From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 18872
Date: 2003-02-18
----- Original Message -----
From: <dmilt1896@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 3:34 AM
Subject: [tied] Jubar
> My questions: Is 'jubar' an expected derivative of 'juba'? If so, what is the function of the final 'r'? Or is Varro wrong again and there is some completely different etymology? And what is the etymology of 'juba' itself (which seems to mean "mane" rather more general "hair")?
Pokorny has Lat. iuba 'mane' under *jeudH- (thus ultimately related to <iubeo:>), a root I wouldn't expect to produce <iubar> as a normal derivative in Latin. For the latter, Pokorny gives a reference I can't check at present, but until I see a convincing derivation I'm inclined to regard "<iubar quod iubata>" as a false popular etymology. The various Latin meanings have 'a source of beaming light' as their common denominator, and the word is a consonantal neuter stem (gen. iubaris). If you don't mind a piece of speculation (quite possibly very wide of the mark), one could imagine *dju-bHah2s- 'daylight-radiance' (cf. Vedic su-bHa:s- 'beautifully shining') producing *(d)juba:s, *(d)jubaris > iubar, iubaris, generalising the stem variant with rhotacism. But don't take it too seriously -- I'm just thinking aloud.
The suggestion expressed in the article you quoted -- that Venus may have been more 'hairy-looking' or comet-like in the past -- sounds like some Velikovskyan nonsense.
Piotr