Re: [tied] Odin as a Trojan Prince

From: João S. Lopes Filho
Message: 8537
Date: 2001-08-16

ON Áss (pl. Aesir)=Got Ansus is considered to be cognate of Sanskrit
Asura=Avestic Ahura <*ansu- "spiritual being".
----- Original Message -----
From: <tgpedersen@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 7:04 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Odin as a Trojan Prince


> --- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> > --- In cybalist@..., tgpedersen@... wrote:
> > > --- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> >
> > >> Snorri makes Odin a wanderer from Troy and you ask how I know
> what
> > his literary model is ... I hope you don't buy stuff like "Aesir =
> > Asiamen" as based on fact.
> >
> > > No, but how about Etruscan (and Lemnian) *as- "god", the Yaz-
> > people, "iron" (aes) people, and your own theory of Goths as
> casters
> > and founders? (yes I know about the /n/ in *ansuz, but how about
> > nasalisation in the other cognates?)
> >
> > What "other cognates"?
> Sea of Azov.
>
> What "cognates" in the first place? Iranian
> > yaz- has nothing to do with *h2ajes- ("aes"), and *as- : *ansu- is
> > not what you might call a compelling equation.
> /ais/ and *ayes-. Hm.
> As for *ansu-, it might be a hypercorrection, influenced by *an-
> "breath, spirit"
> >
> >
> > > Where I come from, a story is either true or false. I don't
> > understand Klingenbergs epistemology: What exactly is "non-history"
> > and in italics at that)? The question is: Is Snorri's story of Odin
> > true or false?
> >
> > OK, it's _factually_ false. It is evidently a late construct -- a
> > piece of literary fiction, inspired partly by Germanic traditions,
> > partly by Graeco-Roman influences, and framed in a Christian
> context.
> >
> > > Klingenberg does not answer that question, he just assumes as
> > obvious that he did.
> >
> > Did you read the article or just the summary I quoted?
> >
> Let me paraphrase Klingenberg's argument:
> A lot of English historians claim there was a battle near a place
> called Waterloo, and a certain French emperor Napoleon was defeated
> by English troops. But we all know that many English historian were
> educated at boarding schools where they read the classical authors.
> It is evident that they calqued the battle of Gaugamela, where
> Alexander beat the Persian emperor. The purpose of the story is
> therefore to justify the English independence of France. The story is
> _factually false, and there has never been a battle at Waterloo,
> except in the heads of a lunatic fringe who have a need to believe
> such stories.
>
>
> > Piotr
>
> Torsten
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>