João Simões Lopes Filho wrote:
> Does the preservation of word *Re:g^-s in Celtic, Italic and Indic
> demonstrate any particular social meaning or it's just aleatory? May
> represent a conservation of IE king in these people? There was
> another languages preserving *re:g^-s ? I know there is possibly
> Thracian Rhe:sos (<*Re:z-os).
>
> Joao SL
So far I knew Rhe:sos is the name of a thracian king. Do you have any
information which shows that "rhe:sos" was the word for "king" in
Thraciand?
The rom. word for "king" was "rigã" and it is supposed by DEX to be a
loan from Neogreek "righas" and it seems to be for reala loan from
neogreek since the /i/ remains /i/ and do not become /â/ as usual after
/r/^.
But however, the rigã or king was unknown to romanians , or unused. For
them the byzantine king was the "imperator" very old form ( pãrat),
later becoming "imparat" , and the Slavic "voevoda" > rom. "voievod".
The denomination "voievod" kept long time, but somehow it was prefered
the one of "domn" < Lat. "dominus".
The actual word for king is "rege" and this is explained by DEX as
coming direct from Latin "regis".
I doubt about this word as being an inherited one, it seems to me it
belongs to the set of words which have been brought into language with
the re-latinisation of the language.