Loreto:
> But outside (Indo-European) I think she is also related to Inanna,
> Astharte, Asteroth etc.
That much is clear, yes. Actually, speaking of the "Lady of the Waters"
theme that seems to be mentioned in your link, I recently came across
an Etruscan gloss "atisilitHiial" in Mayani's half-assed book about his
theories that Etruscan is related to Albanian (!!!???). Unfortunately
there are only three books at the Vancouver Public Library downtown and
his is one of the monstrosities.
What does that have to do with anything? Well, I may speak more on this
later but I've noticed how badly translated Etruscan is and, not only
that, but also that there are even reasonable books on the subject from
Massimo Pallotino and the like that amazingly persist with completely
unverified translations that are no doubt lingerings of the crackpot
ideas like those of Mayani. Sufficed to say, for example, /un/ and it's
derivatives are NOT the second person pronoun as some still insist and
the collective form /un-cHva/ shows clearly that /un/ is an inanimate
noun (most likely something like "libation"). But somebody tell Massimo
that. Check out the glossary he provides in his own books.
I still am sure personally that Etruscan, Lemnian, Rhaetic, EteoCypriot
and even Minoan consitute a family which we may call Tyrrhenian and that
it deviated from IE approximately 6000 to 7000 BCE, hence my mention of
it on this list from time to time. However I've had enough of these
rampant mistranslations and if I have to re-translate everything with an
iron fist and derive my own more comprehensive understanding of Etruscan
grammar, I will without embarassment if it means having translations
that _finally_ make full sense in the contexts they are found in.
So, I've been reviewing ALL words that have been "translated", so to
speak, and making absolutely sure that the translations actually make
sense in ALL the contexts that they are written in. Unfortunately, most
don't! I've come up with some interesting results that relate to the
above phrase.
We can be certain that /ati/ means "mother" (Mayani thought it was
"father" based solely on Albanian which shows you how outright inane
some people can be -- the word for "father" is certainly /apa/).
This leaves /silitHiial/ in the unspaced string above. However, I've
recently found out that /tHi/ must surely be "water" and derivatives
like /tHii/ "at/in the water" are found in the Zagreb Mummy text. There
is also a word for a "water containing vessel", /tHina/. So /tHiial/
must mean "of the water(s)" and an inanimate genitive -al would be
consistent with the translation and all its derivatives.
So we have "Mother BLANK of the waters". Sound familiar? I'm wondering
if this is a title of Turan (aka Venus) and I've found similar
titles in Minoan Linear A starting with A-TA-I 'mother'. I'd like to
know more about that particular gloss but it seems to be a tough one to
track down for now. Mayani states that it is classified as CIE 302 and
the inscription on this "statuette of a goddess" reads in full:
mi fleres atisilitHiial
I translate this to mean "I [am] the gift of Mother X of the Waters".
Whatever /sili/ is exactly would be anyone's guess.
I just thought I'd share that.
Some words that I'm re-translating for myself in Etruscan are:
/usil/ -> does NOT mean "sun", probably "night"
/usilane/ -> NOT "at noon" but "in the evening"
/tin/ -> means _"sun"_ or "day", not "sky"
/mula/ -> "to bless", not "to give"
/mulacH/ -> "blessed" and hence "beautiful"
/fav-in/ -> "to descend", n-extension of /fav-/
/tr-in/ -> "to give", n-extension of /tur-/
I also now believe that the Etruscan verb marks the mood, aspect
and tense (in that order) but has lost any trace of former personal
endings like those that exist in IE. In that way, I think I now
know precisely what grammatical processes have shaped /cericHunce/
out of /cera/ and the actual nuance between /ama/ and /ame/. No,
/-ne/ is NOT the future tense. Sorry for the rant. Carry on.
Loreto:
> She maybe male too therefore who knows if Pan, Tala, Lucifer, Azazel
> and Jesus Christ are correspondent.
No. These would be more in line with what I like to call the "male
principle" theme. They look to me to be the embodiment of the physical
and involve the rebirth and death of vegetation during the course of
the year. Ptah, Osiris, Tammuz, Dumuzi, Telepinu and Jesus would be
examples. They all have a nasty habit of kicking the bucket and having
to be resurrected all the time. However, there also appear to be _two_
male figures that accompany the female figure. One is a son (eg:
Etruscan Maris; Greek Hercules), the other a father and husband
(Etruscan Tin; Greek Zeus).
You'll perhaps notice that the "female principle" (the Goddess) as
represented by Inanna, Hera, Ishtar, Uni, Turan, Venus and the like seems
to be more ethereal or non-physical. In the bible, we might more aptly
connect Mother Mary to the latter theme. I'm tempted also to connect the
always enigmatic and curiously sexless "Holy Ghost" in the phrase
'Father, Son and Holy Ghost' to this as well. In all, the female
principle seems to pertain to the creative power itself (note pregnancy
is a female domain) or natural order rather than the bounties that derive
from it.
Loreto:
> Further I think she more represent the number six (and perhaps
> nine) rather than seven.
Not necessarily so in re of the Seven Sisters of the Pleiades. In the
bible at least, the well-known 666 is connected with Satan, a kind of
derivative of Baal (back to the male principle again). What do you
have in mind in regards to 'nine'?
= gLeN