--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "S & L" <mbusines@...> wrote:
> From Peter Dobrev's "Ezikyt na Asparukhovite i Kuberovi
bylgari,
Rechnik i
> Gramatika", Sofia, 1995 found at
> http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/b_lang/bl_oldwords.html as "The
Dobrev doesn't not claim there that the name of Banat comes from the
title 'ban'. Instead, he interprets 'Banat' as containing the
definitive article -at, similar, according to him, to other medieval
toponyms from Bulgaria as well as north of the Danube. In his chapter
IV (left untranslated) he says:
"Transylvania was named 'Banat' by the Bulgars, probably from 'ban'
(mountain), found in Pashto and in the Caucasus. 'Banat' in the
Pamirian l-s literally means 'the mountains' and it is an almost
exact copy of the Latin name 'Transylvania' and the Slavic name of
the same region - ZAGURA - from the expression ZA GURU - beyond the
mountain. The particular Bulgarian name 'Banat' has been in use
throughout the whole early Middle Ages, in parallel to the
Slavic 'Zagura' (Zagora)'.
Unfortunately, there are no references.
> Slavic groups began settling the Balkan Peninsula beginning in the
> VI century AD.
> None of the Slavic groups did not have anything like a state at
> this stage, but they developed several small tribal territories,
> each called a ZUPA and ruled by a tribal chief known as the ZUPAN.
> This simple organization was very probably drawn from the civil
> organization of the Sclavonic tribes. ...
'zhupan' has been attested not only in the Balkans, but in Central
Asia at the same time or even earlier (in Bactrian). Why go for
Slavic origin?
Regards,
Vassil