--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: tgpedersen
> To: cybalist@...
> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 1:21 PM
> Subject: [tied] Re: I, Hercules [was: A "Germanic" query]
>
>
> > But on the same subject: Which "interpretatio" is Herodotus using
when he mentions the seven gods of the Scythians, of which five have
Scythian names but Heracles and Ares Greek ones?
>
> Assuming that Herodotus is right, they may have worshipped some
Greek gods or demigods, just as the Romans and the Etruscans did.
Assuming that their ultimate provenance is Greek.
The remaining deities on Herodotus' list are non-Greek and there is
no evidence that any kind of "interpretatio Graeca" guided his
methodology. By contrast, "interpretatio Romana" is Tacitus' own term
for his consciously applied interpretive method, as explained by the
author himself.
>
True, but doesn't rule out the possibility that the Germani
worshipped Hercle under that name, as apparently did the Scythians.
> > And BTW, how do you reconstruct <thunar>?
>
> PGmc. *þun[a]raz (OE þunor/þunr-, OHG thonar, OS thuner, ON þórr <
*þonrr < *þunraz) < *tnh2-ro-s, from *(s)tonh2- 'resound'.
Suppose we start with PIE *asu- instead of *n.su-, and postulate that
the -n- in Gothic *ansuz etc is a hypercorrection springing from a
phonological shibboleth <n>/nothing between W. Germ. vs N.
Germ., "high style" vs popular style (even within N. Germ., Da.
<vinter> vs Icel. <vettr> "winter", note also Snorri's use of W.Germ.
like form for "their", the "old" name). In that case *þor might be
the original form and *þonr > *þonar a hypercorrection.
And why these extra assumptions? Because we could then analyse
Thoringia (Thuringia) as *þor-ing- etc. If we didn't, who were those
people then -ing-'s, followers of, if not of þor?
> Piotr
Torsten