Re: [tied] Santiago and James

----- Original Message -----

From: Pere

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 1:03 PM

Subject: Re: [tied] Santiago and James

        Answering one of your questions: I suppose the diference between the use of James and Jacob to be a convention: Jacob for Old Testament and James in New Testament.  I can't find my Vulgata now to see how the translation is, but I think in Old Testament the name appears as an indeclinable Jacob (as Jacob or Israel, father of the 12 tribes) and in New Testament like Jacobus (the two apostles named Jacobus or Santiago)

        I think that Santiago is the only name in Spanish which has conservated the honorific. This is not rare in place names like Santander< (Ecclesia) Sancti Emeterii or Saelices (Ecclesia) Sancti Felicis, but I don't remember any other case in a person name.   

        In Spanish, -mb- latin is always -m-:  plumbum>plomo; palumba (from palumbes)>paloma... I don't now why Jacobus generates a -m-. I suppose it to be some kind of vulgarism.

       

P.

       

----- Original Message -----

From: loreto bagio

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 1:28 PM

Subject: Re: [tied] Santiago and James

--I thank you all for the wonderful replies. Joao, Pedro, Brian,
Daniel, Abdullah, Peter etc.
I was merely echoing so many exciting discussions on the net about
the names Jacob, James, Santiago, Diego, Jacques etc.
But more than those (actually), I question Sanctus Jacobus>Santiago
because it is the only one which retains the saintness of the saint-
names. We do not have San Pedro, San Pablo etc. as common names,
right? It is quite off.
But as Pedro and Joao explained the popularity of Santiago de
Compostella may really have an effect on the whole name (honorofic +
name) as becoming commonplace.
From the net I found out that the form Jago, Yago, Tiago, would be
the near-forms that Celts and Iberians would render the name Jacob.
And plus forms of San or Santi-, we have Santiago.
However, I still have further questions (three actually). Some other
sources say that IAKWBS is the Greek form of the earliest "James".
But Jesus also has a supposed near ancestor through Joseph named
Jacob, but did not experienced the change name. My first (further)
question is why? It seems the name James or near forms (from Jacomus)
applied only to Jacobs during the time of Jesus.
Second, Is it possible that maybe we have forms near James in Hebrew
or Aramaic that maybe inspiration for James or of Jacobus>Jacomus?
Near forms I find are Amasa, Amaziah, Amos.
Third, in the Jacobus>Jacomus, (from an early to a later Latin), what
is the trigger for this?
Is there a 'usual' -b- to -m- in the history of Latin? Or as Pedro
noted to differentiate the Patriarch Jacob from the
apostles/disciples and later James. Which would reiterate what I've
been noticing in my early comparisons that in Latin and in some
IE/Semitic -m- is subordinate to -b- (e.g. mother to father).
Sorry I think I added more questions.

Loreto


- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@...> wrote:
> The usual explanation is that Portuguese Diogo and Spanish Diego <
*Didacus, perhaps through Vulgar *Diducus and Didicus. The Saint
Jacob became Jacomus to distinguish him apart from Patriarch Jacob.
In Portuguese there was many forms, and along XVI,XVII centuries the
forms Jacome and  Jaques were more common. But due an influence of
(San)Tiago, Diogo was treated as equivalent of them, although his
different origin. The patronymic of Didacus, Didaci, became
Portuguese surname Dias (Spanish, Diez, Diaz). Today the usual form
is Jaime in Portuguese, and in Brazil the name Tiago is very popular.
>
> Joao SL
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Brian M. Scott
>   To: Daniel J. Milton
>   Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 4:40 PM
>   Subject: Re[2]: [tied] Santiago and James
>
>
>   At 2:28:26 PM on Monday, April 12, 2004, Daniel J. Milton
>   wrote:
>
>   > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott"
>   > <BMScott@...> wrote:
>
>   >> At 10:56:29 on Monday, 12 April 2004, Pere wrote:
>
>   >> > Sanctus Jacobus had in latin a dialectal variant, Sanctus
>   >> > *Jacomus, so we have Giacomo in Italian. In the East of
>   >> > the Iberic Penninsula we find Jacme. The "c" became a
>   >> > vowel in Aragon dialect Jaime and Catalan Jaume. In the
>   >> > West of Iberic Penninsula the *Jacomu> Yago or Yagüe. Then
>   >> > the fame of Santiago de Compostela was extended all along
>   >> > the Penninsula and the names Yago and Yagüe became rare.
>   >> > We can find also Diego, from a false word ending of
>   >> > Sant-Yago>San-Tiago.
>
>   >> I have always found the derivation of <Diego> from <Didacus>
>   >> via <Didago> and <Diago> more convincing; it seems to fit
>   >> the evidence better.
>
>   > I believe the Spanish theologian Diego Estella was Didacus
>   > Stella in Latin. (There's a wonderful book by Robert
>   > Merton "On the Shoulders of Giants" tracing the phrase "
>   > Pigmies standing OTSOG see farther" back to him and
>   > beyond.)
>
>   > But aren't Didacus and Jacobus independent names, although
>   > either can yield Diego in Spanish?
>
>   They are independent names.  What I question is whether
>   <Diego> actually can derive from <Jacobus> at all, or at
>   least whether this source plays any significant role.
>
>   Brian
>
>
>
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>               ADVERTISEMENT
>             
>       
>       
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
>   Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/
>      
>     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     cybalist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>      
>     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.