From: ehlsmith@...
Message: 7474
Date: 2001-06-05
> ...[snip]...of the
> Ned joins the debate (Hey Ned):
> >To continue with my speculations- IMHO a word formed from "ruler
> >realm" implies a more complex level of socio-politicalorganization than is
> >necessarily implied by one >formed from "ruler of the people"malevolent,
>
> The definition of the name /Wurun-Katti/ as "ruler of the realm"
> is what one site mentioned and so this is what I have on my page.
> However, "realm" can mean lots of things, as I have mentioned
> to Ned. It might mean a vague area, it might mean a specific
> boundary, it might also mean worlds beyond our physical reality
> believed by these people. English definitions of foreign words can
> sometimes be deceptive and its best to keep an open mind of all
> the possibilities before stressing that they must have had a
> complex level of socio-political organization due to _one_
> interpretation of "realm".
>
> For instance, a hypothetical ProtoHattic *wunun-kWati could have
> meant more along the lines of "chief of the (otherworldly) realm"
> for all we know. If the Hattic war god is anything like the war
> gods of other Middle-Eastern religions (and it probably is due to
> influence), then Wurunkatti, like Baal, was doing battles with
> otherworldly creatures. In this sense, WurunkattiSorry, didn't mean to sound dogmatic. I'm far from committed to any
> could very validly be conceived of as ruler or master of the
> realm (the _otherworldly_ realm).
>
> I think these possibilities undermine the certainty of societal
> complexity based on this single word.
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail athttp://www.hotmail.com