***HOW TO BEHAVE ON CYBALIST***

Moderatorial Recommendations and Rules of Proper Conduct

The purpose of Cybalist is to popularise Indo-European studies and to provide a
discussion forum for people who are interested in the various linguistic,
cultural and historical aspects of IE scholarship.

Cybalist is not moderated in the strict technical sense: the moderators do not
have to see all the messages before they are posted to the members. However, as
an elementary precaution against Internet hooligans and spammers, new members
remain moderated until they start posting regularly. A 'moderated' message has
to wait for approval, which may take from a few minutes to a few hours. It may
also be rejected by a moderator if it violates our rules of proper conduct (see
below).

Our primary duty as list managers is to maintain a decent level of discussion
and to make sure that out debates are conducted in a civil manner. We reserve
the right to judge whether your postings are conducive to that purpose or not.
If we find that a particular poster's behaviour is wilfully counterproductive,
we shall react by issuing a warning off-list. If the warning has no effect, we
can restrict the poster's privileges by changing his or her status to
'moderated' for about two weeks. Recidivists may expect a longer probation
period. Since the public discussion of administrative and disciplinary problems
on Cybalist would cause undesirable distraction, any complaints, concerns or
suggestions regarding such matters should be sent to us off-list. Should anyone
prefer a public discussion of them, we have established a separate forum called
Cybalist_admin,

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist_admin/

where you can speak your mind freely before all the moderators and before
anybody alse who wishes to join that list.

----------

DON'T DO IT

Here is a list of things that are explicitly forbidden on Cybalist. Infraction
will result in disciplinary action on the moderators' part, from off-list
notification to immediate removal from Cybalist, depending on the seriousness of
the offence. It is recommended that Cybalist members should save this list for
future reference.

(1) Spam

Anyone caught spamming (that is, posting off-topic commercial advertisements or
other unwanted junk) will be removed from Cybalist without warning.

(2) Off-topic postings and pseudoscience

Since this list is devoted to Indo-European studies, the discussion of
extraneous or too general topics (e.g. other language families, the origin of
language, long-range comparison etc.) will be discouraged. There are other lists
where subjects like general linguistic, Nostratic studies, anthropology, etc.,
may be discussed more profitably. We assume that there is a nearly unanimous
consensus among the list's managers and regular posters as to what should and
what should not be discussed. While the discussion of controversial issues is
welcome on the list, there are certain limits that we should like to be
observed. In particular, we will not encourage the pursuit of pseudoscience, by
which we understand, for example, amateurish decipherments of ancient scripts,
racist theories, speculation about the language spoken in Atlantis or in the
Garden of Eden, demonstrations that Latvian and Sumerian are practically the
same language, or anything else that sinks below the level at which serious
discussion is possible.

(3) Id�es fixes

Please do not treat Cybalist as your private forum. Posters who attempt to
publicise their private obsessions had better look for some other audience.
Anyone who tries to dominate the discussion by sending an immoderate number of
messages on a single topic may expect hear from the moderators off-list. In the
interest of the group we may shut down a tired thread. In such cases, if you
want to protest or ask the moderators to re-open the thread, please get in touch
with one of us off-list or write to Cybalist_admin.

(4) Flaming, trolling and ad hominem attacks

Please avoid deliberate rudeness, aggressive language, addressing the
personalities of other members rather than their arguments, and other forms of
disruptive behaviour. Posters who seem to enjoy irritating other participants or
provoking violent exchanges will be given time out at short notice: their
posting rights may be revoked for about two weeks. If you feel provoked or
insulted by somebody else, please don't hesitate to complain to the moderators
(privately or on Cybalist_admin) rather than repay insults in kind.

(5) Flogging dead horses and reviving banned threads

We also wish to discourage attempts to resurrect a closed thread if the poster
has no fresh ideas to contribute. The list archive is searchable, and before you
raise a topic you should at least try to check if it has not been discussed in
the past months. If we find a thread objectionable and announce its termination,
any posters who want to post their final thoughts on it may do so within 24
hours. After that time, any attempt to revive a banned thread within two weeks
of its termination may be punished with a brief (one or two weeks) restriction
of the offender's posting rights.

----------

TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

(1) Post plain-text messages rather than HTML. Fancy backgrounds, colours and
fonts are dispensable.

(2) To minimise readability problems, use 'West European' encoding (that is, the
'Latin-1' or ISO-8859-1 character set) whenever possible. If you find it
necessary to use something more sophisticated (e.g. UTF-8), do so sparingly and
don't forget to warn the list.

(3) Avoid sending attachments with your postings. Any pictures, Word or PDF
documents, etc. that you'd like to share with other list members should be
uploaded to the Files area instead. Please remember that copyrighted materials
have to be handled without breaking the legal restrictions on their fair use.
When in doubt, consult the moderators.

(4) When responding to others' postings, quote only those fragments of the
original message that you want to reply to. In particular, do not quote whole
threads. Make sure that the quotations are properly marked, so that one can
easily see who wrote what.

(5) If your reply drifts away from the original topic, change the subject line
(e.g. 'IE loanwords in Hurrian [was: The Indo-Iranian homeland]').

The above prohibitions and recommendations are tentative and may evolve further.
We will keep you informed if we decide to modify them in the future.

Piotr Gasiorowski

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:
> From: george knysh <gknysh@...>

> --- On Fri, 7/1/11, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:
>
> marg- is "death" in Persian/Farsi as in Marg-ba Amrika,or whoever
> they have the hate on. So it looks Iranian enough but battle cries
> can be borrowed
>
> ****GK: Any explanation for the "hyperization"  -h i.o. -g? OK in
> Iranic dialects or might this tell us something about that of
> the "Ticenses"?****
> Slavic does a pretty good job of alternating between /g/ and /h/
> e.g. Russian
> govno vs. Ukrainian hivno (vel sim).
> Germanic has /g/ where Italic has /h/
> Another answer could be the language of the person who wrote it
> down, it may have influenced what was written


A third answer would postulate, noting that the Slavic g > h seems to be an area
thing: Czech, Slovak, Belarussian, Ukranian, southern Russian AFAIK, that the
Iranian languages of the same area experienced the same transition? Fourth: the
war cry 'marga!' was borrowed by Slavic and -> 'marha!', along with the rest of
the vocabulary in the relevant Slavic languages (before being replaced by 'ura!'
(<- Turkish?).


Torsten



Torsten

The ones that are mentioned in a list of peoples "beyond" the northernmost
important city of Roman Dacia, Porolissum. Again one must be careful here. The
TP gives the impression that this list (= PITI. GAETAE. DAGAE. VENEDI) follows
the flow of the Danube eastward, and hence the VENEDI would be located near its
Black Sea outlet. This BTW is what led the interesting Belorusan
historian/archaeologist V. Nosewich to identify these VENEDI with the "Etulia
culture" of that spot (2nd through 4th centuries: a mixture of LaTene, Late
Scythian, and Late Zarubinian elements) Cf. his recent article at
http://vln.by/node/178 (with great maps!).

But there is another possibility, viz., that the list represents peoples to the
north of Porolissum. The TP is quite schematic. If the extant version is indeed
datable to the early 330's in this form, then it might have been drawn in the
wake of Constantine's temporary reconquest of Roman Dacia from the Goths in 332
(Didn't last long, but at least to 337 and some few years beyond). Which
justified the retention of the old Dacian road system on the map, with one route
leading to Tivisco, another to Sarmizegetuza, and a third to Napoca (today's
Cluj in Transylvania) and Porolissum. Then came the list, which has been
plausibly reconstructed as (GE)PITI (=Gepids), Goths, Dacians, and Venedi,
members of the defeated 332 Gothic alliance. The rest of the TP information is
typically hazy but quite understandable for the 330's. Contact with the northern
Black Sea coast had been effectively lost for generations. Tyras and Olbia had
been destroyed (they're not on
  the map). The Bosporan Kingdom
  particulars are thoroughly scrambled. In fact all this portion of the TP shows
the north Black Sea coast to have become a sort of "terra incognita" again. We
have Germanic names for the Dnister ("Agaling") and the Dnipro ("Nusacus"). This
is the heyday of the Chernyakhiv culture. And even the Vistula seems to have
become a "Sellania" which flows from the Baltic into the Dnipro/Nusacus (!!).
And the Don is "Tanasis Galatiae"...

So I would think that these VENEDI are to be located not so much at the mouth of
the Danube, but somewhere in the north, near the Goth-dominated territory, more
or less in the area of the Kyivan culture, which is basically the same as the
location hinted at by Tacitus, and by Jordanes for the time of Hermanaric. These
VENEDI would be Slavs.

A lot of VENEDS/VENETS in 332! All apparently speaking distinct languages.
(a) those of Armorica probably still there
(b) and those of Italy
(c) and those of Latvia
(d) and those of the Oka
(e) and those of Danubian Sarmatia
(f) and the Slavs...
(g) and?...
******

W dniu 2011-07-01 15:50, george knysh pisze:

> A lot of VENEDS/VENETS in 332! All apparently speaking distinct languages.
> (a) those of Armorica probably still there
> (b) and those of Italy
> (c) and those of Latvia
> (d) and those of the Oka
> (e) and those of Danubian Sarmatia
> (f) and the Slavs...
> (g) and?...

Not the only such case, cf. Brigantes : Burgundiones. Some tribal names
are typologically common, and flattering or self-congratulatory ones
often fall into this category. If PIE *wenh1-eto- meant something
'friendly, loveable, honourable', who wouldn't have liked to be a Venet?

Piotr

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
> The ones that are mentioned in a list of peoples "beyond" the northernmost
important city of Roman Dacia, Porolissum. Again one must be careful here. The
TP gives the impression that this list (= PITI. GAETAE. DAGAE. VENEDI) follows
the flow of the Danube eastward, and hence the VENEDI would be located near its
Black Sea outlet. This BTW is what led the interesting Belorusan
historian/archaeologist V. Nosewich to identify these VENEDI with the "Etulia
culture" of that spot (2nd through 4th centuries: a mixture of LaTene, Late
Scythian, and Late Zarubinian elements) Cf. his recent article at
http://vln.by/node/178 (with great maps!).
>
> But there is another possibility, viz., that the list represents peoples to
the north of Porolissum. The TP is quite schematic. If the extant version is
indeed datable to the early 330's in this form, then it might have been drawn in
the wake of Constantine's temporary reconquest of Roman Dacia from the Goths in
332 (Didn't last long, but at least to 337 and some few years beyond). Which
justified the retention of the old Dacian road system on the map, with one route
leading to Tivisco, another to Sarmizegetuza, and a third to Napoca (today's
Cluj in Transylvania) and Porolissum. Then came the list, which has been
plausibly reconstructed as (GE)PITI (=Gepids), Goths, Dacians, and Venedi,
members of the defeated 332 Gothic alliance. The rest of the TP information is
typically hazy but quite understandable for the 330's. Contact with the northern
Black Sea coast had been effectively lost for generations. Tyras and Olbia had
been destroyed (they're not on the map). The Bosporan Kingdom particulars are
thoroughly scrambled. In fact all this portion of the TP shows the north Black
Sea coast to have become a sort of "terra incognita" again. We have Germanic
names for the Dnister ("Agaling") and the Dnipro ("Nusacus"). This is the heyday
of the Chernyakhiv culture. And even the Vistula seems to have become a
"Sellania" which flows from the Baltic into the Dnipro/Nusacus (!!). And the Don
is "Tanasis Galatiae"...
>
> So I would think that these VENEDI are to be located not so much at the mouth
of the Danube, but somewhere in the north, near the Goth-dominated territory,
more or less in the area of the Kyivan culture, which is basically the same as
the location hinted at by Tacitus, and by Jordanes for the time of Hermanaric.
These VENEDI would be Slavs.

Nope. Those Venedi would *later* be Slavs.

> A lot of VENEDS/VENETS in 332! All apparently speaking distinct
> languages.

No, they didn't. At least not originally, but they probably, like the Dutch,
tended to switch language easy.


> (a) those of Armorica probably still there
> (b) and those of Italy
> (c) and those of Latvia
> (d) and those of the Oka
> (e) and those of Danubian Sarmatia
> (f) and the Slavs...
> (g) and?...
> ******

and those of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendsyssel
http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fil:Vendsyssel_of_denmark_in_medieval_times_(croppe\
d).jpg
and the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limfjord ,
and the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandals

The Slavs you call Venedi would be Venedi who picked up the Slavic language by
necessity. As Jordanes tells us, the Venedi sucked at (land-based) warfare.

Don't be so continental, George. ;-)
If I tell you that
(a) Canada,
(b) Australia,
(c) USA
(d) England
have similar words in their languages, would you conclude anyway that they must
be independently developed cultures? They had ships.


Torsten

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
> --- On Fri, 7/1/11, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> > --- On Fri, 7/1/11, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@> wrote:
> >
> > marg- is "death" in Persian/Farsi as in Marg-ba Amrika,or whoever
> > they have the hate on. So it looks Iranian enough but battle cries
> > can be borrowed
> >
> > GK: Any explanation for the "hyperization"  -h i.o. -g? OK in
> > Iranic dialects or might this tell us something about that of
> > the "Ticenses"?
> > Slavic does a pretty good job of alternating between /g/ and /h/
> > e.g. Russian
> > govno vs. Ukrainian hivno (vel sim).
> > Germanic has /g/ where Italic has /h/
> > Another answer could be the language of the person who wrote it
> > down, it may have influenced what was written
>
> A third answer would postulate, noting that the Slavic g > h seems
> to be an area thing: Czech, Slovak, Belarussian, Ukranian, southern
> Russian AFAIK,

> ****GK: Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this areal "softening"
> of the G->H a development of the late 1rst millennium/early 2nd
> millennium CE? In other words, Old (undifferentiated) Slavic
> retained the hard G?****

I keep forgetting that my own timeline isn't mainstream; the mainstream one has
the Slavs arrive in their present locations in the 6th-7th centuries CE since no
one heard of them before; the g -> h thing would be later than that so it's
placed in the period you mention; my timeline has them arrive with Ariovistus in
the 1st cent. BCE, just being awful quiet about it, and no one takes any notice
until they begin to resist slavers in the 6th-7th centuries CE.


>  that the Iranian languages of the same area experienced the same
> transition?


> ****GK: But if the above is correct, then is 359 not too early?
> BTW anything similar in Ossetic?****

I have no hard facts on Ossetic, unfortunately; I checked
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetic
and the answer seems to be no.


> Fourth: the war cry 'marga!' was borrowed by Slavic and ->
> 'marha!', along with the rest of the vocabulary in the relevant
> Slavic languages (before being replaced by 'ura!' (<-
> Turkish?).

> ****GK: And "slava!" in some others.

New proposal for 'slava!'
1) cf. the war cry of the Ambrones: 'Ambrones!'; it could just be their own
name.
2) cf. the Dutch war cry 'sla dood!' "kill"
http://cf.hum.uva.nl/dsp/ljc/bilderdijk/Rotsgalmen2/aanteeke.html
'SLA DOOD is van ouds de Hollandsche aanvalkreet des voetvolks, met staven, dat
is knotsen of kluppels (ook kuze en kodden of kolven, en goedendags genoemd) en
morgenstarren of prikellen, gewapend.'
http://www.wattpad.com/25223-de-leeuw-van-vlaanderen-of-de-slag-der-gulden?p=56
''Sla dood! Sla dood!' huilden de scharen als razend. 'Sla dood de verrader
Deconinck! Deconinck!!''

cf
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/67876
' Gr. = στεγγίς = στελγίς 'a body-scraper'.
- Boh. tlapa 'paw', Rum. talpe id., talpetá 'to stamp the feet', Lat. talpa
'mole' (from his large, flat front paws), Gr. σκάλοψ and σπάλαξ id.,
Ital. scalpitare 'to clatter with the hoofs (horses)'; Gr. κολάπτειν
'to stamp with the hoof (horses)'.
- Bret. (dial. Van) stlafein 'flanquer', Gr. κόλαφος 'a box on the ear'.
- Bret. stlak 'claquement', stlok = stolok 'bruit sourd'.
- Bret. stlafad 'soufflet', stalaf 'battant de porte', stalf 'linteau'.
...
- Fr. claque 'a group of hired applauders', Gr. κόλαξ 'a flatterer,
fawner'.
...
Bret. stlak = strak 'claque­ment'; stlapad, 'coup de main', strapad 'accès (de
mauvais temps, de maladie), strap 'bruit'.'
and I'd add
Dutch kloppen, German klopfen "knock", Latin stloppus.

> But again, there is the matter of the time frame of the g->h switch
> in areal Slavic...

Yes. No problem for me.


Torsten

--- On Fri, 7/1/11, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

       W dniu 2011-07-01 15:50, george knysh pisze:



> A lot of VENEDS/VENETS in 332! All apparently speaking distinct languages.

> (a) those of Armorica probably still there

> (b) and those of Italy

> (c) and those of Latvia

> (d) and those of the Oka

> (e) and those of Danubian Sarmatia

> (f) and the Slavs...

> (g) and?...



Not the only such case, cf. Brigantes : Burgundiones. Some tribal names

are typologically common, and flattering or self-congratulatory ones

often fall into this category. If PIE *wenh1-eto- meant something

'friendly, loveable, honourable', who wouldn't have liked to be a Venet?

****GK:  Did any of the attested IE languages keep that meaning, as far as you
can tell? Might be interesting to know. Doesn't sound too applicable to this
lot:

""Venedi multum ex moribus [Sarmatorum ]traxerunt; nam quidquid inter Peucinos
Fennosque silvarum ac montium erigitur latrociniis pererrant." Tacitus,
Germania, 46)

Unless we think of Soviet style self-evaluations (:=))) *****

W dniu 2011-07-01 19:59, george knysh pisze:

> ****GK: Did any of the attested IE languages keep that meaning, as far
> as you can tell? Might be interesting to know.

There are some parallel examples of *-eto- adjectives corresponding to
*-e/os- nouns.

> Doesn't sound too
> applicable to this lot:
>
> ""Venedi multum ex moribus [Sarmatorum ]traxerunt; nam quidquid inter
> Peucinos Fennosque silvarum ac montium erigitur latrociniis pererrant."
> Tacitus, Germania, 46)
>
> Unless we think of Soviet style self-evaluations (:=))) *****

Think of "the goodfellas", "la cosa nostra" and "a friend of ours" ;)

Piotr

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> W dniu 2011-07-01 19:59, george knysh pisze:
>
> > ****GK: Did any of the attested IE languages keep that meaning, as
> > far as you can tell? Might be interesting to know.
>
> There are some parallel examples of *-eto- adjectives corresponding
> to *-e/os- nouns.
>
> > Doesn't sound too
> > applicable to this lot:
> >
> > ""Venedi multum ex moribus [Sarmatorum ]traxerunt; nam quidquid
> > inter Peucinos Fennosque silvarum ac montium erigitur latrociniis
> > pererrant."
> > Tacitus, Germania, 46)
> >
> > Unless we think of Soviet style self-evaluations (:=))) *****
>
> Think of "the goodfellas", "la cosa nostra" and "a friend of ours"
> ;)

Dan. ven, Sw. vän "friend".


My proposal:

UEW
'weпe-še 'Boot, Kahn' FW
Finn. vene (Gen. veneen),
(dial.) veneh, venhe 'Boot, Kahn, Barke, Nachen';
est. vene (Gen. vene) 'Kahn, Boot' |

lapp.
N fânâs ( ~ vânâs) -dn-,
L vanās 'Boot, Schiff',
K (1825) T vans (Gen. vannizi),
Kld. vөns, -nnas,
Not. vөnas, vөnnas 'Boot' |

mord. E venč, väńč, M veńeš (dem.) veńeškä 'Kahn'.

Falls finn. vene usw. Ableitungen von einem Verb *vene- 'sich dehnen' sind (s.
unter *wene- 'sich ausstrecken, sich dehnen' FW) (Serebrennikov: Ėtimologija
1966:302;
E. Itkonen: UAJb. 41:102),
so muß die Ableitung *wene-še ursprünglich eine Art Boot oder Floß bedeutet
haben, das vom Ufer her gezogen wurde.

Das Ableitungssuffix *še ist in FW Zeit an den Stamm getreten.

Castrén: Suomi 1845:178;
Lindström: Suomi 1852:104;
Ahlqvist, MMdGr. 181, Kulturw. 165;
MUSz. 195;
Setälä: JSFOu. 14/3:43, 17/4:17;
Genetz: Suomi 1897/3/13:35;
ÁKE 282;
Collinder: Vir. 1928:245;
Steinitz, FgrVok. 31;
E. Itkonen: FUF 29:318, LpChr. 104, UAJb. 41:102;
Collinder, CompGr. 179;
Serebrennikov: Ėtimologija 1966:302;
Hallap: SFU 5:97.'

Boat people. Specifically towboat people. Since the root only occurs in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finno-Volgaic_languages (FW)
which grouping supposedly doesn't exist anymore, it might be a substrate loan in
those FU languages.


Torsten

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "gknysh" <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "The Egyptian Chronicles"
<the_egyptian_chronicles@> wrote:
> >
> > DGK wrote: I see no basis for Wikipedia's claim that <Venta> meant 'market',
and Kitson's theory of extraction from suffixed names is implausible. But if the
Belgae conquered the three towns named Venta from the Veneti, perhaps the
original name was *Wenetja:, and this became in Belgic *Wentt(j)a with regular
syncope and /j/-gemination (a feature later occurring in NWB-influenced West
Germanic).
>
> ****GK: Only one of the three Ventas is connected to the Belgae. The others
are Venta Icenorum and Venta Silurum. Looks like the poor Veneti got it from
everybody (:=)). But seriously, I think the link to the discussion mentioned by
Brian Scott is useful, and the notion that "venta" was a borrowing into Celtic
worthy of further study. On the Venet/Vened problem cf. also ch. 3 here: 
http://books.google.com/books?id=5aoId7nA4bsC&pg=PA87&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false

I agree with the author that Venetic should not be classified with Illyrian (or
Macro-Illyrian), and the notion of "Veneto-Illyrian" has led to great confusion
in the literature.  However, the notion that the Veneti were pre-Indo-European
is groundless.  The author's negativism about IE substrate problems is
excessive.  These problems are indeed difficult, and some may be insoluble, but
until we know that sufficient information is simply unavailable, we have no
business waving the white flags.

The fact that only one of the three Ventae was explicitly associated with the
Belgae by ancient authors is not fatal to the hypothesis about <Venta> which I
proposed.  In Caesar's time, the Continental Belgae were culturally and
linguistically distinct from the Gauls.  Bede however knew of only three
pre-Roman peoples in Britain, namely the Britons, Scots, and Picts.  By the time
of his earliest sources, the Insular Belgae had already been assimilated to the
Britons.  If indeed the Belgae made Venetic *Wenetja: into *Wentt(j)a, and this
was further reduced to Britto-Latin <Venta>, the place called Venta Belgarum
might simply be the last one where unassimilated Insular Belgae lived.

P.R. Kitson (p. 80 of "British and European River-Names", TrPhS 94:73-118, 1996)
suggested that <Venta> was hypostasized from the suffix *-went- presumed to be
in <Bannaventa>, <Glannoventa>, and probably <Derventio> 'the Derwent etc.'
(which he regards as an alteration of the original river-name, as explained
below).  This suffix is Indo-European and signifies 'full of, abounding in, rich
in'.  In Greek it forms athematic adjectives like <kharíeis> (*kharí-went-s)
'graceful' from <kháris> 'grace'.  Latin uses different suffixes, -o:so- and
-lento-, in this sense.  However, *-wento- is found in the place-name
<Maluentum> if I am correct in understanding it as 'Abounding in Mallows'. 
(Plautus has trissyllabic <larua> for classical <larva>, so I am assuming that
<malva> was earlier *malua.  This word is of East Mediterranean origin and has a
short root-syllable, so it probably did not come into Italic directly from
non-IE substrate, but indirectly through Japygian, that is, the Central Italian
form of Illyrian.  <Maluentum> for *Maluventom is like <fui:> for Old Latin
<fuvei>.  The /a/ was necessarily short; otherwise the intentional
folk-etymological alteration to <Beneventum> 'Well-Come' would not have
occurred, since it depends on <Maluentum> sounding like <male ventum>
'ill-come'.)  In Kitson's scenario, names of the form *X-venta meaning 'full of
X' were reinterpreted as 'place of X', leading to the extraction of *venta
'place'.  This is more plausible than Ifor Williams's guess that *venta equals
<forum>, but serious difficulties remain.

Kitson notes (p. 79) that *-went- "has not been recognized as occurring in
Celtic lexical items ... Yet it must be presumed to have been available at an
early period, especially since it was productive in the neighbouring stock
Italic."  I cannot agree with this presumption.  <Maluentum> is probably
Illyrian rather than Italic, and its replacement <Beneventum> is a creation of
the Hannibalic War.  Extrapolation from Italic to Celtic morphological behavior
is risky anyhow, considering that the /nt/-participle is highly productive in
Italic but not at all in Celtic.  Moreover it is semantically difficult to
regard <Bannaventa> and <Glannoventa> as formed within Celtic using the suffix
*-went- in its original sense.  <Bannaventa> (also <Bannavanta>, <Bennovenna>)
referred to a hill-fort of the Catuvellauni near modern Daventry, and probably
to another place which St. Patrick called home.  Nobody seems to doubt that the
first element is identical to Gaelic <beann> 'peak, hill, height'.  But why on
earth would a single hill, or a place occupying one, be called 'Full of Hills'? 
Such an adjective properly applies to a district, not a single place.  The
variation in form renders it dubious that *-went- was originally part of this
name at all.  If it was pre-Celtic, the first element (whatever it was) could
simply have been folk-etymologized to *bend-no-, *benno- 'peak, hill' by
Celtic-speakers.

Similarly, <Glannoventa> (also <Glannabenta>, <Glanovenda>, <Clanoventa>), a
maritime town of the Brigantes near modern Ravenglass, is presumed to mean 'Full
of Shores' or 'Full of Banks'.  This is bizarre on its face, since one seldom
deals with more than one shore, or two banks, at a time.  I am not opposed to
this name originally including *-went-, but I doubt that the first element is
identical to the second of <Amboglanna> 'Riverbank', a town of the Otadeni at
Hadrian's Wall near modern Burdswald.  (The correct form is probably
*Ambiglanna, since we have Gallo-Latin <ambis> 'river' (Chron. Gall., 452 CE)
and <ambicus> 'type of fish' (Polem. Silv., ca. 450; MS. <ambions>, but nobody
doubts the correction).)  If the first part of <Glannoventa> has undergone
Celtic folk etymology after 'shore, bank', perhaps the pre-Celtic form was
*Glandiwenta: 'Abounding in Nuts or Acorns', the stem being *gWl&2-ndi- (Latin
<glans>, <glandis>; P-Italic *bland- is probably in <Blandusia>, site of a
fountain in the Sabine country; Greek <bálanos> has a thematic suffix,
*gWl.h2-no-).

Several British rivers had the Latinized name <Derventio>.  Ekwall, Jackson, and
more recently R. Geraint Gruffydd ("Where was Rhaeadr Derwennydd?", FS Hamp
261-6, 1990) take the British protoform as *Derwéntiü: 'river where oaks grow
abundantly, river flowing through an oak-wood'.  Rivers thus named include the
modern Darwen, Darenth, two Darts, Little Dart, and four Derwents.  The Welsh
Derwennydd is referred to a British by-form *Derwentíjü:.  Noting the
difficulty of explaining the segment -ent-, Kitson regards the name as a Celtic
folk-etymological reshaping of *Druantia or *Dravantia, a river-name well
represented on the Continent constituting an important member of Krahe's Old
European hydronymy.  Comparing the Sanskrit river-name <Dravanti:>, he infers
that the OEH formation is participial and means 'Running'.  This is plausible
enough as far as OEH is concerned, and Kitson has done an excellent job later in
the paper demonstrating that the OEH system is indeed Indo-European as Krahe
maintained, not Vasconic as Vennemann argued.  Unfortunately, his explanation of
<Derventio> requires the rather heavy-handed folk-etymological deformation of
*Draw- to *Derw-, as well as the poorly supported assumption of *-went- being
productive in prehistoric Celtic.

A Gallo-Latin <Derventum> is known from central Gaul (modern Drévant, southeast
of St.-Amand-Montrond, about 40 km south of Bourges).  Conventional wisdom makes
this a native Celtic name 'Oak-Grove' vel sim., but again the segment -ent- is
unexplained.  Therefore, I propose that this name is pre-Celtic.  The place is
quite far from the coastal areas frequented by the Veneti, so a more likely
source is Continental Belgic (or "Northwest Illyrian", to be identified with the
language of Kuhn's Nordwestblock).  The formation in this view is parallel to
*Maluwentom, but the /u/ of *Deruwentom underwent Belgic syncope of a short
vowel in an open second syllable following a short first syllable, as I have
already postulated to get <Venta> out of the Belgic form of *Wenetja:.  Since
*deru- outside of Celtic usually means 'wood' or 'tree', not specifically 'oak',
the sense of *Der(u)wentom was probably 'place abounding in trees, thicket,
copse' vel sim.  And in this view the British *Derwéntiü: was simply borrowed
from a Belgic antecedent without folk-etymological deformation, regardless of
the Celtic association with 'oak' rather than 'tree'.  Whether the Belgic suffix
*-i(j)o:(n), or whatever it was, was simply associative, yielding '(river)
involving thickets', or was based on *ei- 'to go', yielding '(river) going
through a thicket', I cannot say.

NWB students may object that Derventum is a long way from the Nordwestblock as
delineated by Kuhn.  Yes it is, but we have a good example of a similar outlier,
not quite so far south, among river-names.  The apa-Namen are largely restricted
to the NWB, but we have a medieval river Latinized as Cantapia in three French
departments (recorded 997 CE in Mayenne, now Chantache; 1025 in Eure-et-Loir;
1177 in Calvados), and a town Chantepie southeast of Rennes very likely
resulting from folk-etymological deformation of *Cantapia to a phrase
'sing-magpie' (cf. Chantemerle, Chanteloup, Chante Renard, etc.).  (The notion
that the attested <Cantapia> actually originated this way from *canta-pica (P.
Skok, ZRPh 32:560, 1908) cannot be taken seriously.)  At any rate, it is not
implausible that a large part of what was northern Celtic Gaul in Caesar's time
had been Belgic-speaking a few centuries earlier.

DGK

W dniu 2011-07-02 02:51, Torsten pisze:

> Dan. ven, Sw. vän "friend".

Reflexes of *winiz 'friend' (< *wenh1-i-) are found throughout Germanic,
as is *wunjo: 'joy' (*wn.h1-jah2), but George asked about exact cognates
of the "Venet" ethnonym.

Piotr

--- On Sat, 7/2/11, dgkilday57 <dgkilday57@...> wrote:
>GK: Only one of the three Ventas is connected to the Belgae. The others are
Venta Icenorum and Venta Silurum. Looks like the poor Veneti got it from
everybody (:=)). But seriously, I think the link to the discussion mentioned by
Brian Scott is useful, and the notion that "venta" was a borrowing into Celtic
worthy of further study. On the Venet/Vened problem cf. also ch. 3 here: 
http://books.google.com/books?id=5aoId7nA4bsC&pg=PA87&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false



I agree with the author that Venetic should not be classified with Illyrian (or
Macro-Illyrian), and the notion of "Veneto-Illyrian" has led to great confusion
in the literature.  However, the notion that the Veneti were pre-Indo-European
is groundless.  The author's negativism about IE substrate problems is
excessive.  These problems are indeed difficult, and some may be insoluble, but
until we know that sufficient information is simply unavailable, we have no
business waving the white flags.



The fact that only one of the three Ventae was explicitly associated with the
Belgae by ancient authors is not fatal to the hypothesis about <Venta> which I
proposed.  In Caesar's time, the Continental Belgae were culturally and
linguistically distinct from the Gauls.

****GK:  Do you have a  notion (or better) about the specifics of this
distinctiveness?  There is a discussion in the cybalist archives (inconclusive)
trying to make sense of Caesar's famous statement. The best I could come up with
is that Caesar's initial description of the Belgae fits the Nervii very well
(they are thus his prime "Belgan" reference point). If we then add the fact that
the Belgae crossed over from Germania, chased out the locals, and had Germanic
associates (some mentioned directly as such others (the Nervii et al.) possible
by implication) the idea dawned that the "3rd" language of Gallia (for Caesar)
besides Gaulish and Aquitanian was simply...Germanic. Despite the fact that many
Belgae were actually Gaulish-speaking (including those who conquered portions of
Britain). Cf. also final query below after your other analyses.*****


Bede however knew of only three pre-Roman peoples in Britain, namely the
Britons, Scots, and Picts.  By the time of his earliest sources, the Insular
Belgae had already been assimilated to the Britons.  If indeed the Belgae made
Venetic *Wenetja: into *Wentt(j)a, and this was further reduced to Britto-Latin
<Venta>, the place called Venta Belgarum might simply be the last one where
unassimilated Insular Belgae lived.



P.R. Kitson (p. 80 of "British and European River-Names", TrPhS 94:73-118, 1996)
suggested that <Venta> was hypostasized from the suffix *-went- presumed to be
in <Bannaventa>, <Glannoventa>, and probably <Derventio> 'the Derwent etc.'
(which he regards as an alteration of the original river-name, as explained
below).  This suffix is Indo-European and signifies 'full of, abounding in, rich
in'.  In Greek it forms athematic adjectives like <kharíeis> (*kharí-went-s)
'graceful' from <kháris> 'grace'.  Latin uses different suffixes, -o:so- and
-lento-, in this sense.  However, *-wento- is found in the place-name
<Maluentum> if I am correct in understanding it as 'Abounding in Mallows'. 
(Plautus has trissyllabic <larua> for classical <larva>, so I am assuming that
<malva> was earlier *malua.  This word is of East Mediterranean origin and has a
short root-syllable, so it probably did not come into Italic directly from
non-IE substrate, but
  indirectly through Japygian, that is, the Central Italian form of Illyrian. 
<Maluentum> for *Maluventom is like <fui:> for Old Latin <fuvei>.  The /a/ was
necessarily short; otherwise the intentional folk-etymological alteration to
<Beneventum> 'Well-Come' would not have occurred, since it depends on
<Maluentum> sounding like <male ventum> 'ill-come'.)  In Kitson's scenario,
names of the form *X-venta meaning 'full of X' were reinterpreted as 'place of
X', leading to the extraction of *venta 'place'.  This is more plausible than
Ifor Williams's guess that *venta equals <forum>, but serious difficulties
remain.



Kitson notes (p. 79) that *-went- "has not been recognized as occurring in
Celtic lexical items ... Yet it must be presumed to have been available at an
early period, especially since it was productive in the neighbouring stock
Italic."  I cannot agree with this presumption.  <Maluentum> is probably
Illyrian rather than Italic, and its replacement <Beneventum> is a creation of
the Hannibalic War.  Extrapolation from Italic to Celtic morphological behavior
is risky anyhow, considering that the /nt/-participle is highly productive in
Italic but not at all in Celtic.  Moreover it is semantically difficult to
regard <Bannaventa> and <Glannoventa> as formed within Celtic using the suffix
*-went- in its original sense.  <Bannaventa> (also <Bannavanta>, <Bennovenna>)
referred to a hill-fort of the Catuvellauni near modern Daventry, and probably
to another place which St. Patrick called home.  Nobody seems to doubt that
  the first element is identical to Gaelic <beann> 'peak, hill, height'.  But why
on earth would a single hill, or a place occupying one, be called 'Full of
Hills'?  Such an adjective properly applies to a district, not a single place.

*****GK: Just in passing. J. Harmatta suggests that the ethnonym "Sadagarii"
('full of hills'(people) in Iranic) refers (5th c.)to transplanted Roxolani in
Scythia Minor, so called because if their barrow burial practice.*****



   The variation in form renders it dubious that *-went- was originally part of
this name at all.  If it was pre-Celtic, the first element (whatever it was)
could simply have been folk-etymologized to *bend-no-, *benno- 'peak, hill' by
Celtic-speakers.



Similarly, <Glannoventa> (also <Glannabenta>, <Glanovenda>, <Clanoventa>), a
maritime town of the Brigantes near modern Ravenglass, is presumed to mean 'Full
of Shores' or 'Full of Banks'.  This is bizarre on its face, since one seldom
deals with more than one shore, or two banks, at a time.  I am not opposed to
this name originally including *-went-, but I doubt that the first element is
identical to the second of <Amboglanna> 'Riverbank', a town of the Otadeni at
Hadrian's Wall near modern Burdswald.  (The correct form is probably
*Ambiglanna, since we have Gallo-Latin <ambis> 'river' (Chron. Gall., 452 CE)
and <ambicus> 'type of fish' (Polem. Silv., ca. 450; MS. <ambions>, but nobody
doubts the correction).)  If the first part of <Glannoventa> has undergone
Celtic folk etymology after 'shore, bank', perhaps the pre-Celtic form was
*Glandiwenta: 'Abounding in Nuts or Acorns', the stem being
  *gWl&2-ndi- (Latin <glans>, <glandis>; P-Italic *bland- is probably in
<Blandusia>, site of a fountain in the Sabine country; Greek <bálanos> has a
thematic suffix, *gWl.h2-no-).



Several British rivers had the Latinized name <Derventio>.  Ekwall, Jackson, and
more recently R. Geraint Gruffydd ("Where was Rhaeadr Derwennydd?", FS Hamp
261-6, 1990) take the British protoform as *Derwéntiü: 'river where oaks grow
abundantly, river flowing through an oak-wood'.  Rivers thus named include the
modern Darwen, Darenth, two Darts, Little Dart, and four Derwents.  The Welsh
Derwennydd is referred to a British by-form *Derwentíjü:.  Noting the
difficulty of explaining the segment -ent-, Kitson regards the name as a Celtic
folk-etymological reshaping of *Druantia or *Dravantia, a river-name well
represented on the Continent constituting an important member of Krahe's Old
European hydronymy.  Comparing the Sanskrit river-name <Dravanti:>, he infers
that the OEH formation is participial and means 'Running'.  This is plausible
enough as far as OEH is concerned, and Kitson has done an excellent job later in
the paper
  demonstrating that the OEH system is indeed Indo-European as Krahe maintained,
not Vasconic as Vennemann argued.  Unfortunately, his explanation of <Derventio>
requires the rather heavy-handed folk-etymological deformation of *Draw- to
*Derw-, as well as the poorly supported assumption of *-went- being productive
in prehistoric Celtic.



A Gallo-Latin <Derventum> is known from central Gaul (modern Drévant, southeast
of St.-Amand-Montrond, about 40 km south of Bourges).  Conventional wisdom makes
this a native Celtic name 'Oak-Grove' vel sim., but again the segment -ent- is
unexplained.  Therefore, I propose that this name is pre-Celtic.  The place is
quite far from the coastal areas frequented by the Veneti, so a more likely
source is Continental Belgic (or "Northwest Illyrian", to be identified with the
language of Kuhn's Nordwestblock).  The formation in this view is parallel to
*Maluwentom, but the /u/ of *Deruwentom underwent Belgic syncope of a short
vowel in an open second syllable following a short first syllable, as I have
already postulated to get <Venta> out of the Belgic form of *Wenetja:.  Since
*deru- outside of Celtic usually means 'wood' or 'tree', not specifically 'oak',
the sense of *Der(u)wentom was probably 'place abounding in trees, thicket,
copse' vel
  sim.  And in this view the British *Derwéntiü: was simply borrowed from a
Belgic antecedent without folk-etymological deformation, regardless of the
Celtic association with 'oak' rather than 'tree'.  Whether the Belgic suffix
*-i(j)o:(n), or whatever it was, was simply associative, yielding '(river)
involving thickets', or was based on *ei- 'to go', yielding '(river) going
through a thicket', I cannot say.



NWB students may object that Derventum is a long way from the Nordwestblock as
delineated by Kuhn.  Yes it is, but we have a good example of a similar outlier,
not quite so far south, among river-names.  The apa-Namen are largely restricted
to the NWB, but we have a medieval river Latinized as Cantapia in three French
departments (recorded 997 CE in Mayenne, now Chantache; 1025 in Eure-et-Loir;
1177 in Calvados), and a town Chantepie southeast of Rennes very likely
resulting from folk-etymological deformation of *Cantapia to a phrase
'sing-magpie' (cf. Chantemerle, Chanteloup, Chante Renard, etc.).  (The notion
that the attested <Cantapia> actually originated this way from *canta-pica (P.
Skok, ZRPh 32:560, 1908) cannot be taken seriously.)  At any rate, it is not
implausible that a large part of what was northern Celtic Gaul in Caesar's time
had been Belgic-speaking a few centuries earlier.


****GK: Would I be correct in assuming that you consider Belgic to have been a
NWB dialect?****



DGK

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> W dniu 2011-06-25 23:12, Piotr Gasiorowski pisze:
>
> > No, that's why I argue for vowel syncope in the initial syllable. There
> > are a few examples of stl- in Latin, though. Apart from <stlocus> we
> > have OLat. stli:s > Class.Lat. li:s, -tis 'lawsuit', <stlatta ~ stla:ta>
> > 'cargo-boat, barge' and the derived adjective <stlatta:rius ~
> > stla:ta:rius> 'imported by boat' (both of which are rare poetic words
> > preserved in their archaic form till Classical times), plus the clearly
> > onomatopoeic hapax <stloppus> 'slap on an inflated cheek'.
>
> I forgot <stlembus> 'slow, sluggish', and a few etymologically opaque
> proper names beginning with this cluster.

Possibly <lancea> belongs here also.  Alessio compared Tuscan <schiancia>,
<schianza>, <stiance>, <stianza> 'cattail, Typha latifolia', noting also that
Veronese <lancia> denotes several types of reedy plants growing in swamps (Studi
Etruschi 20:122-3, 1952).  In his view, *stlancea was probably borrowed from an
Etruscan word meaning 'type of swamp-reed' (from which lances could be made) and
hence 'lance' itself.

I find it more probable that <lancea> is of P-Italic origin based on an Illyrian
loanword, and the plants in the modern dialects were named after the weapon. 
True lances were twisted with a leathern thong during release, and the spinning
imparted greater accuracy than simple throwing.  Hence the Indo-European root
could be *slenk- 'to wind, turn, twist' (IEW 961-2), with the passive noun
*slonkóm 'twistable thing, thong' becoming Illyrian *slankam, this in turn
borrowed into P-Italic as *slankom and producing an adjective *slankejo-
'involving a thong'.  I hypothesize that in Old Sabine, the lance was
distinguished from the ordinary spear as *(fasta: slankeja:) 'thong-spear',
commonly *slankeja: for short.  When the archaic Romans adopted the weapon, they
would have borrowed the name as Old Latin *stlancea:.  Roman Latin of course
simplified OL stl- to l- as in other words, but Alessio's comparison suggests
that Tuscan Latin retained stl-.  If this scenario is correct, the weapon must
have become obsolete for Roman military use later, since Varro thought it came
from Spain, and Festus from Greece.

The cattail has a club-shaped spike which might be considered to resemble a
lance.  Reedy plants generally have sharp tips.  That a plant can be named after
such a weapon is pointedly illustrated by English <spearmint>.

DGK

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
> --- On Sat, 7/2/11, dgkilday57 <dgkilday57@...> wrote:
> >GK: Only one of the three Ventas is connected to the Belgae. The others are
Venta Icenorum and Venta Silurum. Looks like the poor Veneti got it from
everybody (:=)). But seriously, I think the link to the discussion mentioned by
Brian Scott is useful, and the notion that "venta" was a borrowing into Celtic
worthy of further study. On the Venet/Vened problem cf. also ch. 3 here: 
http://books.google.com/books?id=5aoId7nA4bsC&pg=PA87&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false
>
> [...]
>
> The fact that only one of the three Ventae was explicitly associated with the
Belgae by ancient authors is not fatal to the hypothesis about <Venta> which I
proposed.  In Caesar's time, the Continental Belgae were culturally and
linguistically distinct from the Gauls.
>
> ****GK:  Do you have a  notion (or better) about the specifics of this
distinctiveness?  There is a discussion in the cybalist archives (inconclusive)
trying to make sense of Caesar's famous statement. The best I could come up with
is that Caesar's initial description of the Belgae fits the Nervii very well
(they are thus his prime "Belgan" reference point). If we then add the fact that
the Belgae crossed over from Germania, chased out the locals, and had Germanic
associates (some mentioned directly as such others (the Nervii et al.) possible
by implication) the idea dawned that the "3rd" language of Gallia (for Caesar)
besides Gaulish and Aquitanian was simply...Germanic. Despite the fact that many
Belgae were actually Gaulish-speaking (including those who conquered portions of
Britain). Cf. also final query below after your other analyses.*****

Caesar tangled with the Germans several times.  He needed Germanic interpreters
to learn about the business of coordinating attacks with lunar phases, and some
of his own lieutenants spoke Gaulish.  That he was aware of the difference
between Germanic and Gaulish is also shown by his comment about Ariovistus
acquiring fluent Gaulish during his years occupying part of Gaul.  Had Belgic
been a Germanic dialect, it would be astonishing if Caesar were unaware of it.

Caesar regarded the distinction between British and Gaulish as unimportant;
whatever difference existed at the time was, to him, merely dialectal.  Thus we
cannot regard Belgic as a Gaulish dialect either.
>
> [...]
>
> Kitson notes (p. 79) that *-went- "has not been recognized as occurring in
Celtic lexical items ... Yet it must be presumed to have been available at an
early period, especially since it was productive in the neighbouring stock
Italic."  I cannot agree with this presumption.  <Maluentum> is probably
Illyrian rather than Italic, and its replacement <Beneventum> is a creation of
the Hannibalic War.  Extrapolation from Italic to Celtic morphological behavior
is risky anyhow, considering that the /nt/-participle is highly productive in
Italic but not at all in Celtic.  Moreover it is semantically difficult to
regard <Bannaventa> and <Glannoventa> as formed within Celtic using the suffix
*-went- in its original sense.  <Bannaventa> (also <Bannavanta>, <Bennovenna>)
referred to a hill-fort of the Catuvellauni near modern Daventry, and probably
to another place which St. Patrick called home.  Nobody seems to doubt that
>  the first element is identical to Gaelic <beann> 'peak, hill, height'.  But
why on earth would a single hill, or a place occupying one, be called 'Full of
Hills'?  Such an adjective properly applies to a district, not a single place.
>
> *****GK: Just in passing. J. Harmatta suggests that the ethnonym "Sadagarii"
('full of hills'(people) in Iranic) refers (5th c.)to transplanted Roxolani in
Scythia Minor, so called because if their barrow burial practice.*****

Interesting.  This suggests another possible sense for <Bannaventa>.  I know
nothing about pre-Roman burial practice around Daventry, however.
>
> [...]
>
> NWB students may object that Derventum is a long way from the Nordwestblock as
delineated by Kuhn.  Yes it is, but we have a good example of a similar outlier,
not quite so far south, among river-names.  The apa-Namen are largely restricted
to the NWB, but we have a medieval river Latinized as Cantapia in three French
departments (recorded 997 CE in Mayenne, now Chantache; 1025 in Eure-et-Loir;
1177 in Calvados), and a town Chantepie southeast of Rennes very likely
resulting from folk-etymological deformation of *Cantapia to a phrase
'sing-magpie' (cf. Chantemerle, Chanteloup, Chante Renard, etc.).  (The notion
that the attested <Cantapia> actually originated this way from *canta-pica (P.
Skok, ZRPh 32:560, 1908) cannot be taken seriously.)  At any rate, it is not
implausible that a large part of what was northern Celtic Gaul in Caesar's time
had been Belgic-speaking a few centuries earlier.
>
> ****GK: Would I be correct in assuming that you consider Belgic to have been a
NWB dialect?****

I prefer to consider NWB as a late dialect of Continental Belgic.  At this point
I have no criteria for distinguishing Insular from Continental Belgic, or
internal dialectal differences, so I am just covering bases here.  There may
well be too little surviving information to draw any plausible inferences.  As
for the position of Belgic within Indo-European, my working hypothesis is that
it belongs with Illyrian (sensu lato), so the closest well-attested language to
it would be Messapic.  We do have an apa-Name down there, <Salapia> (not
'salt-water', but 'involving tide-water or overflowing water') as well as
<Messapia> itself, perhaps 'place in the midst of water'.

DGK

> >  There is a discussion in the cybalist archives (inconclusive) trying to
make sense of Caesar's famous statement. The best I could come up with is that
Caesar's initial description of the Belgae fits the Nervii very well (they are
thus his prime "Belgan" reference point). If we then add the fact that the
Belgae crossed over from Germania, chased out the locals, and had Germanic
associates (some mentioned directly as such others (the Nervii et al.) possible
by implication) the idea dawned that the "3rd" language of Gallia (for Caesar)
besides Gaulish and Aquitanian was simply...Germanic. Despite the fact that many
Belgae were actually Gaulish-speaking (including those who conquered portions of
Britain). Cf. also final query below after your other analyses.*****
>
> Caesar tangled with the Germans several times.  He needed Germanic
interpreters to learn about the business of coordinating attacks with lunar
phases, and some of his own lieutenants spoke Gaulish.  That he was aware of the
difference between Germanic and Gaulish is also shown by his comment about
Ariovistus acquiring fluent Gaulish during his years occupying part of Gaul. 
Had Belgic been a Germanic dialect, it would be astonishing if Caesar were
unaware of it.
>
> Caesar regarded the distinction between British and Gaulish as unimportant;
whatever difference existed at the time was, to him, merely dialectal.  Thus we
cannot regard Belgic as a Gaulish dialect either.


If we define Germanic as those related languages who have been subject to the
process known as Grimm's law, the NWBlock area is excluded since in that area we
observe that process in action in historical times
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/66375

The question can then be rephrased as: how much similarity to Germanic is
displayed by the un-Germanic elements which by Kuhn's methods can be sifted out
of the Germanic languages now spoken in those regions (roots in p-, roots of the
form T1VT2, for T1,T2 unvoiced unaspirated stops)? Enough that we may claim they
formed a separate family descended from a Proto-Proto-Germanic language? In my
opinion this is not the case, neither wrt. to the set of roots obtained for the
NWBlock area, for England or for Scandinavia, cf the roots here
http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/KuhnText/list.html
for which there are seeming cognates in both Finnic and Celtic
and here for Jysk
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/30336

Alternatively, we could follow Kuhn and propose the existence of not one but two
substrate layers for Germanic in the NWBlock area:

1 a non-IE language, called the ar-/ur-language by Kuhn

2 an IE language, spoken but for a short time before Germanic took over

and assign the Germanic-like NWBlock roots to the latter, eg Meid's
German flur, English floor, NWB placename Plore, OI lar "field"

(<- *plar-/*plan- <- *plaN- ?)


Torsten

I've been trying to make sense of those "Sarmatian" references in the Tabula
Peutingeriana (other than to the Roxolani) which might have "ethnic"
implications for historical IE reconstructions, inc. of course the mysterious
"Venedae Sarmatae". I tried all sorts of possible combinations re the "Lugiones
Sarmatae" but they all seemed strained somehow. And then I stumbled upon this
text:   http://mek.niif.hu/03400/03407/html/14.html

Since the TP is above all a road map (a practical traveller's guide), and since
acc. to the text above there was an Apulum to Lugio road (unmarked but partly
'protected" something like the stations in the Old American  West), could
"Lugiones Sarmatae" simply refer to those Sarmatians who were in some way
connected to that road, perhaps even (in the post-271 period) as "guides" or
"guardians"?

Perhaps this might apply by analogy to the "Venedae Sarmatae"? I.e. also
somewhere near Apulum, travellers might connect with "Sarmatians" who could
guide them along the "road to the Venedae"? Perhaps in the Ptolemaic sense of
the amber coast?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "bmscotttg" <bm.brian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <bm.brian@>
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >> At 1:41:47 AM on Monday, June 27, 2011, Torsten wrote:
> > >
> > > >>> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
> > > >>> <gpiotr@> wrote:
> > >
> > > >>>> W dniu 2011-06-26 08:09, Torsten pisze:
> > >
> > > >>>>> Trick question: what would happen to PIE *stVló- in
> > > >>>>> Oscan?
> > >
> > > >>>> Two things wouldn't: *o > a: and k > g
> > >
> > > >>> That's true for a regular derivation within PIE; I suspect
> > > >>> that both Latin (st)locus and Oscan sla(a)gi- are
> > > >>> substrate words, related to those Boutkan discusses here:
> > > >>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/61680
> > > >>> the semantics of which, "swamp" etc, would match the Oscan
> > > >>> sense of "border";
> > >
> > > >> Only if one deliberately distorts the attested semantics by
> > > >> choosing the most atypical datum.
> > >
> > > > You're not expressing yourself very clearly. Do you mean to
> > > > say that "border" is the most atypical sense of the two
> > > > attested senses "border" and "region" of the three known
> > > > occurrences of *sla(a)gi-?
> > >
> > > Of course not.  I am obviously talking about 'those Boutkan
> > > discusses here ... the semantics of which, "swamp" etc, would
> > > match the Oscan sense of "border".  The semantics of that group
> > > do *not* match 'border': 'swamp, morass' is clearly an outlier.
> > >
> > > The repetition of the word 'semantics' and the fact that it was
> > > the subject of the clause to which I was replying should have
> > > made this obvious, and even a cursory review of Boutkan's data
> > > would have confirmed the obvious.
> >
> > Only three obviouses and one clearly, but it's a short text, of
> > course.
> >
> > You should take a look at de Vries' proposal below Boutkan's
> > article ('das bewerfender hauswand' should be 'das bewerfen der
> > hauswand'), who relates them all to the material used in
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wattle_and_daub
> > construction, basically clayey mud, making *slagan the act of
> > daubing, slinging the daub onto the wattle. Villages in flat
> > territory were bordered by terrain which couldn't be cultivated
> > because it was too wet, ie. muddy.
>
>
> from JSTOR:
>
> John Phelps
> INDO-EUROPEAN INITIAL sl
>
>
> 'This article' treats of Indo-European initial sl in relation to
> initial stl found in some of the derived languages. Since we discuss
> only the initial position that position will be understood whenever
> sl or stl is mentioned.
> The theory is that sl is the original sound, retained by some
> languages, but which in some other languages became stl by a
> post-Indo-European intercalation of t.
>
> 1. A survey of the vocabularies of the various Indo-European
> languages, ancient and modern, discloses a remarkable, and, it
> seems, hitherto unnoticed fact:
> The northern belt of languages - Gadhelic, Gaulish, Teutonic,
> Baltic, Slavic (except Bohemian), Armenian, and Indo-Iranian - have,
> and always have had, words in sl in some form, but none in stl. The
> southern belt - Greek, Latin, Romance,2 and Brythonic - have not,
> and historically never have had, any word in sl, but many in stl and
> its derivatives. Moreover, sl is found in the reconstructed
> Indo-European and stl is not.3
> As a tentative explanation of this geographical cleavage we may
> assume that the original Indo-European speakers in their northern
> home spoke sl; and that those offshoots who migrated southerly to
> the shores of the Mediterranean Sea lost the facility for
> pronouncing initial sl as the result of contact with some
> autochthonous people to whom sl was unknown, and who pronounced it
> as stl.4
> This result of contact with the sea-folk5 is borne out by the fact
> that Oscan (and inferentially Umbrian), which never reached the sea
> until historic times, retained sl, while the other Italic dialects
> on the coasts spoke only stl.1 Bohemian has the original sl together
> with stl, includ­ing doublets in sl/stl, indicating an originally sl
> speech with local survivals of an importation of the stl influence
> through Venetic con­tacts. A few words in Polish and East Slavic are
> explainable as loans from Bohemian. As to Brythonic we may assume
> that it was pre-historically in contact with the Mediterranean.' A
> few skl (never stl) words in English dialect are of Brythonic
> survival. Some English sl influence may be traced in Welsh and
> Cornish.
>
> 2. Whatever may have been the real prehistoric geographical and
> cultural relations of these speakers, it is the phonetic relation
> between the two groups of sounds, sl and stl, that indicates that
> the t is inter­calary. The articulation of sl is effected wholly by
> tongue-movements. The tongue, in changing from the s to the l
> position, performs the diffi­cult feat of instantaneously and
> completely reversing its shape. In the s position the tip is down,
> the sides are expanded, the surface is concave and the mass of the
> organ is raised. In the l position the tip is up, the sides
> contracted, the surface convex and the mass lowered. The audi­tory
> effect of this is that the tip closes the orifice for the s sound at
> the precise instant that the sides open the orifices for the l
> sound. When these complicated movements are all performed with
> synchronous agility, accompanied with the requisite breath, the
> sound sl is heard. But if there is a lack of synchrony or
> coordination in any of the move­ments some other sound must
> necessarily intervene. Now, the tip is the quickest and most agile
> part of the tongue, and a lack of synchrony first results in the
> upward click of the tip, bringing the tongue into the t position,
> before the contraction of the sides has opened the orifices for the
> l sound. In this uncoordinated movement t is midway between s and l,
> and the intercalation of t is a necessary consequence. Hence the
> resulting combination of sounds is stl. In other words, stl is a
> natural result of the effort to pronounce sl by a tongue
> undisciplined to the mechanics of the movement.
> For example, the simple sound-imitation slop, slap, which could be
> formed at any linguistic epoch for the sound made by striking flat
> sur­faces, hence for flat things and derived senses, is found in
> Latin pro­nounced stloppus, 'the sound made by slapping the distended
> cheek'; and in Breton stlapad 'coup de main, tape', stlapa, v.
> 'flanquer'.
> This stl, once fixed in a language as a permanent combination of
> sounds, becomes itself, in turn, subject to sundry changes or
> develop­ments :
>
> 3. The t sometimes shifts to a palatal stop, whence Vulg. Lat
> *scloppus (Ital. schioppo 'a gun') and Breton sklapan 'flanquer'.
> So, the doublets:
> Lat. stlis/sclis 'strife',
> Breton stlabez/sklabez 'ordure',
> stlej 'qui traine' / sklejal 'trainer',
> stleug 'etrier' / skleug 'marchepied d'une voiture',
> Boh. stloustnouti/skloustnouti 'fett werden'.
> Lat. stl became everywhere scl in later Latin and Romance; but it
> never reverts to sl.8
>
> 4. A further shift of the stop results in spl, which is purely
> analogous since the lips have no part in the phonetic change of s to
> l. So,
> Ir. slaodim 'I drag',
> OBret. stloit 'trainer',
> OFr. esclaon 'traineau', beside splaon, id.;
> Boh. stlesknouti 'zusammenschlagen',
> tleskatý = splesklý = pleskatý 'flachgedrückt'.
> - Gr. στειλάμεναι· στελλάμεναι, Hesych.;
> σταλει~σα· σπολει~σα, Id.
> (See below, 7, for vowel insert).
>
> 5. In all these forms, viz: stl, skl (scl), spl, the s is sometimes
> dropped, perhaps by a delayed breath impulse, resulting in tl, kl
> (cl) pl. It would seem that tl is always derived from stl; but it
> cannot be said that kl (cl) pl are always derived from skl (scl) spl
> respectively. However, before assigning to Indo-European any word in
> tl, kl (cl) or pl, its pos­sible origin from stl should be examined.
> - Ex.:
> Boh. šlapěje 'der Schritt',
> tlapna 'der Tritt',
> tlap, tlapa 'die Pfote, Tappe, der Fuss',
> tlapot 'das Getappe '
> - E slush,
> Boh. stloustnouti 'fett werden',
> tloušt 'die Dicke',
> Pol. tluszcz 'fat, grease',
> tlusty (adj.) 'fat'.
> - Bret. stlapa, dial. sklapan, 'flanquer',
> Pol. klopot 'clatter of footsteps' (cf. tlapot),
> Fr. clapoter 'to clack the tongue',
> OFr. clop 'boiteux' (Fr. éclopé), clopeter, clopier, 'boiter',
> Vulg. Lat. cloppus 'lame'.
> - Boh. splesklý = pleskatý, supra.
>
> 6. Words in tl, (kl, pl,) apparently are liable to lose the initial
> stop, leaving initial l. I say apparently because I have only
> doubtful in­stances of the sequence stl > tl > l. It is inferable
> from doublets like Lat. stlis/sclis/lis, stlocus/locus; from
> stlat(t)a 'a broad ship', tlatum, p.p. of fero, = latum, latus
> 'broad', latus 'side'; and from *Stlatium, Tlatie, Latium. The loss
> of initial s before a consonant is common Indo-European; but every
> reason forbids that lis, locus should be Indo-European, while stlis,
> stlocus are post-IE loans. The alternative probability is that a
> dropping of s from sl was coeval with the intercala­tion of t, and
> was just another device to avoid pronunciation of sl. I leave the
> question open and for determination in each individual case.
>
> 7. By a different result of lack of coordination, perhaps as an
> effort to aid articulation, there is produced a hiatus between the t
> (k, p) and l. This is a breath sound which is a rudimentary vowel,
> becoming in time a full vowel. This intercalary vowel, not being
> historical or etymological but a mere phonetic incident in
> post-Indo-European speech, may take on any vowel timbre according to
> circumstances. Sometimes it comes in by a metathesis or
> transposition of an original vowel in the word. The anaptyctic vowel
> may be represented by a sign like ə, but is not to be confused with
> IE schwa. Moreover, the intercalary vowel some­times takes on the
> stress accent, which tends to disguise the form and remove it from
> its cognates in sl. -
> Ex.: Gr. = στεγγίς = στελγίς 'a body-scraper'.
> - Boh. tlapa 'paw',
> Rum. talpe id., talpetá 'to stamp the feet',
> Lat. talpa 'mole' (from his large, flat front paws),
> Gr. σκάλοψ and σπάλαξ id.,
> Ital. scalpitare 'to clatter with the hoofs (horses)';
> Gr. κολάπτειν 'to stamp with the hoof (horses)'.
> - Bret. (dial. Van) stlafein 'flanquer',
> Gr. κόλαφος 'a box on the ear'.
> - Bret. stlak 'claquement', stlok = stolok 'bruit sourd'.
> - Bret. stlafad 'soufflet',
> stalaf 'battant de porte',
> stalf 'linteau'.
> - Pol. tlusty 'fat', Russ. tolstyy id.
> - Boh. slup/ stlup 'pillar, column',
> Illyr. Stlupi, Stulpini (supra).
> - Gr. σκλοι~ος = σκολιός 'crooked'.
> - Fr. claque 'a group of hired applauders',
> Gr. κόλαξ 'a flatterer, fawner'.
>
> 8. Finally, the l of stl, skl (scl), spl sometimes changes to r. It
> is not suggested that all cases of str skr (scr) spr have this
> origin; but there are enough doublets extant to establish the
> phonetic rule when applicable.-
> Ex.: Gr. στλεγγίς = στρεγγίς, supra.
> - Bret. stlak = strak 'claque­ment';
> stlapad, 'coup de main',
> strapad 'accès (de mauvais temps, de maladie),
> strap 'bruit'.
> - E slip, slippery,
> Bret. (dial. Leon) stlipou pl. 'tripes', (dial. Van) stripou, id.,
> Fr. tripes, id.
>
> 9. Reducing the foregoing conclusions to a formula we have:
> Coordinated IE sl > Uncoordinated stl > stəl, tl, təl, skl > skəl,
> kl, kəl, spl > spəl, pl, pəl
> Add to this occasional variants in str etc., (which, however, cannot
> be said to form a similar complete paradigm) and we have the basis
> for analysing a large class of European loan-words whose true places
> in the history of language cannot otherwise be properly determined.
>
> 10. It is apparent that in collating such words from various
> languages, ancient and modern, we are not dealing with them on the
> principles on which words descended from a common Indo-European
> origin are collated. Indeed, if our main thesis be correct, namely,
> that the com­bination stl is a phonetic phenomenon of
> post-Indo-European speech, it is manifest that such groups of words
> must represent a later, but still chiefly prehistoric, epoch of
> interloans among the already formed and divergent languages. It also
> follows that such words cannot be assigned to any Indo-European
> origin without first eliminating the intercalated stop (and the
> intercalated vowel, if any) and carrying them back to the
> Indo-European original through their related forms in the northern
> or sl group of languages. -
> Ex.:
> Gr. σκάλοψ must be analyzed as σ(κα)λοπ-, and not as
σκαλ-οπ-;
> Lat. talpa as s(t)lap-, not as talp-, and Gr. σπάλαξ as σ(πα)λακ-
=
> σ(κα)λαπ-, not as σπαλ-ακ - all under the common European
loan-form
> slap or slop.
>
> 11. The modern science of comparative Indo-European linguistics has
> been intent on building up the primitive elements of the parent
> speech. This monumental labor has now about attained its object, and
> the question even arises whether the system has not become
> over-comprehensive. All words not obviously loans are, a priori,
> assigned, or sought to be assigned, to some primitive etymon of the
> parent speech. But there was a vast stretch of time - how many
> centuries or millennia we will never know - between that parent
> speech and our recorded languages. Throughout those long unrecorded
> ages of prehistory what interrelations existed between the peoples
> who spoke the prototypes of our recorded languages we do not know.
> But we must recog­nize that whenever, even to the remotest times,
> there was contact be­tween two or more speech-groups, there was
> inevitably an interchange, more or less extensive, of vocabulary.9
> Meillet has forcibly reminded us10 that the body of words classed as
> Indo-European really consists of two distinct categories:
> (1) words properly Indo-European; and
> (2) words which are loans between the separate dialects or languages
> descended from Indo-European.
> These two categories are confused because of the lack of some
> criterion which can distinguish the original from the loan words.
> The present theory furnishes, as to the type of words to which it
> applies, such a criterion. According to our main premise words
> bearing the hall-mark of the intercalated stop in sl must belong,
> not to the primi­tive Indo-European era, but to some period of that
> long and ever silent interval following the breaking up of the
> parent language. If this should necessitate the reconsideration of
> some etymologies" heretofore deemed adequate, it need not, in any
> event, disturb the fundamental principles of the science. It offers
> a point of orientation from which the beginnings may be made of an
> exploration into an uncharted void in the history of language. That
> exploration will become more extensive and produce greater results
> in proportion as other criteria may be found identifying other types
> of the prehistoric loan-vocabulary.
>
>
>
> 1 Substantially as presented in a paper read before the annual
> meeting of the Linguistic Society OF America at New York, December
> 27th, 1935.
> 2 In words like Ital. slargare the sl is not strictly initial.
> 3 See Walde-Pokorny, 2.706-16; 603-51. I have not noticed anything
> relevant to this topic in the available data of Hittite and
> Tokharian.
> 4 As Sanskrit acquired the cacuminal dentals from the Dravidian
> aborigines. SeeMeillet, Introd.6 11.
> 5 Who these Mediterranean people were and what language they spoke
> is un­known, and no supposition is advanced. However, we are, I
> think, justified in calling the stl combination 'Mediterranean'.
> 6 Oscan slagim (Acc.) 'regionem, finis', slaagid (Abl.),
> beside
> Lat. stlocus, stloppus, stlat(t)a, stlis, stlembus;
> Oscan proper name Slabiis,
> beside Lat. Stlabius, Labius.
> Buck, Osc.-Umbr. Gram.,
> s.vv.-Celto-Ligurian inscr. No. 269 slaniai (Prae-Ital. Dial. 2.86),
> Dat. 'to Slania'?,
> beside
> Stlania (Venetia).
> So, generally in the coastal dialects:
> Stlaccia (Lucania, Calabria, Campania, Latium, Venetia);
> Stloga (Latium);
> Stlabia, Stlaboria (Campania);
> Stlatta (Volsci);
> Stlar*** (Daunia);
> Stla**** (Picenum);
> and the Illyrian town Stlupi (Ptolemy), with ethnicon Stulpini, on
> the coast of Liburnia. For the Italic names see
> Conway, Italic Dialects (1897), and
> Conway, Whatmough, and Johnson, Prae-Italic Dialects (1933),
> passim.
> -Umbrian Tlatie 'Latii' (Buck, op. cit.) does not, I think,
> represent a local stl, and thus separate Umbrian from Oscan; but is
> from an older name *Stlatium of the Latins themselves, i.e. *Slatium
> 'the flat courtry'. Cf. Cam­pania; stlat(t)a.
> 7 And, it seems to me, in contact with early Latin. The most archaic
> stl forms are in Breton.
> 8 Prov., Sp., Pg. scl beside escl; OFr. escl (Fr. écl); Ital. and
> Rum. schi. The statement of Brugmann (Grundr.2 1.585) that Lat. stl,
> 'nach gewissen lauten', became sl > l, does not apply to initial
> stl. - Although we are not concerned with the general history of
> -sl- in interior position, it may be observed that the tendency of
> the dialects of the south Italian coasts to intercalate t into sl
> was so strong, that when Lat. insula became *isla it was pronounced
> *istla, and became the name of the island Iscla, now Ischia, off the
> Bay of Naples. Grandgent, Vulg. Lat. ?284. In Calabria, Sicily, and
> Sardinia the common noun appears as iska, and in Pro­vence as iscla.
> Meyer-Liubke, REW2 4475.
> 9 Although this loan-epoch seems to have been primarily European the
> eastern languages may also be represented. We may venture to call it
> the Prehistoric European Loan-period, waiving, for the moment, any
> participation of the eastern group that may be shown.
> 10 'Toutefois, il importe de ne jamais l'oublier, le terme de mots
> indo-européens recouvre deux choses hétérogenes et qui ne restent
> confondues que par suite de l'absence d'un critère donnant le moyen
> de les distinguer; et la part des emprunts préhistoriques d'un
> dialecte indo-européen à un autre ou de plusieurs dialectes
> indo-européens à des langues d'autres familles est certainement
> immense'. Meil­let, Introd.6 339, cf. 343.
> 11 I do not discuss details of etymologies since those heretofore
> advanced are usually treated on an Indo-European basis, and must
> necessarily clash with those on the interloan theory. I have sought
> to use for the exposé of the principles announced illustrative forms
> whose semantic relations are simple and obvious. There are, however,
> other groups which similarly demonstrate the general prin­ciples, and
> which I hope to discuss hereafter.'
>
> The slave and Slav word (with its sl-/skl-/stl-)
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/66821
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/67224
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/67253
> would also belong here.


Where my *λaN- "wet mass, brine pond, beach flotsam, dead jellyfish, vitreous
body of the eye" also belongs, the origin of i.a. Germanic *glas- "glass",
Russian glaz "eye" etc, cf
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/64397

As for the -aN suffix, I earlier proposed it degenerated into several positional
allophones:
*-a:#, *-am#, *-o:#, *-in-, *-ar#, *-an-
of which the two first were systematized as nom. and acc. respectively, of a new
declensionm of a-stems, the next pair similarly as nom. and oblique case stem of
a declension of n-stems, and the last pair as the nom. and oblique case stem of
a heteroclitic declension

For the latter, cf.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/67253
see under 'skarn'


Now compare

Vasmer
:
'стекло´ 'Glas', dial. склo Jarosl. Vologda, Nižn., Westl, Südl.
(D.), (s. cкля´нка),
ukr. skło,
wruss. šklo,
aruss. stьklo 'Glas, Gefäß',
s.-ksl. stьklo κρύσταλλoς,
abulg. stьklěnica `αλάβαστρoς (Supr.),
bulg. stъklό, ckló (Mladenov 616),
skr. stàklo, skl`ò, ckl`ò 'Glas',
sloven. stəklò,
ačech. stklo,
čech. sklo,
slk. sklo,
poln. szkło,
osorb. nsorb. škla 'Schüssel',
osorb. škleńca 'Glasscheibe',
nsorb. šklanica. ||

Ursl. *stъкlo entlehnt aus
got. stikls 'Becher',
ahd. stechal calix,
s.
MiEW. 328,
Trautmann B81. 286,
Hirt PBгBtr. 23, 336,
Brückner Archiv 23, 536,
EW. 549,
Stender-Petersen 397ff.,
Kiparsky 209ff.
Lit. stìklas 'Glas, Trinkglas',
lett. stikls 'Glas, Glasscheibe',
apreuss. stiklo 'Glas'
können ebenfalls aus d. Germ., werden aber eher aus dem Slav. stammen (s.
M.-Endz. 3, 1067). Unwahrscheinlich ist balt.-slav. Alter (gegen Trautmann c.
1., Apr. Sprd. 439). Ausgeschlossen ist slav. Herkunft der germ. Wörter (gegen
Jagić Archiv 23, 536, Uhlenbeck PBrBtr. 22, 191). s. Kiparsky c. 1. Vom spitzen
Trinkhorn ist das Wort auf andere Gefäßformen und auf das Material übertragen
worden (Miklosich).'

and cf.
http://www.eudict.com/?word=glass&lang=engpol#
http://www.eudict.com/?word=glass&lang=engcze#
http://www.eudict.com/?word=glass&lang=engcro#


I can't see why the Germanic words can't have been borrowed from the Slavic.

But the real interesting stuff here is the ending (suffix) alternations:
*-o, *-an-, *-en-

Perhaps the mysterious Slavic n.nom.sg ending -o is from *-aN?


Torsten

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "keltikos" <keltikos@> wrote:
> > >
> > > No, but it was common that people were moving on and around from
> > > their original places, keeping their country-names, like Kasses
> > > (Hesse, then Welliokasses, Biokasses, Trikasses in France) and
> > > perhaps Turones (Thüringen, Tours and South Gallaecia?).
> >
> >
> > The *kant-/katt- etc word means 'subtribe', AFAIK.
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/55551
> >
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/58032
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/57987
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/54256
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/59612
>
> Michel Lejeune,
> Manuel de la langue Vénète
> calls the Venetic gloss kant- (among others) 'éventuellement,
> suffixés'.
> Inscriptions:
> 30. - C. Pauli, Altit. Forsch. I, 1885, n° 71; L37 VII; PP Es 49.
> Dédicace sinistroverse (partant de la tête, sur une face large) :
> ka.n.ta ruma.n[.]na dona.s.to re.i.tia.n.
> Dans le théonyme (accusatif régi par dona.s.to : § 55) le second i
> est aussi court qu'un point.
> Autre style votif de même dédicante : 31.
>
> [me: The Roman community/faction gave [this] to Reitia]
>
> 31. - G. Pauli, Altit. Forsch. I, 1885, n° 69; L37 XV; PP Es 50.
> Dédicace sinistroverse (sur une face étroite, en partant de la
> tête), offrande de la même dédicante qu'en 30. Texte :
> nego [sic] na.s.to [sic] ka.n.ta ruman [sic] re.i.tiia.i.
> Gravure plusieurs fois fautive : nego pour <m>ego; na.s.to pour
> <do>na.s.to (le graveur, arrivé au o du pronom, ayant cru être
> arrivé à celui de la première syllabe du verbe); ruman pour
> ruma<.>n<.na>.
>
> [me: Me gave the Roman community(?)faction to Reitia]
>
> ...
>
> 81 A. -
> A. Prosdocimi, Not. Sc. 1882, pl. VIII-16; L38 XXIII a; PP Es 80.
> Sur le bord de l'urne, graffite sinistroverse : ka.n.( )
> Peut-être amorce abandonnée, ou doublet abrégé, de la légende b.
> Mais peut-être aussi première épitaphe (abrégée), une seconde
> épitaphe (b) ayant été gravée à l'occasion d'un remploi de l'urne.
> 81 B. - Même urne (L38 XXIII b). Sur le corps, graffite dextroverse:
> ka.n.ta.i. vho[.]u.go.n.ta.i. vhr
> Ou bien désignation d'une seule défunte (la même que signale le
> graffite a) avec formule onomastique triple, à condition de corriger
> le second nom (L38) en vho.u.go.n.t<n>a.i. (lapsus par
> dissimilation) pour avoir un gamonyme, et de compléter le troisième
> en vhr(ema.i.s.tia.i.) pour avoir un patronyme. - Ou bien deux
> idionymes f. en asyndète, avec patronyme commun vhr( ) au dat.
> sg. ou au dat. pl. : d'abord (a) utilisée pour Kanta:, l'urne aurait
> été remployée (b) après la mort de sa s�"ur Fougonta:, et une
> épitaphe commune gravée; voir § 57 b.
>
> [me: to/of the Foug-ont- faction/tribe/community vhr(?)]
> Hans Kuhn,
> Das letzte Indogermanisch
> compares names in the territory of the Marsi in Italy with the names
> of the territory of the Marsi in Westphalia, among them:
> 'lacus Fucinus: Vochene (jetzt Vochem, zu Brühl, s. Köln), dazu
> (Alba) Fucens/Fucentia (Ort): Vochentz (Vögnitz, sö. Schweinfurt),
> vgl. auch Fohhences-heim'
> Note the suffix alterantion: -in-/-ent-
>
> ...
> 66. - G. F. Gamurrini, Appendice al C.I.I. (1880), no 4; L35 IX; PP
> Es 11.
> Provenance : Morlongo; contexte inconnu. Fragment d'obélisque de
> trachyte. Il reste le bas de la partie inscrite sur 24 cm de haut et
> une largeur de 17 cm (en bas) à 12 cm (en haut). Deux lignes
> boustrophédon, l'une sinistroverse descendante, l'autre dextroverse
> ascendante; dispositif :
> Restitution la plus probable (évaluant à deux lettres les lacunes du
> haut) :
> [.e.g]o kata.i. | ege.s.tn[a.i.]
> Omission d'un point dans .e<.>ge.s.tn[a.i.]; non notation de la
> nasale antéconsonantique de ka<.n.>ta.i. (§ 157 b). Le .i. est
> constitué par un tiret entre deux hastes longues, par inversion de
> son tracé usuel (une haste longue entre deux tirets).
>
> [me: I, of/to the Egesta tribe], cf
> Hans Kuhn,
> Vor- und frühgermanische Ortsnamen und den Niederlanden,
> in the list of placenames in -st
> 'Eckst, ö. Assen, Drente, alt Exte Eegeste u. a.,'
>
> Note the loss of /n/ before /t/.
> Manuel de la langue Vénète,
> '
> 157. Nasales antéconsonantiques : neutralisalion, au moins
> partielle, de l'opposition /m/ ~ /n/ :
> ...
> b) Nasale + occlusive (séquences hétérosyllabiques). C'est, par
> excellence, la position de neutralisation attendue pour les nasales.
> Par malchance, nous n'avons pas de premiers termes de composés à
> nasale finale (comme lat. com-/con-) où nous puissions suivre
> l'accommodation de la nasale à l'occlusive qui suit. Au reste, nous
> n'avons aucun exemple de nasale + labiale; seulement, quelques
> exemples de nasale + dorsale (avec graphie -.n.k- : voir § 155 a),
> et surtout des exemples de nasale + dentale; il en existe pour la
> sonore (sans l'assimilation nd > nn qu'on trouve, notamment, en
> osco-ombrien): .a.n.de-, 136/ANDE- , 236, ve.r.ko.n.darna, 24; on en
> a un grand nombre pour la sourde (en particulier, participe
> horvionte 123, et nombreux thèmes d'anthroponymes en -.n.t- : § 35
> c1). - La nasale implosive paraît avoir été d'articulation
> relativement débile.
> A Este, en regard de plus de quarante exemples de -.n.t- (9, etc.),
> on a quatre textes où la nasale est omise :
> 66 (ka<.n.>ta.i.),
> 77 (vho.u.go<.n.>ta),
> 89 (vhogo<.n>tna.i.),
> 100 (kvi<.n.>to);
> il s'agit d'épitaphes de date Este-IV; chacune comprend un seul mot
> en -nt- (celui où la nasale n'est pas notée). De date Este-IV aussi
> est la dédicace de Vicence où l'on est tenté de lire .a.<.n.>tra
> «intra:» (125), et qui, elle non plus, n'a pas d'autre mot en -nt-.
> Nous ignorons si le phénomène, d'apparition sporadique, est
> spécifiquement un phénomène tardif en vénète. Nous ignorons si
> l'usage d'un même scribe était constant en la matière. Si la réponse
> aux deux questions était négative, il serait loisible, dans
> l'inscription atestine archaïque 75 ter (qui présente aussi vhontei)
> de lire a<n>tisteit, et dans l'inscription vicentine archaïque 123
> (qui présente aussi horvionte), de lire me<n>tlon.'
>
>
> In other words, my understanding of *kant-/*katt-/*kass- as "edge,
> side, faction, tribe" is not contradicted by the Venetic data, but
> might even make new sense of well-known inscriptions.
>
> BTW, Venetic punctuation marks consonants in auslaut with a point.
>

In the above posting, I assumed without proof that Roman-annexed territories
contained an identifiable and self-conscious Roman 'expat community'. I better
find somethng to corroborate that assumption.

David Magie
Roman Rule in Asia Minor
ch. The Consequences of Annexation
pp. 162-163

'There is another side to the picture. At the very time when the citizens of
Pergamum were in debt and when the city had petitioned in vain for the abolition
of the war-contribution demanded by the Romans, the Council and People voted to
honour Diodorus by bestowing on him a golden wreath and by erecting no less than
five statues of him, two of gold and two of bronze, one of each kind to be on
horseback, and one of marble, the last to be set up in a temple which was
likewise to be reared for his worship.4 Such an outlay of public funds
immediately after an economic crisis seems indeed to indicate a reckless
management of the municipal finances and shows why the city, as well as its
citizens, became involved in debt.

The loans which the citizens of Pergamum had contracted may have been advanced
in part by the richer men of the city, but it is highly probable that in some
cases, at least, they were made by Roman capitalists, who had come from Italy in
the wake of the army. One of the decrees honouring Diodorus includes among other
groups that of "the resident Romans,"5 and it can hardly be supposed that these
were residing in Pergamum for any other purpose than the exploitation of the
country.

This is the earliest mention in Asia Minor of a type of organization which grew
up in the provinces of Rome - a definitely constituted group of Italians
permanently domiciled in a city and existing as a special association alongside
of the citizens.6 Technically, such a group was known as a conventus Civium
Romanorum, but for practical purposes it was called more simply "the resident
Romans" or "the Romans engaged in business." With the love of organizing that is
characteristic of their kind, these business-men established associations, each
having officials and a treasury of its own. They passed resolutions, sometimes
acting conjointly with the Council and People of their city, and conferred
honours on some important person, a Roman, a member of their own association, or
a citizen of the community. As time went on, the groups of the entire province
would sometimes combine for some joint action.7 In the second or early first
century before Christ, these groups existed in many cities, not only at Pergamum
but also at Ephesus, Priene, Tralles, Adramyttium and Caunus and on the islands
of Chios and Cos. During the first forty years of the province of Asia the
influx of Italians must have been great indeed, for in 88 b.c. as many as 80,000
are said to have been massacred by order of King Mithradates.l But it was
especially after the expulsion of the Pontic King that Italian settlers crowded
into the province and the real heydey of exploitation began. In the first
century and under the emperors there was an association of "resident Romans" in
almost every city of importance.

These associations evidently regarded themselves as constituting a body apart
from and independent of the community in which they lived.8 They were also so
regarded in cases where the law was concerned. In the free cities, at least
during the Republican period, they were subject to the city's jurisdiction
unless specifically exempted, but elsewhere they could not be tried by local
magistrates but only by the Roman governor or his substitute.9 From the more
important groups were chosen members of the governor's consilium, or panel from
which he drew referees or jurymen for the lawsuits of the provincials conducted
by him.10 Despite their independence of the community, these Italians shared in
all the advantages which the communal life afforded. They were eligible for
election to the local offices,11 and, as at Pergamum they were included among
those invited to the public banquet given by Diodorus,m so in other places also
they shared in benefactions made to the people by dignitaries or public-spirited
citizens.12

The groups included not only Romans but also all citizens of the Italian towns
which were in alliance with Rome; with the extension of citizenship in 89 b.c.
to all the Italian allies this differentiation, of course, ceased, and all those
whose homes were south of the Po became "Romans" in the eyes of the law. Men of
all classes were eligible to membership - exporters of the products of Asia,
merchants great and small, agents of the tax-farming corporations, veterans
domiciled in the province, bankers who made loans to bankrupt cities, and minor
capitalists who lent money to individuals. No distinction among the Roman
settlers was made, either economic or social.
...

4. I.G.R. IV 292, l. 23f.; 293 II, l. 17f. It is, of course, possible that these
honours were not all carried out. We know only that, as provided by the decree
(I.G.R. IV 292, 1. 37), a city-tribe was named after him; it was called,
however, not πασπαρηίς, but διοδωρίς; sw: A.M. xxxv (1910), p.
422f., nos. ii, 13 and 19.

5. ´ρωμαίων ο´ι `επιδημου~ντες; see I.G.R. iv 294 =
O.G.I. 764, 1. 19, as corrected in AM. xxix (1904), p. 389. In the lists of
ephebi enrolled at Pergamum, AM. xxvii (1902), p. 115f. (see Chap. VI note 8),
xxxii (1907), p. 415f., xxxiii p. 384f and xxxv p. 422f., there are several
Italian names. In one list, AM. xxxii p. 438, no. 303 (see xxxv p. 424), the
´ρωμαι~οι seem to have formed a separate group.

6. For these conventus Civium Romanorum - which, of course, were wholly
different from the judiciary conventus (conventus iuridici) or dioceses (see
below note 41)- see A. Schulten De Conventibus Civ. Rom. (Berlin 1892), pp. if.
and 26f.: E. Kornemann De Civibus Rom. in Provinciis Imperii consist. = Berl.
Stud. f. Cl. Philol. xiv (1892), no. i and in R.E,. iv 1179f.: Mommsen in Eph.
Ep. vii p. 440f. For those in the Asianic provinces see also Chapot Prov.
Procons. p. 186f.: J. Hatzfeld Les Trafiquants Italiens dans l'Orient
Hellénique (Paris 1919), pp. 44f, 90f. and 160f.: Broughton in Econ. Surv. iv
p. 543f. For a list of the cities in these provinces in which these conventus
are known during the Republican and the Imperial periods see Appendix iv. The
associations were regularly and properly called Romani --- (name of city)
consistentes or qui --- negotiantur; in Greek ο´ι κατοικου~ντες
´ρωμαι~οι or ο´ι πραγματενόμενοι ´ρωμαι~οι but
sometimes simply ο´ι ´ρωμαι~οι. During the Republican period the
associations seem to have been headed by magistri varying in number; no certain
example of these officials, however, has been found in Asia Minor, for the
assumption (R.E. iv 1190) that the two freedmen, entitled magistri, who appear
in an inscription from Samos (C.I.L. iii 458) were magistri of a conventus
Civium Romanorum is very doubtful. In the Imperial period a conventus seems
ordinarily to have had a single curator; see Hatzfeld, p. 286. This official, as
the list in Appendix iv shows, is known to have held office at Attaleia,
Thyateira and Tralles. An official called κονβεντα[ρ]χήσας τω~ν
´ρωμαι~ων is known at Hierapolis (I.G.R. iv 818). A γραμματεύς
of the conventus existed at Tralles (A.M. viii [1883], p. 328f., no. 10 = P.A.S.
i p. 108, no. 10). No mention of a treasury appears in any inscription from Asia
Minor, but the statues or other honours for which the various conventus must
have paid are sufficient evidence that they had funds of their own.

7. At Ephesus the conventus C. R. qui in Asia negotiantur honoured the Emperor
Claudius (Ephesos iii p. 110, no. 19); at Laodiceia-on-Lycus ο´ι `επ`ι
τη~ς `ασίας ´ρωμαι~οι combined with ο´ι `έλληνες
(evidently the κοινόν of the province, see below note 48) and ´ο
δη~μος ´ο Λαοδικέων in honouring a Q. Pomponius Flaccus (AM. xvi
[1891], p. 144f. = I.G.R. iv 860); at Rhodes the C.R. qui in Asia negotiantur
took some action unknown (C.I.L. iii 12266); and at Ephesus [ο´ι κατ`α
τ`η]ν `ασίαν ο`ικου~[ντες ´ρωμαι~οι] (if the
restoration be correct) seem to have set up a statue of the genius of the city
(I.B.M. 517). Chapot, who knew only the inscription from Laodiceia, denied
(Prov. Procons. p. 190) that the Romans of the whole province were thus
organized in one group; but the inscriptions from Ephesus and Rhodes seem to
demonstrate it clearly. That the group of mercatores qui Alexandr., Asiai,
Syriai negotiantu[r], who made a dedication at Puteoli (C.I.L. x 1797 = Dessau
7273), were a still larger organization, as was suggested by Kornemann, is
unlikely; more probably they were local merchants whose trade was carried on
with these provinces; see Broughton in Econ. Surv. iv p. 548, note 96.

8. This is apparent from the fact that in some cases, e.g. at Cibyra, Erythrae,
Laodiceia, Smyrna and Teos, honours were conferred separately by ´ο
δη~μος and ο´ι ´ρωμαι~οι. On the other hand, in many cities,
e.g. Apameia, Assus, Cibyra, Cyzicus, Methymna, Pergamum, Philadelpheia (?),
Prymnessus, Thyateira and Conana (Pisidia), action was taken conjointly by the
βουλ`η κα`ι δη~μος (or the δη~μος) and ο´ι
κατοικου~ντες (or πραγματενόμενοι) ´ρωμαι~οι,
evidently distinct bodies. A similar distinction is made between singulos
conventus (of Roman citizens) and singulas civitates in Caesar Bell. Civ. iii 32
(see above p. 403).

9. See Mommsen RSt.R. iii p. 702 and Chapot Prov. Procons. pp. 125 and 190. In
C.I.G. 2222 = Syll.8 785 = I.G.R. iv 943 (Chios, a re-enactment under Augustus
of a senatus consultum of 80 b.c.) it is specifically provided that ο´ί τε
παρ` α`υτοι~ς `όντες ´ρω[μ,αι~](ο)ι τοι~ς χείων
´υπακούωσιν νόμοις. Mommsen supposed (l.c., note 3) that under
the emperors autonomy was taken away from Cyzicus and Rhodes because by
inflicting capital punishment on Roman citizens the cities' courts had exceeded
their powers, but these instances do not prove his contention. Cyzicus was
deprived of its freedom by Tiberius because of violentia committed against
Romans (Tacitus Ann. iv 36, 2f.: Suetonius Tib. 37: Cassius Dio lvii 24, 6; see
above p. 503); it had once before been deprived of it for the same reason by
Augustus (see Chap. XX note 21). The freedom of the Rhodians was taken away by
Claudius (Cassius Dio lx 24, 4, see Chap. XXIII note 24) because they had
impaled (ανεσκολόπισαν) certain Romans. In both cases it would seem
that it was the illegality of the act that these emperors punished and not a
regular procedure of the properly constituted courts of the cities.

10. So in Sicily; see Cicero II Verr. ii 32f. and 70; iii 28: Mommsen RSt.R. I3
p. 317 and note 5. The belief that the members of the conventus formed this
panel and also Mommsen's theory that only the richer (and hence more
responsible) Romans were enrolled in it has found striking confirmation in the
first and fourth of the edicts of Augustus recently found at Cyrene and dealing
with law-suits in which provincials were concerned; see S.E.G. ix 8 = H.
Malcovati Augusti Operum Fragmenta2 (Turin 1928), p. 39f. In these edicts the
Emperor ordered that all cases involving life, freedom or nationality, hitherto
tried by a jury selected from the 215 resident Romans having a taxable property
of at least 2500 denarii, might henceforth, if the defendant so desired, be
tried by a jury composed of equal numbers of Romans and "Greeks," all to be at
least 25 years of age and having a minimum taxable property of 7500 denarii -
unless it should prove necessary, on account of a dearth of those so qualified,
to lower this amount to not less than one half. All other cases were henceforth,
unless either party to the suit should express his preference for Romans, to be
tried by a jury composed entirely of "Greeks," none of whom, however, might be
domiciled in the city of which either party to the suit was a native. It may be
supposed that a similar arrangement also existed in Asia, and that the same
change was introduced there.

11. So at Apameia, where four Roman citizens and one native are described as
`άρξαντες `εν τω~ λ' κα`ι ρ´ `έτει (a.d. 45/6)
´ρωμαι~οι, πρώτως (i.e. the first Romans to hold the office); see
I.G.R. iv 792. The curatores known from the inscriptions listed in Appendix iv
from Attaleia and Thyateira (I.G.R. iv 1169 and 1255), Tralles (C.I.G. 2930) and
the official from Hierapolis (I.G.R. iv 818) all held local offices.

12. For example, at Panamara and Lagina in Caria the ´ρωμαι~οι, as well
as the citizens, received the money-doles distributed by the priest and
priestess; see B.C.H. xi (1887), pp. 146f., nos. 47, 48, 51; xii (1888), p. 255
= xxviii (1904), p. 23f., no. 2. At Priene they were included in the dole of oil
and the free use of the public bath, as well as in the entertainments provided
by generous magistrates; see Ins. Priene 112, 113 and 123.'

So apparently such communities existed, and would have existed in
Venetic-speaking regions before the Social War of 91-88 BCE.

Note esp. note 6.

That settles that question, but the text continues to be interesting (I suspect
taxes from the province of Asia was used for buying slaves in Dacia
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/67564
), so I'll quote some more:

pp. 163-167

'The settlers appear to have bought up lands in the territories belonging to the
cities, and on these they established permanent homes.13 Some of them may have
taken up holdings in the rural districts also, although it is not likely that
there were many actual farmers among the Italian immigrants, and these probably
did not buy up much of the former royal domains. This land, now the property of
the Roman People, as well as the land of the native private proprietors, fell
into the hands of the Roman tax-farming corporations.

Six years after the formation of the province and before it could have recovered
entirely from the financial depression which has been described, a fresh blow
fell upon the inhabitants. They were now caught in the clutches of the Roman
tax-farming syndicates, who exploited them for the next seventy-five years.n In
123 b.c. Gaius Gracchus, in his efforts to become a popular leader, sought to
win the support of the great middle class of Rome, composed of share-holders in
the companies which bid for the collection of the revenues accruing to the
state. For some time these publicani had farmed the revenues from the
state-owned properties in Italy, and after the annexation of Sicily they
collected them from the city-territories and the domain-land acquired by the
Roman People as the successors of the Syracusan monarchs.14 Now, by virtue of a
law enacted by Gracchus, companies were permitted to make similar contracts for
the revenues from the province of Asia also.15 Henceforth, their representatives
in Rome, appearing before the censors, or, when these for any reason had not
been elected, before the Consuls, presented bids for the revenues of the next
four years, basing their offers, presumably, on what was supposed to be a fair
yield during preceding periods. If an offer was accepted, the amount was
guaranteed to the government by the company, which thus became underwriter for
the payment of what was due. What remained over and above this amount
constituted the profits of the share-holders.

The revenues thus farmed out to the companies consisted chiefly of tithes on
produce, taxes on pasture and customs-duties - the last, at the rate of 2½ per
cent, levied, apparently, both on imports and on exports.16 According to the
method eventually employed, the agents did not deal directly with the individual
tax-payers but, with the approval of the governor, made sub-contracts with the
several communities, which thus became responsible for the payment of their
respective quotas;17 if these were not paid punctually, interest at a rate
specified in the agreements was charged on all arrears. If tithes on the
harvests were actually delivered in kind, they seem to have been sold and the
proceeds credited to the company.18

The three sources of revenue were farmed by three separate organizations,19 but,
obviously, there was no clash of interests among them. The same persons might be
share holders in all three, and when the need arose, as, for example, in making
bids or asking for the cancellation of their contracts, the three companies seem
to have combined together into a unit of a larger size.20

In the system as finally developed, the companies had their headquarters in
Ephesus, from which their agents carried on their operations.0 The actual head
of the organization, the magister,21 remained in Rome, but he was represented in
the province by a deputy (pro magistro), whose duty it was to conduct all
negotiations both with the governor and with the communities, to handle the
funds of the company, and to turn over to the quaestor of the province the
amount-specified in the contract made with the government at Rome. He had under
his supervision a host of clerks and agents, both free men - some of them
members of the company - and slaves, who were actively engaged in the business
of collecting the taxes.22 The publicani had despatch-bearers of their own, who
carried communications to and from the Capital and through whom letters could be
sent by persons of influence even though they were not connected with the
companies.23 They had also their own banks at Laodiceia and Ephesus, in which
were kept the proceeds of their exactions, and of these a Roman official might
avail himself for the deposit of his ready money, as might also the government
for the purpose of giving bills of exchange to its officers.24

In a speech supposed to have been delivered by Mark Antony eighty-one years
after the passage of Gracchus's law, the statement was made that by this method
of taxation a great benefit had been conferred upon the peoples of Asia; for,
whereas they had previously paid a fixed sum to their kings, whether the yield
was good or bad, the Romans demanded only a proportion of their annual harvests,
thus sharing adverse circumstances with them.p This specious plea disregarded
the fact that not only were the bids of the publicani made in Rome, where no one
could estimate what the yield would be, but they were made for four years in
advance; only an approximate average of previous years, therefore, could
determine the probable amount of the future harvests, with no adequate allowance
for possible years when the crops might fail. The argument also ignored one of
the worst consequences of the system. For a failure on the part of the farmer to
deliver his . quota, either in grain or in money, constituted a lasting
obligation entailing payment of interest on all arrears,q and this interest the
unhappy farmer was compelled to pay to the publicani. Usually, of course, it was
necessary for him to borrow the funds, and the source of a loan would be a Roman
banker engaged in business in the province. Thus the tax-gatherer and the
money-lender together involved the provincial in continually increasing
indebtedness.

The agents of the tax-farmers, with an eye to greater profits, naturally
attempted to tax all land to which they could successfully assert any claim.
Their aggressions are attested by the cases where decisions are known to have
been rendered against them in their attempts to impose taxes on those categories
of land not under their control - the territory of the free cities and the
estates belonging to the temples. In the case of Pergamum, for example, a
magistrate at Rome, in conjunction with a board of advisers, was ordered by the
Senate to investigate a complaint that the publicani were taxing part of the
city's territory and to determine the actual boundaries of the Pergamenes'
lands.25 The extant examples of aggression on temple-properties are more
numerous. Thus the right to tax land belonging to the Temple of Athena Ilias at
Troy, which was asserted by the tax-farmers, was denied by Lucius Caesar, censor
in 89, in consequence of an appeal made by advocates of the Goddess.26 A similar
case arose in connexion with the revenues (probably fishing-rights) from the
lakes near Ephesus, which had originally accrued to the Temple of Artemis, but
had been taken over by "the kings."r The Romans had restored them to the
Goddess, but nevertheless, about the end of the second century before Christ,
the publicani laid violent hands on them; it was only after a special ambassador
- the famous geographer Artemidorus - was sent to Rome by the temple-officials
to present the case to the Senate that these revenues were given back. Another
case arose at Priene, where not only lands formerly the property of Attalus III
but also the saltworks belonging to the sanctuary of Athena Polias were claimed
as taxable.27 When the salt-works were seized by agents of the tax-farmers, a
patriotic citizen appeared before the governor to protest against their action.
Although the aggressors went so far as to use violence, he succeeded in having
their proceedings halted until the Senate granted a favourable reply to the
city's appeal. Evidently the publicani had no scruples in asserting claims to
all possible sources of revenue, but it is to the credit of the government at
Rome that in several instances, at least, their claims were disallowed.

Nevertheless, in spite of the havoc wrought by the revolt of Aristonicus, the
free cities appear during the late second century to have enjoyed a certain
degree of prosperity. The drain of the war-contributions removed, these
communities, not subject to the Roman tax-gatherers' greed, found it possible to
make use of the natural resources of their territories as well as of their
industries and their commerce to repair the ravages caused by the war. Thus at
Magnesia-on-Maeander and at Teos the erection of the temples of Artemis and
Dionysus, the work of the architect Hermogenes, if, as has been suggested, the
buildings may be dated in this period,s testifies to the wealth of the
communities. At Magnesia also the celebrations of the festival in honour of the
Goddess Roma, with dramatic contests consisting of tragedies, comedies and the
farces known as "satyr-dramas," are evidence of the generosity of those
well-to-do citizens who, as "agonothetes," paid the expenses of the
performances.t
...

13. See Rostovtzeff Kolonat, p. 286 and Hellenist. World, Chap. VII, note 35,
who cited as evidence of lands in Asia later owned by Romans in city-territory
Cicero pro Flacco 71f. and 80 and Epist. ad Fam. xiii 53. See also Broughton in
Econ. Surv. iv p. 549 and (for absentee owners) p. 551.

14. On the societates publicanorum see F. Kniep Societas Publicanorum i (Jena
1896), p. 11f.: Rostovtzeff Staatspacht, p. 370f. (for the Republican period):
V. Ivanov De Societatibus Vectigalium publicorum Pop. Rom. (St. Petersburg
1911), p. 12f.: Steinwenter in R.E. xiv 987f.: Frank in Econ. Surv. 1 p. 148f.:
Broughton in Econ. Surv. iv p. 535f.: W. Schwahn in R.E. vii a 44 and 64f.
Publicani, who are first mentioned as having taken public contracts in 215 b.c.
(Livy xxiii 49, 1), appear for the first time in 184 as collectors of the public
revenues (Livy xxxix 44, 7f.), but probably, as Kniep observed, they had
contracted for these previously. According to Polybius vi 17, 2f., in the first
half of the second century large numbers of Romans were financially interested
in the corporations organized for taking contracts for the construction and
repair of public works and the farming of the state-owned utilities. His picture
of the number of persons engaged and of the extent of their operations is
perhaps exaggerated; see Frank in C.P. xxviii (1933), p. 2f. = Econ. Surv. i p.
149. For the collection of tithes in Sicily under the provisions of the Lex
Hieronica, i.e. according to the system established by Hiero II of Syracuse, see
Rostovtzeff Staatspacht, p. 350f. and Kolonat, p. 233f and V. M. Scramuzza in
Econ. Surv. iii p. 237f.

15. Cicero II Verr. iii 12: Scholia Bob. p. 157 Stangl: Fronto Epist. ad Ver. ii
1, p. 125 Naber. An apparent contradiction to the evidence of these passages
seems to be found in Lucilius, ll. 671-2 Marx (Bk. xxvi): Publicanus vero ut
Asiae fiam, ut scripturarius, pro Lucilio, etc.; for Book xxvi appears to have
been written in the period 132-129 b.c.; see F. Marx C. Lucilii Carminum
Reliquiae (Leipzig 1904-05) 1 p. xxx f. It was held by C. Cichorius, however, in
Untersuchungen zu Lucilius (Berlin 1908), p. 72 that these lines, as well as
other indications, point to an actual publication of this and the following
books at a date subsequent to 123 b.c, and thus the contradiction disappears.
Accordingly, it does not seem necessary to attempt to reconcile the evidence by
supposing, with Schanz-Hosius (Gesch. d. Röm. Lit. i4 p. 154), that the lines
in question were written before 129 b.c. in the expectation of the introduction
of the tax-farming system into Asia. For a view that the taxes of Asia were
leased out to publicani as soon as the province was organized see below note 25.

16. These were known respectively as the decumae, the scriptura and the
portorium; see Cicero de Imp. Cn. Pomp. 15 and pro Flacco 19: Lucilius 1. 671
(scripturarius, see above note 15) : Cicero Epist. ad Att. v 15, 3, magistri
scripturae et portus (for Cilicia); xi 10, 1, operas in portu et scriptura Asiae
pro magistro dedit; Epist. ad Fam. xiii 65, i, operas in scriptura pro magistro
dat: Donatus Commentum Terenti, Phorm. 100 (Vol. ii p. 389 Wessner), magistri
tributorum, id est publicani, operas in portu dabant. See also Rostovtzeff in
R.E. vii 154f. (on the decuma) and Hellenist. World, pp. 817, 957 and 965f.:
Ivanov ibid. p. 111: Frank in Econ. Surv. i p. 255f.: Broughton in Econ. Surv.
iv p. 511. For the portorium see R. Cagnat Les Impôts Indirects chez les
Romains (Paris 1882), pp. 1f. and 79f., and for the quadragesima portuum Asiae
in the early imperial period see Chap. XXIV note 4.

17. For these sub-contracts (pactiones) see Cicero Epist. ad Att. v 13, i; 14,
i; vi 1, 16; ad Quint. Fr. i 1, 35; ad. Fam. xiii 65, 1; de Prov. Cons. 10 (for
Syria). See also Rostovtzeff Staatspacht, p. 357 and Hellenist. World, p. 967
and note 50: Ivanov, p. 89f.: Broughton, p. 537: A. Η. M. Jones Greek City, p.
124: W. Schwahn in R.E. vii a 44 and 64. As Rostovtzeff observed, it seems more
probable that the pactiones were annual rather than, as supposed by Broughton
(p. 537, note 13), quinquennial. For the interest on arrears see Cicero ad Att.
vi 1, 16 and 2, 5 and Ivanov, p. 90f.

18. The suggestion of Rostovtzeff (R.E. vii 155), Frank (Econ. Surv. i p. 274)
and Broughton (p. 540) that the tithes on products delivered in kind were
sometimes carried by the publicani outside the province depends on a restoration
in the Lex Antonia de Termessibus (see Chap. XII note 34), col. ii, l. 36f.:
Quos per eorum fineis publicanei ex eo vectigali transportabunt [eorum fructuum
portorium Termenses ne capiunto],

19. This is evident from the fact that each had its magister (or pro magistro);
see above note 16. See also Ivanov, p. 23f.

20. See Ivanov, p. 20f., who showed that such a combination existed not only in
Asia, but in other provinces as well. For the Bithynica Societas as a
combination of the societates operating in Bithynia see Chap. XVI note 72.

21. For the magister and pro magistro see above note 16: Cicero pro Plancio 32:
Scholia Bob. p. 157 Stangl: Cicero Epist. ad Fam. xiii 9, 2 (for Bithynia):
Marquardt RSt.V. ii2 p. 300f.: Ivanov, pp. 51f. and 69f.: Broughton, p. 538f.

22. Cicero de Imp. Cn. Pomp. 16 and Epist. ad Fam. xiii 9, 3: Caesar Bell. Civ.
iii 103: Appian B.C. ii 13. See also Ivanov, pp. 65f. and 74f. and Broughton, p.
539.

23. Cicero Epist. ad Att. v 15, 3, 21, 4. These tabellarii belonged to the
companies which farmed the taxes of Cilicia, but it may be inferred that those
which operated in Asia had them also.

24. Cicero Epist. ad Fam. ii 17, 4; iii 5, 4; v 20, 9; Epist. ad. Att. xi 1, 2;
2, 3; cf. II Verr. in 165. See also Ivanov, p. 42 and E. J. Jonkers in Mnem. ix
(1941), p. 185.

25. See Passerini in Athenaeum xv (1937), p. 252f. who combined several
fragments of the senatus consultum and the decree of the magistrate and his
consilium dealing with the matter, all found at Smyrna (see Türk Tarıh ii
[1934], p. 240f., part of which is in Ann. Ép. 1935, 173). An even more
fragmentary copy, found at Adramyttium, has been known since 1875; see I.G.R. iv
262 and Mommsen in Eph. Ep. iv p. 213f. = Ges. Schr. viii p. 344f. and R.St.R.
iii p. 967, note 4. This copy, on the evidence of the names of the members of
the consilium, was dated in about 110 b.c. by Cichorius Untersuchungen zu
Lucilius, p. 3f., accepted by Munzer in R.E. xv 618,1. 64. Passerini, on the
other hand, on the basis of his restorations in the Smyrna copy [μάνιος
`ακύλλιος γαίος σεμπρώ]νιος ´ύπατοι (1. 9) and
[μάνιος `ακ]ύλλιος ´ύπατο? (1. 17), dated it in 129 b.c.
This dating, however, although accepted by M. Segre in Athenaeum xvi (1938), p.
124 and subsequently by Münzer (quoted in Rostovtzeff Hellenist. World, Chap.
VI note 86) and by Hansen (Attalids, p. 151), is questionable. Although the
restoration in l. 17 is reasonably certain, since ... υλλιος can hardly be
restored in any other way, and although the clause `εαν α`υντω~
φαίνηται, which immediately follows, evidently alludes to the Consul of
the year, the restoration of 1. 9, based on the assumption that the names of the
Consuls of the current year are to be read here, is not convincing. Moreover, it
is hard to believe that a controversy between the publicani and the Pergamenes
could have arisen as early as 129, when the revolt of Aristonicus had scarcely
been quelled. It seems much more probable, therefore, that the
[`ακ]ύλλιος in question was the younger Manius Aquilius, Consul wilh
Gaius Marius in 101 b.c. and in 90 a special commissioner in Asia (see above p.
208), and that: the Consuls (the second named ... νιος mentioned in 1. 9)
were those of some unknown year. This view seems to be supported by the presence
of Lucius Domitius Cn. [f.] in the consilium (1. 37), who, as Passerini observed
(p. 269), can hardly be any other than the Consul of 94. It is difficult to
suppose that this man was old enough in 129 to have been a member of a
magistrate's consilium; for since his father, Gnaeus Ahenobarbus, was Consul in
122 b.c, Lucius (who was the second son) could scarcely have been born before
145; in 129, therefore, he was not more than 16 years old. If Passerini's dating
of the inscription cannot be accepted, we must question also his inference (p.
277f.) that the taxes of Asia were leased to the publicani immediately after the
acquisition of the province, and that the Lex Sempronia of Gaius Gracchus (see
above note 15) was merely a change in the system already existing, by which
either tithes were introduced or the percentage imposed on harvests was altered.

26. I.G.R. iv 194 = O.G.I. 440 = Dessau 8770 = Abbott and Johnson Municipal
Administration in the Rom. Emp. (Princeton 1926), no. 14. A somewhat similar
case, as Dittenberger observed (O.G.I. 440, note 4), is found in the Senate's
decision in 73 b.c. against the claim of the publicani that the lands of the
sanctuary of Amphiaraus at Oropus on the border between Attica and Boeotia were
subject to taxation; see I.G. vii 413 = Syll.3 747 and Cicero de Nat. Deor. iii
49. On the other hand, an inscription from Telmissus in Caria (J.H.S. xiv
[1894], p. 377f. = Michel 459), which records a restoration of land to Apollo,
and a fragment from Pergamum of the early second century after Christ (A.M. xxiv
[1899], p. 177, no. 27 = I.G.R. iv 397), recording a similar restoration to
Dionysus, were cited by Dittenberger (O.G.I. 440, note 3) as parallel cases,
but, as they contain no mention of publicani, they cannot be regarded as
definite instances of aggression of this kind. It is also difficult to connect
with the publicani, as was suggested by Viereck (Sermo Graecus, p. 9), a
fragmentary letter of the proconsul P. Cornelius Scipio to Thyateira containing
mention of [´ιε]ρω~ν χρημάτων (I.G.R. iv 1211, see Chap. XX note
37).'



Torsten

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Tavi" <oalexandre@...> wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> >
> > Alternatively, we could follow Kuhn and propose the existence of
> > not one but two substrate layers for Germanic in the NWBlock area:
> >
> > 1 a non-IE language, called the ar-/ur-language by Kuhn
> >
> > 2 an IE language, spoken but for a short time before Germanic took
> > over
> >
> > and assign the Germanic-like NWBlock roots to the latter, eg
> > Meid's German flur, English floor, NWB placename Plore, OI lar
> > "field"
> >
> Matasović reconstructs Proto-Celtic *fla:ro- 'floor', and he quotes
> Old Irish lár 'ground, surface, middle', although the semantic shift
> to 'field' is straightforward (cfr. Basque larre 'meadow', probably
> a Celtic loanword).
>
> However, I'd prefer *p\ to Matasović's reconstructed *f , and I
> also wonder whether NWB <p> actually represented /p\/ and not /p/.
>
>
> > (<- *plar-/*plan- <- *plaN- ?)


I'm not familiar with your notation convention. What phoneme does your /p\/
represent?


Torsten

According to the "Diccionario etimol�gica de las palabras espa�olas de or�gen
oriental" (on the Internet Archive), which discusses non-castilian words as
well, the portuguese word "buraco" would come from (old) Arabic
برجة , translated as "foramen" in Latin, i.e.
"(bore)hole"

Olivier
http://sambahsa.pbworks.com/

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao S. Lopes" <josimo70@...> wrote:
>
> In Portuguese, buraco means "hole". Antenor Nascentes's Etymological
Dictionary states some possibilities about its origin: from *furaco (cf.
Portuguese furo, furar "pierce, to pierce"), and a connexion to Germanic bore.
Any comment? Gothic? Celtic?


Alan Bomhard
Indo-European and the Nostratic Hypothesis

2 Proto-Nostratic *bur-/*bor- "to bore, to pierce" >
PIE *b[h]or-/*b[h]ŗ- "to bore, to pierce";
Proto-Afro-Asiatic *bar-/ /*bər- "to bore, to pierce";
Proto-Uralic *pura "borer, auger";
Proto-Dravidian *pur- "to bore, to perforate; bore gimlet";
Proto-Altaic *bur- "to bore through, to pierce";
Sumerian bur "to bore through, to pierce".


Torsten