'No Jewish Monotheism'.
"Holy long-lived Semitic polytheism, Batman!"
I've raised some thoughts pertinent to this matter in conversation with yourself and
@CastilloVerde recently. Below, I'll repeat my earlier comments, slightly edited here and there to eliminate tangents that are irrelevant to this matter, and to clarify some points that make little sense without the context in which I was originally writing.
Suffice to say, my general thesis was (and remains) that there existed such a thing as a Canaanite High Culture (in the macro-historical sense), which first coalesced from is pre-cultural/pre-formative background around 1500 BC. I view the Jewish people as an off-shoot of this culture, which separated itself religiously-- and in so doing became a separate cultural entity unto itself. The process of religious separation was far more gradual and took place far later than the traditional Jewish histories and scriptures (all codified in later ages!) would have you believe.
The United Monarchy of Israel was established under Saul, c. 1037 BC, and thereafter achieved its greatest extent under David. As we know, this United Monarchy split into two states (Samaria in the North and Judah in the South) c. 930 BC. But that's not what's really important here. The important thing is that these Israelites have certainly made a mark on history by introducing a tradition of monotheism that is (a-historically) called "Abrahamic". The truth is that the Israelite evolution towards monotheism was very slow and gradual. Indeed, the two Israelite states seem to have had two
different "main gods". In Samaria, they considered El their national deity, and in Judah, it was the more obscure Yahweh. In both cases, these gods were considered the "first among the gods", but certainly not to the
exclusion of other gods. The period following 930 BC was thus one of emerging
henotheism among the Israelites.
Soon enough, however, a religious syncretism arose, and Yahweh and El were conflated, becoming viewed (in the public consciousness) as always having been one and the same. During that same period, "Yahwism" emerged-- that being an a-historical term for the religious insistence on Yahweh as by far the most important deity, to the detriment of the older Canaanite gods. It is in that context that the Israelites became true henotheists (and thereby began to separate, culturally, from their neighbours, e.g. the Phoenicians and other Canaanite nations).
In this same period, Tyre (the mother-city of future Carthage) became the most prominent city of Phoenicia, and ultimately Priest-King Ithobaal I (r. 879 BC - 847 BC) united Phoenicia under his authority. Now, Ithobaal had a daughter, named Jezebel. If that name sparks negative associations, that's mostly because of the religious developments that I just described. Because Jezebel was married to King Ahab of the Samarian Kingdom, who ruled c. 871 BC - c. 852 BC. A period of time that falls entirely within the life of the prophet Elijah. Who was one of the major players in the push for "Yahwism". And Jezebel, being from Phoenicia, upheld the faith of her father, i.e. the traditional Canaanite religion. (Among other things, she brought priests and priestesses of Asherah with her to the Samarian court.) So she became known in Jewish scripture as an evil vixen. This is all indicative of building religious tension in the Canaanite world.
In the following century, Yahwism took on more extreme forms, moving towards a tendency of
exclusively worshipping Yahweh. Involved in this process was the prophet Hosea, who lived in the 8th century BC. At this point, the Israelite religion fully separated from the Canaanite religion. This was quite possibly helped along by the fact that during the period we're discussing, the Neo-Assyrian Empire invaded. During the Neo-Assyrian period, the Israelites held greater autonomy than the Phoenicians. The Israelites were purely clients of the empire, and largely independent. The Phoenicians, conversely, were vassalised in a more formal manner. In this turbulent period, the already mounting division between the Israelites and the Phoenicians appears to have become very...
final.
In effect, the Israelites culturally seceded from the Canaanite High Culture, and became a wholly separate culture. And then they were conquered by the Babylonians, who ill-treated them. But this seems to have hardened the Israelite resolve, and solidified their evolution towards uncompromising monotheism. However, we know for a fact that up to the start of the Babylonian period, the Israelites were still henotheists (apparently the majority view), and that more traditional polytheism still existed among the populace. Indeed, it is for this reason that Jeremiah and Ezekiel (following the example of Hosea) preached against this practice, and in favour of what we now term "Yahwism". Some argue that Jewish monotheism only became
truly codified as the unquestionable position by the time of the Maccabees, although it should be noted that this is a pretty radical take on the chronology of events.
This tends to imply that the Akhaimenid POD that
@Buba proposed is
probably too far on the late side. A POD that wholly averts the Babylonian captivity might do the trick, and result in the preservation of Yahweh-centric henotheism among the Israelites. (Conceivably alongside Asherah as His queen in the Northern tradition of Samaria.) I'm inclined to think, however, that this would
also turn out to be "just" a delay (albeit a substantial one). The pre-existing trend was towards the worship of Yahweh, even more to the exclusion of all others. I don't see that trend just reversing. (To clarify: it
can be done, I'm certain, but would require a lot of outside pressure, which in turn demands some sort of earlier POD beyond the matter at hand.)
As such, I'd argue that you're much better off with an earlier POD, especially if you aim to avoid Jewish monotheism altogether (meaning in both Samaria
and Judah). I think that a different Neo-Assyrian conquest would do the trick. Specifically, I propose a scenario in which the Neo-Assyrians treat the whole Levant as one region, which is somewhat less directly vassalised than Phoenicia was in OTL, and somewhat more directly suborned than the Israelite kingdoms were. The key point is that they administratively organise it as
one cohesive unit. That would presumably prevent much of OTL's religious divergence, and offers a plausible alternative future for the Canaanites. One that sees henotheism decline instead flourish. Ideally... have Elijah strangled early on. Have Ithobaal installed as a vassal king who governs over all Canaanites on behalf of the Neo-Assyrians (becoming the regional overlord to the kings of Samaria and Judah as well), and see Jezebel remembered as a good queen in Samaria, whose religious preferences won out in the end.
