According to S.D., Ardeal derives from the Indoeuropean root ard-, which
means "high, height, hill, mountain, woody region" (p. 49). SD enumerates a
large number of toponyms from all over Europe; and states that the root ard-
derives from Celtic.
The number of toponyms with ard- is really impressive. However, these names
have nothing to do with Ardeal, the similarity is a simple coincidence. (One
could also mention Rumanian arde "to burn", or ardei "pepper, paprica",
[borrowed by some Hungarian dialects in Transylvania: árdé] also with a
similar sound pattern but totally irrelevant in this context.)
The reasoning given by S.D. about Hungarian erdo and Erdély is full of
serious errors. The word erdo "forest" is a Hungarian word and existed at
the beginning of the second millennium: it derives from the verb eredni "to
originate". 279 The Hungarian word fa does not mean "a clamp of trees, a
little wood" (p. 58) but simply "tree". Thus, the Hungarians did not need to
borrow a Rumanian word for "forest" from the Rumanians; (it is also quite
absurd to assume that such a word would derive from the name of a province).
The assumed form "erdel" for Rumanian Ardeal (p. 58) is thus wrong, as well
as the reasoning after this (p. 58 - 59) .
The Hungarian designation for Transylvania is Erdély. Its first known
mentioning in a written text is from the end of the 12th century, in the
Gesta by Anonymus: siluam igfon que iacet ad erdeuelu: i.e., erdo + elv(e):
"beyond the forest". The documents of the Hungarian chancellary were in that
time written in Latin, and the translation of this sense appears first: in
1075, Ultra silvam is recorded, in 1111, Mercurius princeps Ultrasilvanus.
Ma comment about:
I am not a specialist of IE or PIE or celtic ,so I am far away for making
myself considerations about.Fact is, we have two posibilities and on the one
side we have the rumanian one, on the other side the hungarian one. Of
course it could be a thirth, but we have to ask Piotr about:))
So far I see both parts are arguing with their opinions.
I wonder just about the fact that here the hungarian bring as argument the
Gesta Hungarorum of Anonymous and a bit later they deny Gesta Hungarorum to
be a reliable document.And even in the points where Anonymous wrote about
hungarians comming to the lands of valahians ( story which is in almost same
words deocumented by Chronic of Nestor from Kiew) and the story of valahians
princess Glad, Gelou and Menoumorut , princes who fought against hungarians
as they came. ( The story ist just in Anonymous and no records anymore ,
neither from rumanians nor from hungarians)
Hope this help a bit.....
Best Regards,
A. Moeller
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at
http://mail.yahoo.com