Re: [tied] Albanian Names (1) --> Aziz

alexandru_mg3 wrote:

> Regarding the Thraco-Dacian origin of Albanian name : Aziz
> ===========================================================

you forgot the Rom. name "Zizu" too:-)

> "What is absolutely characteristic is the great number of Getic
> elements, found in the toponimy of the region defined between Salona
> and Apollonia. Thus, on the roads that went to Narona and Scodra
> Tabula Peutingeriana named the localities Asamo, Adzizio and
> Berzumno (Miller, o.c. p. 468 sqq.), that are identical or almost
> identical, with Samus-Asamus, Azizis and Berzobis from Banat, Ardeal
> and getic Bulgaria. Also, even the name of Scodra is found
> epigraphically in that "regio Scodrihesis" (CIL., VI 2698, cu ||
> Patsch p.169), that we already known from Dacia Aureliana.
> Then, on the same territory where we found Scirtones, appear also
> the localities [Termidava] and [Eiminacium] (Ptol. II 16, 7)
> indicating the same Dacic direction, from Oltenia, Banat and Serbia
> to Adriatica. On via Egnatia, on the west from Scirtiana, with
> Thracic toponims around, HI (Miller, Itin. Rom. p. 520, with
> the map from p. 518) talks about o mutatio with the name Brucidava,
> name that Tomaschek (I, p.28), after Wesseling, amend it to Brugiada,
> so to the name [Brygias] making a link with the ancient name
> of the tribe [Brygoi]. We think that Brucidava (like Ibida from the
> Getic Land from Scythia Minor) represent o forms related better with
> Brucla (like Gerucla) and with [Bregedava] (cf. Tomaschek II 2, 63).

Parvan, even if did not took as serios the work of N. Densusianu, see in
the archeological path the same expansion of the Getae until the Celtic
power growed up. If you take a deeper notice of the comentar of Radu
Florescu, in the time from Parvan until nowadays it is already clear
that a lot of considered "celtic elements" and "scytic elements" should
be of autochton origins.



The "mutation" Bcrucidava which was seen as being a derivative of
Brucla, makes me to think at the "later" latin change in Romanian where
the group "cl" became "ki";

>
>
> II. From [P^arvan, GETICA, Cap. V. p. : 262] :
> --------------------------------------------------

:

> ---------------------------------
> [Aizizis] -> well identified, both in Dacia, but also with a similar
> toponym in Dalmatia (see page 229). Ptolemeu placed it correctly in
> Banat, but with a false latitude and longitude. The origin of the
> name is Dacian (cf. Tom., II, 2, 53). So we do not have to wrongly
> compare it like Muller, p. 449 and Schutte, p. 93, with the name of
> the God Azizus, epigraphic documented at Potaissa (CIL. II 875), that
> is a name of Syrian origin(cf. cit. even Muller and v. Roscher, Myth.
> Lex. sv.)

Thomascheck tries to make a relationship between Aizizis and the PIE
*dig'ha "goat"(caprã).
The Albanian word for goat is "dhi" but the fact the intervocalic "z"
went lost appears a bit strange ( So far I know, just the dentals are
lost intervocalic in Albanian; since there has been an "z" in the
"aiziz" it appears unnatural -if not another explanation beside my
ignorance- for loosing the second "z")
I am quite intrigued that Thomascheck points that the spelling of "z"
shouldn't has been an "z" but an "z^" kind of consonant "j" in Rom. or
the palatalised "g^". He means that this should have been the spelling
because the words like aiziz^is, dez^is, deiz^as are wrotten with Greek
"xi" and just only some few examples with zeta.
A such opinion makes me to think that there is no "z" or "z^" but simply
"sh".

Now, Thomascheck and all other tried to show how çatam the Dacian
Language was. To me it appears wrong. There is a lot of "z" but just in
the odd situations: when after "z" is an "i" or "e" or an "z" which has
its counterpart in a Latin or Greek "s".
In fact, I cannot pretty understand who was the first comming with Idea
the Thracian should be a satem language and why. The idea kept and keep
even today even if there is no demonstration for it.

Alex



Alex