Let me add that <bruges> can
be compared with the Greek form <pHruges>, with Macedonian or indeed
Phrygian phonetics (*bH > Mac./Phr. b : Gk. pH). There is therefore some
justification for the hypothesis that the Bryges of the East Balkans were
ethnonymically (and perhaps also in other ways, see Herodotus) related to
the Phrygians of Asia Minor, but the Celtic connection is pure fantasy, as Chris
points out.
Celtic *brigant- has a perfectly good
native etymology, *bHrg^H-nt- 'high, lofty > exalted, noble', the feminine
form of which (*bHrg^H-nt-ih2) is the prototype of Brigit (her name means
'lady', more or less). Even with a different suffix *bH(e)rg^H- would not have
yielded anything like <bruges>/<pHruges> in Phrygian itself. We know
a thing or two about Phrygian -- not very much, but enough to be sure that it
has nothing to do with Celtic. It used to be regarded as a close relative of
Thracian and/or Armenian, but the view that it ought to be grouped with
Greek and Ancient Macedonian as a "Hellenoid" language has been gaining
ground in recent decades.
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 4:59 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: Boiotia < *bhoi- ?
> ... The Bryges lived on in Celtic Europe of
the as the Brigantes of Britain and the Brigantii of southern Germany, and
probably, I think, of the Roman town of Brigetio on the middle Danube.
Their eponymous goddess was known to the Gauls, and lives on today as the
Irish Saint Brigit.
[Chris:] More ridiculousness. You _cannot_ postulate connections
between disparate tribes based simply on superficial similarities in name. The
Brigantes of Britain and the Brigantii of Gaul _might_ have a distant connection
- but they certainly have no connection whatsoever to the
Bryges.