[tied] Re: Accepted cognates of Arya?

--- In cybalist@..., george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:

>
> --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> > (mumbling to himself):
> > The Western European open-style royal crown is
> > actually a red cap
> > (the funny stuffing inside) with a tiara around it.
> > Now how did that arrive there? With Roman soldiers?
> > Imitating Roman
> > kings and emperors? Nah.
> > Gregory of Tours, in his discussion of the origin of
> > the Franks seems
> > to argue on the principle that what has a king is a
> > people. Dukes and
> > other leaders don't count. Therefore he tries to
> > trace back the
> > lineage of the Frankish kings back to Pannonia and
> > beyond.
> >
> > Torsten
>
> *****GK: One of the "symbolisms" which seems to have
> arrived West from the East is the famous French
> "fleur-de-lys".

Symbol of French royal power, if I am not mistaken? But now we are
getting into the territory of the French/Frankish royal line, Rennes-
le-Chateau, Et In Arcadia Ego, Dardanus, etc

An identically stylized tamga was used

> by Alanic groups within the Bosporan Kingdom (3rd
> century). Some of the Alans who crossed the Rhine in
> 406 stayed in France.******
> >
> >
> >
>
>

The single /l/ in Alemanni (indicating long a:) puzzles me, since it
is traditionally derived from the PGerm. cognate of "all". One Roman
source claims that the Alemanni were Alani, which is denied by
linguists, on the Occam principle the entia (concepts) should not be
multiplied (they seem to forget the "sine ratione" ie. without
reason). Thus in this type of traditional linguistic reasoning,
without (linguistic!) evidence to the contrary, a pre-historic people
must not be thought to have changed their language (although there
are plenty of examples of that in historical times). I think it is a
mistake to use such an argumentum ex nihilo if there is
extralinguistic evidence present (eg. the testimony of an otherwise
reliable chronicler).

Torsten