the Iowa-class battleship. Hull BB-66 was originally to be the second ship of the Montana-class battleships. However, the urgent need for more warships at the outbreak of World War II and the U.S. Navy's experiences in the Pacific theater led it to conclude that rather than battleships larger and more heavily armed than the Iowa-class battleship, it quickly needed more fast battleships of that class to escort the new Essex-class aircraft carriers being built. As a result, hulls BB-65 and BB-66 were reordered and laid down as Iowa-class battleships in 1942.

As such, she was intended to be the sixth and final member of the Iowa-class constructed. At the time of her construction she was the second ship of the United States Navy to be named in honor of the U.S. state of Kentucky. Like her sister ship USS Illinois (BB-65), laid down as one of the last pair of Iowa-class ahead of her, Kentucky was still under construction at the end of hostilities and became caught up in the post-war draw-down of the armed services. Her construction was suspended twice, during which times she served as a parts hulk. In the 1950s, several proposals were made to complete the ship as a guided missile battleship, abandoned primarily due to cost concerns and the rapid pace of evolving missile technology. Kentucky ultimately was sold for scrap in 1958.

Background
Kentucky was conceived in 1935, when the United States Navy initiated design studies for the creation of an extended South Dakota-class battleship (1939) that was not restricted by the Second London Naval Treaty. This resulted in one of the "fast battleship" designs planned in 1938 by the Preliminary Design Branch at the Bureau of Construction and Repair.

The passage of the Second Vinson Act in 1938 had cleared the way for construction of the four South Dakota-class battleships and the first two Iowa-class fast battleships (those with the hull numbers BB-61 and BB-62). The latter four battleships of the class, those designated with the hull numbers BB-63, BB-64, BB-65, and BB-66 (Missouri, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Kentucky, respectively) were not cleared for construction until 12 July 1940. While BB-63 and BB-64 were originally planned as the final ships in the Iowa-class, BB-65 and BB-66 were intended to be the first ships of the Montana class which was larger and slower while mounting twelve 16 in Mark 7 guns. However, the passage of an emergency war building program on 19 July 1940 resulting in Illinois and Kentucky being re-ordered as the fifth and sixth ships, respectively, of the Iowa-class battleship in order to save time on construction, so the first ship of the Montana-class battleship would be reassigned as BB-67. The orders for BB-65 and BB-66 were placed on 9 September 1940, and the ships were laid down on 6 December 1942, and 7 March 1942, respectively.

By 1942 the United States Navy shifted its building focus from battleships to aircraft carriers after the successes of carrier combat in both the Battle of the Coral Sea, and to a greater extent, the Battle of Midway. As a result, the construction of the US fleet of Essex-class aircraft carriers had been given the highest priority for completion in the US shipyards by the US Navy. The Essex-class carriers were proving vital to the war effort by enabling the Allies to gain and maintain air supremacy in the Pacific War, and were rapidly becoming the principal striking arm of the United States Navy in the ongoing effort to defeat the Empire of Japan. Accordingly, the United States accepted shortcomings in the armor of their Iowa-class battleships in favor of additional speed, which could steam at a comparable speed with the Essex-class and provide the carriers with the maximum amount of anti-aircraft protection. As a result, construction of the Montana-class battleship was canceled before their keels could be laid.

Construction
Kentucky's main battery would have consisted of nine 16 in/50 cal Mark 7 guns, which could hurl 2700 lb armor-piercing shells some 20 mi. Her secondary battery would have consisted of 20 5 in/38 cal guns arranged in 10 turrets, which could fire at targets up to 10 mi away. With the advent of air power and the mandate to gain and maintain air superiority came a need to protect the growing fleet of Allied aircraft carriers. To this end, Kentucky was to be fitted with an array of Oerlikon 20 mm and Bofors 40 mm anti-aircraft guns to defend allied carriers from enemy airstrikes.

Like Iowa-class ships from Missouri (hull number BB-63) onwards, the frontal bulkhead armor was increased from the original 11.3 in to 14.5 in in order to better protect against fire from frontal sectors. Because the Iowa-class torpedo defense was virtually the same as the preceding South Dakota-class battleships it was proposed that Illinoiss and Kentuckys hull be redesigned to provide a greater degree of torpedo protection for the battleship. Under the original construction schematics for the class each side of the ship was protected below the waterline by two tanks mounted outside the belt armor, and separated by a bulkhead. These tanks were initially planned to be empty, but in practice were filled with water or fuel oil. The armored belt tapered to a thickness of 4 in below the waterline. Behind the armored belt there was a void, and then another bulkhead. The outer hull was intended to detonate a torpedo, with the outer two compartments absorbing the shock and with any splinters or debris being stopped by the armored belt and the empty compartment behind it. In 1939 the Navy discovered that this system was less effective than the earlier torpedo defense system of the North Carolina-class due to the excessive rigidity of the lower belt armor causing leakage into adjacent compartments. Subsequently, the design of the torpedo defense system was modified for Illinois and Kentucky, such as eliminating knuckles along certain holding bulkheads; the intended construction format was estimated to provide up to 20% improvement to the torpedo defense of the battleship while simultaneously reducing flooding in the event of a torpedo strike.

Kentucky's construction was plagued by suspensions. Her keel was laid down at the Norfolk Navy Yard, Portsmouth, Virginia, on 7 March 1942. However, work on the ship was suspended in June that year, and Kentucky's bottom structure was launched to make room for LST construction on 10 June. Work on the ship resumed on 6 December 1944, when the keel structure was moved to Dry Dock 8. Work on the battleship proceeded at a slow pace, and her completion was projected for the third quarter of 1946. In December 1945 it was recommended that Kentucky be completed as an anti-aircraft battleship, and work on the ship was suspended in August 1946 while this was considered. Construction resumed again on 17 August 1948 without any decision having been made on her final design. Work on Kentucky continued until 20 January 1950, when it was decided to halt work on the ship. Following this, she was floated out of her drydock to clear a space for repairs to sister ship USS Missouri (BB-63), which had run aground en route from Hampton Roads.

Conversion proposals
While her construction was suspended, the Bureau of Ships considered an aircraft carrier conversion proposal for Kentucky and Illinois in the aftermath of the Battles of Coral Sea and Midway. As proposed, the converted Kentucky would have had an 864 ft long by 108 ft wide flight deck, with armament identical to the carriers of the Essex-class aircraft carrier: four twin 5-inch gun mounts and four more 5-inch guns in single mounts, along with six 40 mm quadruple mounts. The idea was abandoned after the Bureau of Ships decided that the converted ships would carry fewer aircraft than the Essex class, that more Essex-class carriers could be built in the same amount of time, and that the conversion project would be significantly more expensive than new Essexes. Instead, Kentucky and Illinois were to be completed as battleships, but their construction was given very low priority.

As early as 1946, missile conversion projects for Kentucky (project SCB 19) and the incomplete large cruiser USS Hawaii (CB-3) were discussed. In the early 1950s, the advances in guided missile technology led to a proposal to create a large warship armed with both guns and missiles. To this end, the incomplete Kentucky was chosen for conversion from an all gun ship into a "guided missile battleship". This proposal would have been relatively conservative, and would have involved the installation of a pair of twin arm launchers for the RIM-2 Terrier surface-to-air missile (SAM) on the aft deckhouse, with a pair of antennas for the associated AN/APG-55 pulse doppler interception radar installed forward of these, and the AN/SPS-2B air search radar on a short mast. Since the battleship was already approximately 73% complete (construction had been halted at the second deck), installation of the missile system and associated electronics would have involved only adding the necessary equipment without any need to rebuild the ship to accommodate the system. Some guided missile concepts included one or two launchers for eight SSM-N-9 Regulus II or SSM-N-2 Triton nuclear cruise missiles. The guided missile battleship project was authorized in 1954, and Kentucky was renumbered from BB-66 to BBG-1, with the conversion due to be complete in 1956. However, the project was soon cancelled, with the conversion ideas transferred to a smaller platform that led to the Boston-class cruiser guided missile cruiser. These partial conversions of two Baltimore-class cruiser heavy cruisers proved only partially successful in their new role, as the pace of change in cruise missile technology rendered their new weapons systems obsolete, while their remaining heavy guns proved in demand.

Another conversion project in early 1956 called for the installation of two Polaris nuclear ballistic missile launchers with a capacity for sixteen weapons. Also proposed were four RIM-8 Talos SAM launchers with eighty missiles per launcher and twelve RIM-24 Tartar SAM launchers with 504 missiles. A July 1956 estimate projected completing the ship by July 1961, but the cost of the conversion ultimately forced the Navy to abandon the project.

Fate
Kentucky was never completed, instead serving as a parts hulk while in the mothball fleet at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard from about 1950 to 1958. Hurricane Hazel hit the area on 15 October 1954, causing Kentucky to break free from her moorings and run aground in the Delaware River. In 1956, Kentucky's bow was removed and used in the repair of USS Wisconsin (BB-64), which had been damaged in a collision with the destroyer USS Eaton (DDE-510) on 6 May 1956. Congressman William Huston Natcher attempted to block the sale of the ship by objecting to the bill in August 1957. Nevertheless, Kentucky was struck from the Naval Vessel Register on 9 June 1958 and her incomplete hulk was sold for scrapping to Boston Metals Company of Baltimore, Maryland on 31 October for $1,176,666. She was towed to their shipyard in Baltimore in February 1959.

Kentucky's four 600 psi (4.1 MPa) boilers and turbine sets were used to power the first two Sacramento-class fast combat support ships, USS Sacramento (AOE-1) laid down in 1961 and USS Camden (AOE-2) in 1964. When the Navy switched to 1,200 psi (8.3 MPa) boilers, sailors who had served aboard Sacramento and Camden provided the experience to operate the older lower-pressure boilers aboard USS New Jersey (BB-62) during her combat tour in the Vietnam War and aboard all four of the Iowas when they were recalled and modernized in the 1980s as part of the 600-ship Navy plan. A pair of 150 lb mahogany doors that had been donated by the state of Kentucky while the ship was under construction were removed and used in an officer's club in New York City before eventually being returned to the Kentucky Historical Society in early January 1994.

title: USS Kentucky (BB-66)


text:
The Adverts

The Adverts were an English punk rock band formed in 1976 that existed until late 1979. They were one of the first punk bands to achieve mainstream success in the UK; their 1977 single "Gary Gilmore's Eyes" reached No. 18 on the UK Singles Chart. The Virgin Encyclopedia of 70s Music described bassist and founding member Gaye Advert as the "first female punk star".

History
The band was formed in 1976 by T. V. Smith (Tim Smith) and Gaye Advert (Gaye Black). Smith was from the town of Okehampton in mid-Devon, and Advert was from Bideford, a small coastal town in North Devon. After relocating to London, the two young punks recruited guitarist Howard Pickup (Boak) and drummer Laurie Driver (Muscat), and the Adverts were born.

The Roxy, London's first live punk venue, played a crucial role in the Adverts’ early career. They were one of the pioneering bands who played at the club during its first 100 days. The Adverts played at the club no less than nine times between January and April 1977. In January 1977, after their first gig supporting Generation X, the band impressed Michael Dempsey so much that he became their manager. Their second gig supporting Slaughter & the Dogs was recorded, and their anthem "Bored Teenagers" was included on the 1977 UK Top 30 album The Roxy London WC2. In February, shortly after the band's third gig supporting the Damned, they signed a recording contract with Stiff Records. In March, the band supported the Jam at the Roxy.

In April, the Adverts recorded the first of four sessions for John Peel at BBC Radio 1. Days later, on 29 April 1977, their debut single "One Chord Wonders" was released by Stiff. The single, "a headlong rush of energy", was recommended by both Melody Maker and Sounds. Understanding the band's limitations, the song's lyrics, composed by TV Smith, were likeably self-deprecating:

I wonder what we’ll play for you tonight Something heavy or something light Something to set your soul alight I wonder how we’ll answer when you say ‘We don’t like you – go away Come back when you’ve learnt to play

The Adverts were a prolific live act. Their first nationwide tour was with Stiff labelmates the Damned. The tour poster read: "The Damned can now play three chords, The Adverts can play one. Hear all four of them at..." Later they would support Iggy Pop on tour, as well as conducting their own headlining tours in Britain, Ireland and continental Europe.

On 19 August 1977, the band released the first of their two UK Top 40 hit singles on Anchor Records. Lyrically, "Gary Gilmore's Eyes" was a controversial song based on the wishes of Gary Gilmore, an American murderer, that his eyes be donated to medical science after his execution. Sounds described it as "the sickest and cleverest record to come out of the new wave". It was later included in Mojo magazine's list of the best punk rock singles of all time.

After the tabloid-fueled controversy surrounding the single, and an appearance on Top of the Pops, the Adverts became big news. Observers focused on frontman Smith and bassist Gaye Advert. Reviewers noted Smith's songwriting ability. He was said to have "captured the spirit of the times few contemporaries could match". Another reviewer described Smith as the band's "raging heart, spitting out the failsafe succession of songs which still delineate punk’s hopes, aspirations and, ultimately, regrets". In contrast, Gaye Advert's reputation was more fleeting. She was "one of punk’s first female icons". Her "photogenic" looks, "panda-eye make-up and omnipresent leather jacket defined the face of female punkdom until well into the next decade".

The band's follow-up single, "Safety in Numbers", was released on 28 October but did not chart. A fourth single, "No Time to Be 21", issued on CBS subsidiary Bright Records on 20 January 1978, scraped into the UK Top 40.

The band's debut album, Crossing the Red Sea was released by Bright on 17 February 1978. It has since become one of the most highly regarded albums of the punk era, with Dave Thompson calling it "a devastating debut, one of the finest albums not only of the punk era, but of the 1970s as a whole", Trouser Press calling it "the equal of the first Sex Pistols or Clash LP, a hasty statement that captures an exciting time", and several other writers including it in lists of all-time greatest albums.

Switching to RCA Records, the Adverts released three additional well-regarded singles, "Television's Over" on 10 November 1978, "My Place" on 1 June 1979 and "Cast of Thousands" on 19 October 1979, but were unable to maintain their momentum. Their career stalled after the release of their second album Cast of Thousands, issued by RCA on 12 October 1979. For that album, the lineup was augmented by drummer Rod Latter (replacing Driver) and keyboardist Tim Cross. Pickup and Latter were then replaced by Paul Martinez (guitar) and Rick Martinez (drums).

Shortly after the album's release, the band were threatened with lawsuits by former members Pickup and Latter, who objected to the band continuing to use the Adverts name without them. They split up shortly after the accidental death by electrocution of manager Dempsey. Their last gig was at Slough College on 27 October 1979. After the band ended, T.V. Smith continued with Cross as T.V. Smith's Explorers, then Cheap, and finally as a solo artist from the 1990s onward.

In regards to their legacy, critic and author Dave Thompson argued that "nobody would make music like the Adverts and nobody ever has. In terms of lyric, delivery, commitment and courage, they were, and they remain, the finest British group of the late 1970s".

Former members who have died include Cross (died 9 July 2012) and Pickup (died 11 July 1997).

Studio albums

 * Crossing the Red Sea with the Adverts (1978, Bright Records) UK No. 38
 * Cast of Thousands (1979, RCA Records)

Singles

 * "One Chord Wonders" / "Quickstep" (1977, Stiff Records)
 * "Gary Gilmore's Eyes" / "Bored Teenagers" (1977, Anchor Records) UK No. 18
 * "Safety in Numbers" / "We Who Wait" (1977, Anchor Records) UK No. 52
 * "No Time to Be 21" / "New Day Dawning" (1978, Bright Records) UK No. 34
 * "Television's Over" / "Back from the Dead" (1978, RCA Records)
 * "My Place" / "New Church" (1979, RCA Records)
 * "Cast of Thousands" / "I Will Walk You Home" (1979, RCA Records)

EPs

 * The Peel Sessions (1987, Strange Fruit Records)

Live albums

 * Live at the Roxy Club (1990, Receiver Records)
 * Live and Loud !! (1992, Link Records)

Compilation albums

 * The Wonders Don’t Care: The Complete Radio Recordings (1997, Burning Airlines)
 * The Punk Singles Collection (1997, Anagram Records)
 * The Best of The Adverts (1998, Anagram Records)
 * Anthology (2003, The Devils Own Jukebox)

Selected compilation appearances

 * "Gary Gilmore's Eyes" on
 * 20 of Another Kind (1979, Polydor Records) UK No. 45
 * Burning Ambitions: A History of Punk (1984, Cherry Red Records)
 * Indestructible the Indomitable Face of New Wave (1987, Receiver Records)
 * The Best of 20 of Another Kind (1989, Castle Music)
 * DIY: Punk, Power Pop, and New Wave 1976-1983 (1992, Rhino Records)
 * Lipstick Traces (1993, Rough Trade Records)
 * No Thanks! The '70s Punk Rebellion box set (2003, Rhino Records)
 * New Wave Heroes (2006, Sony BMG Music Entertainment)
 * 1977 - The Spirit of Punk (2007, Virgin Records)
 * The Edge of the Seventies (2008, Sony BMG Music Entertainment)

 * "One Chord Wonders" on
 * Indestructible the Indomitable Face of New Wave (1987, Receiver Records)
 * Lipstick Traces (1993, Rough Trade Records)
 * No Thanks! The '70s Punk Rebellion box set (2003, Rhino Records)
 * The Stiff Records Box Set box set (1992, Demon Records)
 * 1-2-3-4 Punk & New Wave 1976-1979 box set (1999, Universal Records)
 * Cash from Chaos box set (2001, EMI Records)
 * The Great British Punk Rock Explosion (1991, Link Records)

 * "Bored Teenagers" on
 * The Roxy London WC2 (1977, Harvest Records) UK No. 24
 * The Roxy London WC2 - A Live Punk Box Set box set (2005, Castle Music)
 * If the Kids Are United: The Punk Box Set box set (2008, Castle Music)

 * "No Time to be 21" on The Great British Punk Rock Explosion (1991, Link Records)

title: The Adverts


text:
Idolatry

Idolatry is the worship of a cult image or "idol" as though it were a deity. In Abrahamic religions (namely Judaism, Samaritanism, Christianity, the Baháʼí Faith, and Islam) idolatry connotes the worship of something or someone other than the Abrahamic God as if it were God. In these monotheistic religions, idolatry has been considered as the "worship of false gods" and is forbidden by texts such as the Ten Commandments. Other monotheistic religions may apply similar rules.

For instance, the phrase false god is a derogatory term used in Abrahamic religions to indicate cult images or deities of non-Abrahamic Pagan religions, as well as other competing entities or objects to which particular importance is attributed. Conversely, followers of animistic and polytheistic religions may regard the gods of various monotheistic religions as "false gods" because they do not believe that any real deity possesses the properties ascribed by monotheists to their sole deity. Atheists, who do not believe in any deities, do not usually use the term false god even though that would encompass all deities from the atheist viewpoint. Usage of this term is generally limited to theists, who choose to worship some deity or deities, but not others.

In many Indian religions, which include Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism, idols (murti) are considered as symbolism for the absolute but not the Absolute, or icons of spiritual ideas, or the embodiment of the divine. It is a means to focus one's religious pursuits and worship (bhakti). In the traditional religions of Ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, Africa, Asia, the Americas and elsewhere, the reverence of cult images or statues has been a common practice since antiquity, and cult images have carried different meanings and significance in the history of religion. Moreover, the material depiction of a deity or more deities has always played an eminent role in all cultures of the world.

The opposition to the use of any icon or image to represent ideas of reverence or worship is called aniconism. The destruction of images as icons of veneration is called iconoclasm, and this has long been accompanied with violence between religious groups that forbid idol worship and those who have accepted icons, images and statues for veneration. The definition of idolatry has been a contested topic within Abrahamic religions, with many Muslims and most Protestant Christians condemning the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox practice of venerating the Virgin Mary in many churches as a form of idolatry.

The history of religions has been marked with accusations and denials of idolatry. These accusations have considered statues and images to be devoid of symbolism. Alternatively, the topic of idolatry has been a source of disagreements between many religions, or within denominations of various religions, with the presumption that icons of one's own religious practices have meaningful symbolism, while another person's different religious practices do not.

Etymology and nomenclature

The term idolatry comes from the Ancient Greek word eidololatria (εἰδωλολατρία), which itself is a compound of two words: eidolon (εἴδωλον "image/idol") and latreia (λατρεία "worship", related to λάτρις). The word eidololatria thus means "worship of idols", which in Latin appears first as idololatria, then in Vulgar Latin as idolatria, therefrom it appears in 12th century Old French as idolatrie, which for the first time in mid 13th century English appears as "idolatry".

Although the Greek appears to be a loan translation of the Hebrew phrase avodat elilim, (עבודת אלילים) which is attested in rabbinic literature (e.g., bChul., 13b, Bar.), the Greek term itself is not found in the Septuagint, Philo, Josephus, or in other Hellenistic Jewish writings. The original term used in early rabbinic writings is oved avodah zarah (AAZ, worship in strange service, or "pagan"), while avodat kochavim umazalot (AKUM, worship of planets and constellations) is not found in its early manuscripts. The later Jews used the term, avodah zarah, meaning "foreign worship".

Idolatry has also been called idolism, iconolatry or idolodulia in historic literature.

Prehistoric and ancient civilizations
The earliest so-called Venus figurines have been dated to the prehistoric Upper Paleolithic era (35–40 ka onwards). Archaeological evidence from the islands of the Aegean Sea have yielded Neolithic era Cycladic figures from 4th and 3rd millennium BC, idols in namaste posture from Indus Valley civilization sites from the 3rd millennium BC, and much older petroglyphs around the world show humans began producing sophisticated images. However, because of a lack of historic texts describing these, it is unclear what, if any connection with religious beliefs, these figures had, or whether they had other meaning and uses, even as toys.

The earliest historic records confirming cult images are from the ancient Egyptian civilization, thereafter related to the Greek civilization. By the 2nd millennium BC two broad forms of cult image appear, in one images are zoomorphic (god in the image of animal or animal-human fusion) and in another anthropomorphic (god in the image of man). The former is more commonly found in ancient Egypt influenced beliefs, while the anthropomorphic images are more commonly found in Indo-European cultures. Symbols of nature, useful animals or feared animals may also be included by both. The stelae from 4,000 to 2,500 BC period discovered in France, Ireland through Ukraine, and in Central Asia through South Asia, suggest that the ancient anthropomorphic figures included zoomorphic motifs. In Nordic and Indian subcontinent, bovine (cow, ox, -*gwdus, -*g'ou) motifs or statues, for example, were common. In Ireland, iconic images included pigs.

The Ancient Egyptian religion was polytheistic, with large cult images that were either animals or included animal parts. Ancient Greek civilization preferred human forms, with idealized proportions, for divine representation. The Canaanites of West Asia incorporated a golden calf into their pantheon.

The ancient philosophy and practices of the Greeks, thereafter Romans, were imbued with polytheistic idolatry. They debate what is an image and if the use of image is appropriate. To Plato, images can be a remedy or poison to the human experience. To Aristotle, states Paul Kugler, an image is an appropriate mental intermediary that "bridges between the inner world of the mind and the outer world of material reality", the image is a vehicle between sensation and reason. Idols are useful psychological catalysts, they reflect sense data and pre-existing inner feelings. They are neither the origins nor the destinations of thought but the intermediary in the human inner journey. Fervid opposition to the idolatry of the Greeks and Romans was of Early Christianity and later Islam, as evidenced by the widespread desecration and defacement of ancient Greek and Roman sculptures that have survived into the modern era.

Judaism
Judaism prohibits any form of idolatry even if they are used to worship the one God of Judaism as occurred during the sin of the golden calf. According to the second word of the decalogue, Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. The worship of foreign gods in any form or through icons is not allowed.

Many Jewish scholars such as Rabbi Saadia Gaon, Rabbi Bahya ibn Paquda, and Rabbi Yehuda Halevi have elaborated on the issues of idolatry. One of the oft-cited discussions is the commentary of Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Maimonides) on idolatry. According to the Maimonidean interpretation, idolatry in itself is not a fundamental sin, but the grave sin is the denial of God's omnipresence that occurs with the belief that God can be corporeal. In the Jewish belief, the only image of God is man, one who lives and thinks; God has no visible shape, and it is absurd to make or worship images; instead man must worship the invisible God alone.

The commandments in the Hebrew Bible against idolatry forbade the practices and gods of ancient Akkad, Mesopotamia, and Egypt. The Hebrew Bible states that God has no shape or form, is utterly incomparable, is everywhere and cannot be represented in a physical form of an idol.

Biblical scholars have historically focused on the textual evidence to construct the history of idolatry in Judaism, a scholarship that post-modern scholars have increasingly begun deconstructing. This biblical polemics, states Naomi Janowitz, a professor of Religious Studies, has distorted the reality of Israelite religious practices and the historic use of images in Judaism. The direct material evidence is more reliable, such as that from the archaeological sites, and this suggests that the Jewish religious practices have been far more complex than what biblical polemics suggest. Judaism included images and cultic statues in the First Temple period, the Second Temple period, Late Antiquity (2nd to 8th century CE), and thereafter. Nonetheless, these sorts of evidence may be simply descriptive of Ancient Israelite practices in some—possibly deviant—circles, but cannot tell us anything about the mainstream religion of the Bible which proscribes idolatry.

The history of Jewish religious practice has included cult images and figurines made of ivory, terracotta, faience and seals. As more material evidence emerged, one proposal has been that Judaism oscillated between idolatry and iconoclasm. However, the dating of the objects and texts suggest that the two theologies and liturgical practices existed simultaneously. The claimed rejection of idolatry because of monotheism found in Jewish literature and therefrom in biblical Christian literature, states Janowitz, has been unreal abstraction and flawed construction of the actual history. The material evidence of images, statues and figurines taken together with the textual description of cherub and "wine standing for blood", for example, suggests that symbolism, making religious images, icon and index has been integral part of Judaism. Every religion has some objects that represent the divine and stand for something in the mind of the faithful, and Judaism too has had its holy objects and symbols such as the Menorah.

Christianity
Ideas on idolatry in Christianity are based on the first of Ten Commandments. "You shall have no other gods before me."

This is expressed in the Bible in Exodus 20:3, Matthew 4:10, Luke 4:8 and elsewhere, e.g.: "Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the Lord your God. Ye shall keep my sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary."

The Christian view of idolatry may generally be divided into two general categories: the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox view which accepts the use of religious images, and the views of many Protestant churches that considerably restrict their use. However, many Protestants have used the image of the cross as a symbol.

Catholicism
The Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church have traditionally defended the use of icons. The debate on what images signify and whether reverence with the help of icons in church is equivalent to idolatry has lasted for many centuries, particularly from the 7th century until the Reformation in the 16th century. These debates have supported the inclusion of icons of Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the Apostles, the iconography expressed in stained glass, regional saints and other symbols of Christian faith. It has also supported the practices such as the Catholic mass, burning of candles before pictures, Christmas decorations and celebrations, and festive or memorial processions with statues of religious significance to Christianity.

St. John of Damascus, in his "On the Divine Image", defended the use of icons and images, in direct response to the Byzantine iconoclasm that began widespread destruction of religious images in the 8th century, with support from emperor Leo III and continued by his successor Constantine V during a period of religious war with the invading Umayyads. John of Damascus wrote, "I venture to draw an image of the invisible God, not as invisible, but as having become visible for our sakes through flesh and blood", adding that images are expressions "for remembrance either of wonder, or an honor, or dishonor, or good, or evil" and that a book is also a written image in another form. He defended the religious use of images based on the Christian doctrine of Jesus as an incarnation.

St. John the Evangelist cited John 1:14, stating that "the Word became flesh" indicates that the invisible God became visible, that God's glory manifested in God's one and only Son as Jesus Christ, and therefore God chose to make the invisible into a visible form, the spiritual incarnated into the material form.

The early defense of images included exegesis of Old and New Testament. Evidence for the use of religious images is found in Early Christian art and documentary records. For example, the veneration of the tombs and statues of martyrs was common among early Christian communities. In 397 St. Augustine of Hippo, in his Confessions 6.2.2, tells the story of his mother making offerings for the tombs of martyrs and the oratories built in the memory of the saints.

The Catholic defense mentions textual evidence of external acts of honor towards icons, arguing that there are a difference between adoration and veneration and that the veneration shown to icons differs entirely from the adoration of God. Citing the Old Testament, these arguments present examples of forms of "veneration" such as in Genesis 33:3, with the argument that "adoration is one thing, and that which is offered in order to venerate something of great excellence is another". These arguments assert, "the honor given to the image is transferred to its prototype", and that venerating an image of Christ does not terminate at the image itself – the material of the image is not the object of worship – rather it goes beyond the image, to the prototype.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, 'the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype,' and 'whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it.' The honor paid to sacred images is a 'respectful veneration,' not the adoration due to God alone:"

"Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is."

It also points out the following: "Idolatry not only refers to false pagan worship. It remains a constant temptation to faith. Idolatry consists in divinizing what is not God. Man commits idolatry whenever he honors and reveres a creature in place of God, whether this be gods or demons (for example, satanism), power, pleasure, race, ancestors, the state, money, etc."

The manufacture of images of Jesus, the Virgin Mary and Christian saints, along with prayers directed to these has been widespread among the Catholic faithful.

Orthodox Church
The Eastern Orthodox Church has differentiated between latria and dulia. A latria is the worship due God, and latria to anyone or anything other than God is doctrinally forbidden by the Orthodox Church; however dulia has been defined as veneration of religious images, statues or icons which is not only allowed but obligatory. This distinction was discussed by Thomas Aquinas in section 3.25 of Summa Theologiae.

In Orthodox apologetic literature, the proper and improper use of images is extensively discussed. Exegetical Orthodox literature points to icons and the manufacture by Moses (under God's commandment) of the Bronze Snake in Numbers 21:9, which had the grace and power of God to heal those bitten by real snakes. Similarly, the Ark of the Covenant was cited as evidence of the ritual object above which Yahweh was present.

Veneration of icons through proskynesis was codified in 787 AD by the Seventh Ecumenical Council. This was triggered by the Byzantine Iconoclasm controversy that followed raging Christian-Muslim wars and a period of iconoclasm in West Asia. The defense of images and the role of the Syrian scholar John of Damascus was pivotal during this period. The Eastern Orthodox Church has ever since celebrated the use of icons and images. Eastern Rite Catholics also accepts icons in their Divine Liturgy.

Protestantism
The idolatry debate has been one of the defining differences between papal Catholicism and anti-papal Protestantism. The anti-papal writers have prominently questioned the worship practices and images supported by Catholics, with many Protestant scholars listing it as the "one religious error larger than all others". The sub-list of erring practices have included among other things the veneration of Virgin Mary, the Catholic mass, the invocation of saints, and the reverence expected for and expressed to pope himself. The charges of supposed idolatry against the Roman Catholics were leveled by a diverse group of Protestants, from Anglicans to Calvinists in Geneva.

Protestants did not abandon all icons and symbols of Christianity. They typically avoid the use of images, except the cross, in any context suggestive of veneration. The cross remained their central icon. Technically both major branches of Christianity have had their icons, states Carlos Eire, a professor of religious studies and history, but its meaning has been different to each and "one man's devotion was another man's idolatry". This was particularly true not only in the intra-Christian debate, states Eire, but also when soldiers of Catholic kings replaced "horrible Aztec idols" in the American colonies with "beautiful crosses and images of Mary and the saints".

Protestants often accuse Catholics of idolatry, iconolatry, and even paganism; in the Protestant Reformation such language was common to all Protestants. In some cases, such as the Puritan groups denounced all forms of religious objects, regardless of whether it was a statue or sculpture, or image, including the Christian cross. The Waldensians were accused of idolatry by inquisitors.

The body of Christ on the cross is an ancient symbol used within the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, and Lutheran Churches, in contrast with some Protestant groups, which use only a simple cross. In Judaism, the reverence to the icon of Christ in the form of cross has been seen as idolatry. However, some Jewish scholars disagree and consider Christianity to be based on Jewish belief and not truly idolatrous.

Islam
In Islamic sources, the concept of shirk (triliteral root: sh-r-k) can refer to "idolatry", though it is most widely used to denote "association of partners with God". The concept of Kufr (k-f-r) can also include idolatry (among other forms of disbelief). The one who practices shirk is called mushrik (plural mushrikun) in the Islamic scriptures. The Quran forbids idolatry. Over 500 mentions of kufr and shirk are found in the Quran, and both concepts are strongly forbidden.

The Islamic concept of idolatry extends beyond polytheism, and includes some Christians and Jews as muširkūn (idolaters) and kafirun (infidels). For example:

"Those who say, “Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary,” have certainly fallen into disbelief. The Messiah ˹himself˺ said, “O Children of Israel! Worship Allah—my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever associates others with Allah ˹in worship˺ will surely be forbidden Paradise by Allah. Their home will be the Fire. And the wrongdoers will have no helpers."

Shia classical theology differs in the concept of Shirk. According to Twelver theologians, the attributes and names of God have no independent and hypostatic existence apart from the being and essence of God. Any suggestion of these attributes and names being conceived of as separate is thought to entail polytheism. It would be even incorrect to say God knows by his knowledge which is in his essence but God knows by his knowledge which is his essence. Also God has no physical form and he is insensible. The border between theoretical Tawhid and Shirk is to know that every reality and being in its essence, attributes and action are from him (from Him-ness), it is Tawhid. Every supernatural action of the prophets is by God's permission as Quran points to it. The border between the Tawhid and Shirk in practice is to assume something as an end in itself, independent from God, not as a road to God (to Him-ness). Ismailis go deeper into the definition of Shirk, declaring they don't recognize any sort of ground of being by the esoteric potential to have intuitive knowledge of the human being. Hence, most Shias have no problem with religious symbols and artworks, and with reverence for Walis, Rasūls and Imams.

Islam strongly prohibits all form of idolatry, which is part of the sin of shirk (شرك); širk comes from the Arabic root Š-R-K (ش ر ك), with the general meaning of "to share". In the context of the Qur'an, the particular sense of "sharing as an equal partner" is usually understood as "attributing a partner to Allah". Shirk is often translated as idolatry and polytheism. In the Qur'an, shirk and the related word (plural Stem IV active participle) mušrikūn (مشركون) "those who commit shirk" refers to the enemies of Islam (as in verse 9.1–15).

Within Islam, shirk is sin that can only be forgiven if the person who commits it asks God for forgiveness; if the person who committed it dies without repenting God may forgive any sin except for committing shirk. In practice, especially among strict conservative interpretations of Islam, the term has been greatly extended and means deification of anyone or anything other than the singular God. In Salafi-Wahhabi interpretation, it may be used very widely to describe behaviour that does not literally constitute worship, including use of images of sentient beings, building a structure over a grave, associating partners with God, giving his characteristics to others beside him, or not believing in his characteristics. 19th century Wahhabis regarded idolatry punishable with the death penalty, a practice that was "hitherto unknown" in Islam. However, Classical Orthodox Sunni thought used to be rich in Relics and Saint veneration, as well as pilgrimage to their shrines. Ibn Taymiyya, a medieval theologian that influenced modern days Salafists, was put in prison for his negation of veneration of relics and Saints, as well as pilgrimage to Shrines, which was considered unorthodox by his contemporary theologians.

According to Islamic tradition, over the millennia after Ishmael's death, his progeny and the local tribes who settled around the oasis of Zam-Zam gradually turned to polytheism and idolatry. Several idols were placed within the Kaaba representing deities of different aspects of nature and different tribes. Several heretical rituals were adopted in the Pilgrimage (Hajj) including doing naked circumambulation.

In her book, Islam: A Short History, Karen Armstrong asserts that the Kaaba was officially dedicated to Hubal, a Nabatean deity, and contained 360 idols that probably represented the days of the year. But by Muhammad's day, it seems that the Kaaba was venerated as the shrine of Allah, the High God. Allah was never represented by an idol. Once a year, tribes from all around the Arabian peninsula, whether Christian or pagan, would converge on Mecca to perform the Hajj, marking the widespread conviction that Allah was the same deity worshipped by monotheists. Guillaume in his translation of Ibn Ishaq, an early biographer of Muhammad, says the Ka'aba might have been itself addressed using a feminine grammatical form by the Quraysh. Circumambulation was often performed naked by men and almost naked by women. It is disputed whether al-Lat and Hubal were the same deity or different. Per a hypothesis by Uri Rubin and Christian Robin, Hubal was only venerated by Quraysh and the Kaaba was first dedicated to al-Lat, a supreme god of individuals belonging to different tribes, while the pantheon of the gods of Quraysh was installed in Kaaba after they conquered Mecca a century before Muhammad's time.

Provenance
The first attested date in peer-reviewed academic literature for the worship of murti (Sanskrit) or vigraha (Sanskrit) in India is not clear, as different sources have different opinions and interpretations. However, the Indus Valley Civilization (circa 2500 - 1500 BCE) may have produced some of the earliest murtis or vigrahas in India, as evidenced by various terracotta and bronze figurines found in the archaeological sites. Some of these figurines have been interpreted as representations of deities, such as the so-called Pashupati seal, which depicts a horned figure surrounded by animals and possibly identified with Shiva. Another example is the bronze statuette of a Dancing Girl, which some scholars have associated with Parvati or Shakti. However, these interpretations are not universally accepted, and some scholars have argued that the Indus Valley Civilization did not practice murti or vigraha worship, but rather used symbols and signs to express their religious beliefs.

The Vedic period (circa 1500 - 500 BCE) is traditionally considered as the origin of Hinduism proper, but it also did not emphasize murti or vigraha worship, as the Vedic religion was mainly focused on fire sacrifices and hymns to various gods and goddesses. However, some Vedic texts do mention the use of clay or wooden images for ritual purposes, such as the Shatapatha Brahmana (circa 8th - 6th century BCE), which describes how a clay image of Prajapati (the creator god) was made and consecrated for the agnicayana ritual. Another example, is the Aitareya Brahmana (circa 8th - 6th century BCE), which mentions how a wooden image of Varuna (the god of water and law) was installed in a temple and worshipped by the king. These examples suggest that murti or vigraha worship was not unknown in the Vedic period, but it was not widespread nor dominant.

The post-Vedic period (circa 500 BCE - 300 CE) witnessed the emergence and development of various religious movements and schools, such as Buddhism, Jainism, Shaivism, Vaishnavism, Shaktism and others. This period also saw the rise of murti or vigraha worship as a prominent feature of Hinduism, as evidenced by various literary and archaeological sources. For instance, the Ramayana (circa 5th - 4th century BCE) and the Mahabharata (circa 4th - 3rd century BCE) contain several references to murti or vigraha worship, such as Rama worshipping a Shiva linga at Rameshwaram, or Krishna installing an image of Vishnu at Dwarka. Another example, is the Buddhist text Lalitavistara Sutra (circa 3rd century BCE - 3rd century CE), which mentions how Buddha's mother Maya dreamt of a white elephant entering her womb, and how King Suddhodana made an image of this elephant and worshipped it. Moreover, many stone and metal sculptures of various deities and saints have been found from this period onwards, such as the famous Pancha Rathas at Mahabalipuram (circa 7th century CE), which depict five chariots dedicated to different gods and goddesses.

General
The oldest forms of the ancient religions of India apparently made no use of cult images. While the Vedic literature leading up to Hinduism is extensive, in the form of Samhitas, Brahmanas, Aranyakas and Upanishads, and has been dated to have been composed over a period of centuries (1200 BC to 200 BC), historical Vedic religion appears not to have used cult images up to around 500 BC at least. The early Buddhist and Jain (pre-200 BC) traditions suggest no evidence of idolatry. The Vedic literature mentions many gods and goddesses, as well as the use of Homa (votive ritual using fire), but it does not mention images or their worship. The ancient Buddhist, Hindu and Jaina texts discuss the nature of existence, whether there is or is not a creator deity such as in the Nasadiya Sukta of the Rigveda, they describe meditation, they recommend the pursuit of simple monastic life and self-knowledge, they debate the nature of absolute reality as Brahman or Śūnyatā, yet the ancient Indian texts mention no use of images. Indologists such as the Max Muller, Jan Gonda, Pandurang Vaman Kane, Ramchandra Narayan Dandekar, Horace Hayman Wilson, Stephanie Jamison and other scholars state that "there is no evidence for icons or images representing god(s)" in the ancient religions of India. Use of cult images developed among the Indian religions later, perhaps first in Buddhism, where large images of the Buddha appear by the 1st century AD.

According to John Grimes, a professor of Indian philosophy, Indian thought denied even dogmatic idolatry of its scriptures. Everything has been left to challenge, arguments and enquiry, with the medieval Indian scholar Vācaspati Miśra stating that not all scripture is authoritative, only scripture which "reveals the identity of the individual self and the supreme self as the non-dual Absolute".

Buddhism
According to Eric Reinders, icons and idolatry have been an integral part of Buddhism throughout its later history. Buddhists, from Korea to Vietnam, Thailand to Tibet, Central Asia to South Asia, have long produced temples and idols, altars and malas, relics to amulets, images to ritual implements. The images or relics of Buddha are found in all Buddhist traditions, but they also feature gods and goddesses such as those in Tibetan Buddhism.

Bhakti (called Bhatti in Pali) has been a common practice in Theravada Buddhism, where offerings and group prayers are made to Cetiya and particularly images of Buddha. Karel Werner notes that Bhakti has been a significant practice in Theravada Buddhism, and states, "there can be no doubt that deep devotion or bhakti / bhatti does exist in Buddhism and that it had its beginnings in the earliest days".

According to Peter Harvey – a professor of Buddhist Studies, Buddha idols and idolatry spread into northwest Indian subcontinent (now Pakistan and Afghanistan) and into Central Asia with Buddhist Silk Road merchants. The Hindu rulers of different Indian dynasties patronized both Buddhism and Hinduism from 4th to 9th century, building Buddhist icons and cave temples such as the Ajanta Caves and Ellora Caves which featured Buddha idols. From the 10th century, states Harvey, the raids into northwestern parts of South Asia by Muslim Turks destroyed Buddhist idols, given their religious dislike for idolatry. The iconoclasm was so linked to Buddhism, that the Islamic texts of this era in India called all idols as Budd. The desecration of idols in cave temples continued through the 17th century, states Geri Malandra, from the offense of "the graphic, anthropomorphic imagery of Hindu and Buddhist shrines".

In East Asia and Southeast Asia, worship in Buddhist temples with the aid of icons and sacred objects has been historic. In Japanese Buddhism, for example, Butsugu (sacred objects) have been integral to the worship of the Buddha (kuyo), and such idolatry considered a part of the process of realizing one's Buddha nature. This process is more than meditation, it has traditionally included devotional rituals (butsudo) aided by the Buddhist clergy. These practices are also found in Korea and China.

Hinduism
In Hinduism, an icon, image or statue is called murti or pratima. Major Hindu traditions such as Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktism, and Smartism favor the use of a murti (idol). These traditions suggest that it is easier to dedicate time and focus on spirituality through anthropomorphic or non-anthropomorphic icons. The Bhagavad Gita – a Hindu scripture, in verse 12.5, states that only a few have the time and mind to ponder and fix on the unmanifested Absolute (abstract formless Brahman), and it is much easier to focus on qualities, virtues, aspects of a manifested representation of god, through one's senses, emotions and heart, because the way human beings naturally are.

A murti in Hinduism, states Jeaneane Fowler – a professor of Religious Studies specializing on Indian Religions, is itself not god, it is an "image of god" and thus a symbol and representation. A murti is a form and manifestation, states Fowler, of the formless Absolute. Thus a literal translation of murti as idol is incorrect, when idol is understood as superstitious end in itself. Just like the photograph of a person is not the real person, a murti is an image in Hinduism but not the real thing, but in both cases the image reminds of something of emotional and real value to the viewer. When a person worships a murti, it is assumed to be a manifestation of the essence or spirit of the deity, the worshipper's spiritual ideas and needs are meditated through it, yet the idea of ultimate reality – called Brahman in Hinduism – is not confined in it.

Devotional (bhakti movement) practices centered on cultivating a deep and personal bond of love with God, often expressed and facilitated with one or more murti, and includes individual or community hymns, japa or singing (bhajan, kirtana, or arati). Acts of devotion, in major temples particularly, are structured on treating the murti as the manifestation of a revered guest, and the daily routine can include awakening the murti in the morning and making sure that it "is washed, dressed, and garlanded."

In Vaishnavism, the building of a temple for the murti is considered an act of devotion, but non-murti symbolism is also common wherein the aromatic tulasi plant or shaligrama is an aniconic reminder of the spiritualism in Vishnu. In the Shaivism tradition of Hinduism, Shiva may be represented as a masculine idol, or half-man half woman Ardhanarishvara form, in an anicon linga-yoni form. The worship rituals associated with the murti, correspond to ancient cultural practices for a beloved guest, and the murti is welcomed, taken care of, and then requested to retire.

Christopher John Fuller states that an image in Hinduism cannot be equated with a deity and the object of worship is the divine whose power is inside the image, and the image is not the object of worship itself, Hindus believe everything is worthy of worship as it contains divine energy. The idols are neither random nor intended as superstitious objects, rather they are designed with embedded symbolism and iconographic rules which sets the style, proportions, the colors, the nature of items the images carry, their mudra and the legends associated with the deity. The Vāstusūtra Upaniṣad states that the aim of the murti art is to inspire a devotee towards contemplating the Ultimate Supreme Principle (Brahman). This text adds (abridged): "From the contemplation of images grows delight, from delight faith, from faith steadfast devotion, through such devotion arises that higher understanding (parāvidyā) that is the royal road to moksha. Without the guidance of images, the mind of the devotee may go ashtray and form wrong imaginations. Images dispel false imaginations. (... ) It is in the mind of Rishis (sages), who see and have the power of discerning the essence of all created things of manifested forms. They see their different characters, the divine and the demoniac, the creative and the destructive forces, in their eternal interplay. It is this vision of Rishis, of gigantic drama of cosmic powers in eternal conflict, which the Sthapakas (Silpins, murti and temple artists) drew the subject-matter for their work."

Some Hindu movements founded during the colonial era, such as the Arya Samaj and Satya Mahima Dharma reject idolatry.

Jainism
Devotional idolatry has been a prevalent ancient practice in various Jaina sects, wherein learned Tirthankara (Jina) and human gurus have been venerated with offerings, songs and Āratī prayers. Like other major Indian religions, Jainism has premised its spiritual practices on the belief that "all knowledge is inevitably mediated by images" and human beings discover, learn and know what is to be known through "names, images and representations". Thus, idolatry has been a part of the major sects of Jainism such as Digambara and Shvetambara. The earliest archaeological evidence of the idols and images in Jainism is from Mathura, and has been dated to be from the first half of the 1st millennium AD.

The creation of idols, their consecration, the inclusion of Jaina layperson in idols and temples of Jainism by the Jaina monks has been a historic practice. However, during the iconoclastic era of Islamic rule, between the 15th and 17th century, a Lonka sect of Jainism emerged that continued pursuing their traditional spirituality but without the Jaina arts, images and idols.

Sikhism
Sikhism is a monotheistic Indian religion, and Sikh temples are devoid of idols and icons for God. Yet, Sikhism strongly encourages devotion to God. Some scholars call Sikhism a Bhakti sect of Indian traditions.

In Sikhism, "Nirguni Bhakti" is emphasised – devotion to a divine without Gunas (qualities or form), but its scripture also accepts representations of God with formless (nirguni) and with form (saguni), as stated in Adi Granth 287. Sikhism condemns worshipping images or statues as if it were God, but have historically challenged the iconoclastic policies and Hindu temple destruction activities of Islamic rulers in India. Sikhs house their scripture and revere the Guru Granth Sahib as the final Guru of Sikhism. It is installed in Sikh Gurdwara (temple), many Sikhs bow or prostrate before it on entering the gurdwara. Guru Granth Sahib is ritually installed every morning, and put to bed at night in many Gurdwaras. In the Dasam Bani, Guru Gobind Singh wrote "I am idol-breaker" on line 95 of his Zafarnamah.

Japan
In Japan, there are images of some kami (i.e. deities) such as those of Fūjin and Raijin at the Buddhist temple Sanjūsangen-dō.

North Korean Juche
Kim Il Sung instituted worship of himself amongst the citizens of North Korea, and this act is considered the only instance of a modern country deifying its ruler. As many citizens frequently bow before statues and portraits of him, scholars have considered the Juche state religion to be a form of idolatry.

Africa
Africa has numerous ethnic groups, and their diverse religious idea have been grouped as African Traditional Religions, sometimes abbreviated to ATR. These religions typically believe in a Supreme Being which goes by different regional names, as well as spirit world often linked to ancestors, and mystical magical powers through divination. Idols and their worship have been associated with all three components in the African Traditional Religions.

According to J.O. Awolalu, proselytizing Christians and Muslims have mislabelled idol to mean false god, when in the reality of most traditions of Africa, the object may be a piece of wood or iron or stone, yet it is "symbolic, an emblem and implies the spiritual idea which is worshipped". The material objects may decay or get destroyed, the emblem may crumble or substituted, but the spiritual idea that it represents to the heart and mind of an African traditionalist remains unchanged. Sylvester Johnson – a professor of African American and Religious Studies, concurs with Awolalu, and states that the colonial era missionaries who arrived in Africa, neither understood the regional languages nor the African theology, and interpreted the images and ritualism as "epitome of idolatry", projecting the iconoclastic controversies in Europe they grew up with, onto Africa.

First with the arrival of Islam in Africa, then during the Christian colonial efforts, the religiously justified wars, the colonial portrayal of idolatry as proof of savagery, the destruction of idols and the seizure of idolaters as slaves marked a long period of religious intolerance, which supported religious violence and demeaning caricature of the African Traditional Religionists. The violence against idolaters and idolatry of Traditional Religion practicers of Africa started in the medieval era and continued into the modern era. The charge of idolatry by proselytizers, state Michael Wayne Cole and Rebecca Zorach, served to demonize and dehumanize local African populations, and justify their enslavement and abuse locally or far off plantations, settlements or for forced domestic labor.

Americas
Statues, images and temples have been a part of the Traditional Religions of the indigenous people of the Americas. The Incan, Mayan and Aztec civilizations developed sophisticated religious practices that incorporated idols and religious arts. The Inca culture, for example, has believed in Viracocha (also called Pachacutec) as the creator deity and nature deities such as Inti (sun deity), and Mama Cocha the goddess of the sea, lakes, rivers and waters.

In Mayan culture, Kukulkan has been the supreme creator deity, also revered as the god of reincarnation, water, fertility and wind. The Mayan people built step pyramid temples to honor Kukulkan, aligning them to the Sun's position on the spring equinox. Other deities found at Mayan archaeological sites include Xib Chac – the benevolent male rain deity, and Ixchel – the benevolent female earth, weaving and pregnancy goddess. A deity with aspects similar to Kulkulkan in the Aztec culture has been called Quetzalcoatl.

Missionaries came to the Americas with the start of Spanish colonial era, and the Catholic Church did not tolerate any form of native idolatry, preferring that the icons and images of Jesus and Mary replace the native idols. Aztec, for example, had a written history which included those about their Traditional Religion, but the Spanish colonialists destroyed this written history in their zeal to end what they considered as idolatry, and to convert the Aztecs to Catholicism. The Aztec Indians, however, preserved their religion and religious practices by burying their idols under the crosses, and then continuing their idol worship rituals and practices, aided by the syncretic composite of atrial crosses and their idols as before.

During and after the imposition of Catholic Christianity during Spanish colonialism, the Incan people retained their original beliefs in deities through syncretism, where they overlay the Christian God and teachings over their original beliefs and practices. The male deity Inti became accepted as the Christian God, but the Andean rituals centered around idolatry of Incan deities have been retained and continued thereafter into the modern era by the Incan people.

Polynesia
The Polynesian people have had a range of polytheistic theologies found across the Pacific Ocean. The Polynesian people produced idols from wood, and congregated around these idols for worship.

The Christian missionaries, particularly from the London Missionary Society such as John Williams, and others such as the Methodist Missionary Society, characterized these as idolatry, in the sense of islanders worshipping false gods. They sent back reports which primarily focussed on "overthrow of pagan idolatry" as evidence of their Christian sects triumph, with fewer mentions of actual converts and baptism.

Religious tolerance and intolerance
The term false god is often used throughout the Abrahamic scriptures (Torah, Tanakh, Bible, and Quran) to compare Yahweh (interpreted by Jews, Samaritans, and Christians) or Elohim/Allah (interpreted by Muslims) as the only true God. Nevertheless, the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament itself recognizes and reports that originally the Israelites were not monotheists but actively engaged in idolatry and worshipped many foreign, non-Jewish Gods besides Yahweh and/or instead of him, such as Baal, Astarte, Asherah, Chemosh, Dagon, Moloch, Tammuz, and more, and continued to do so until their return from the Babylonian exile (see Ancient Hebrew religion). Judaism, the oldest Abrahamic religion, eventually shifted into a strict, exclusive monotheism, based on the sole veneration of Yahweh, the predecessor to the Abrahamic conception of God.

The vast majority of religions in history have been and/or are still polytheistic, worshipping many diverse deities. Moreover, the material depiction of a deity or more deities has always played an eminent role in all cultures of the world. The claim to worship the "one and only true God" came to most of the world with the arrival of Abrahamic religions and is the distinguishing characteristic of their monotheistic worldview, whereas virtually all the other religions in the world have been and/or are still animistic and polytheistic. Some Neopagan religions such as Wicca utilize statues of deities within their worship experience.

The accusations and presumption that all idols and images are devoid of symbolism, or that icons of one's own religion are "true, healthy, uplifting, beautiful symbolism, mark of devotion, divine", while of other person's religion are "false, an illness, superstitious, grotesque madness, evil addiction, satanic, and cause of all incivility" is more a matter of subjective personal interpretation, rather than objective impersonal truth. Regina Schwartz and some other contemporary scholars state allegations that idols only represent false gods, followed by iconoclastic destruction is only little more than religious intolerance. The Scottish Enlightenment philosopher David Hume wrote in his essay Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779) that the worship of different gods and cult images in Pagan religions is premised on religious pluralism, tolerance, and acceptance of diverse representations of the divine, whereas Abrahamic monotheistic religions are intolerant, have attempted to destroy freedom of expression, and have violently forced others to accept and worship their conception of God.

title: Idolatry


text:
Talk:Idolatry

African religions.
Could someone add some information about African masks? From what I understand, they are idols.

Idolatry is distorted
Idolatry isn't worshipping a statue. They believed their gods to be in the heavens. They just had statues of their deites so that they have something to bow to.

Muslims also place their heads on a piece of clay when they want to worship god. Aminabzz (talk) 17:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Cherrypicking with double standards for political propaganda.
What's the point of citing North Korea when in the US there is institutionalized idolatry for demi-gods like "founding fathers", idolatry for politicians from the Democratic-Republican biparty, and for celebrities and billionaires?

Besides, communism is from the western Eurasia("europe"), not from the Sinosphere. Fakecontinent (talk) 08:22, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Idolatry