--- tgpedersen <
tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
>
> > We could discuss the Negau helmets if you like.
>
> No one says the inscriptions on the Negau helmet was
> made when the
> helmet was made.
****GK: I don't either. Unfortunately, I haven't read
the latest article on the issue (the 2001 item
mentioned in Wiki.,/if that is indeed the latest;
"latest" doesn't always mean "best" though that is
often the case/,and don't know how effectively it
would deal with Hubert's arguments (if at all). Hubert
says that the helmets were made in the 5th c.BCE, and
he also says (that's the rub) that the inscriptions
are quite archaic. He feels they "are certainly
earlier than the inscriptions of Branio and Todi,
which are of the time of the great invasion" (with a
reference to Dottin's 1920 book on "La langue
gauloise" (which I haven't seen. Perhaps Dottin cites
some other authority). By "the great invasion" Hubert
means the 4th c. BCE Celtic invasion of Italy. The
majority of those who have written about these
inscriptions (including Marstrander, Hubert's prime
authority on this,with whom he disagrees on the basis
of Dottin) feel that the date of the inscriptions is
later than that. Most of those I've seen suggest some
time in the 2nd c. BCE. But I haven't seen their
arguments,or how they would refute Hubert/Dottin.==
And of course the date of the inscriptions is not
necessarily the date of the burial.There are various
theories about this too,but they are less crucial
obviously, though interesting.****
> > Or when Karpat turned to Harfat (?)...
>
> Harfaþ-. Kuhn points out that the o > a in (*Moginos
> >) Moenus > Main
> must have taken place before any of the Germani had
> physical access to
> the Main river.
****GK: The Germani might have heard of Karpat- long
before they saw them.****
> What am I to make of the 'Harigasti teiwa'
> inscription on the Negau
> helmet? "Harigasti god"? What is the proper
> interpretation of that?
*****GK: Teiwaz knows... It may be relevant to note
that the "teiwa" part is actually a longer inscription
some portions of which (3 or 4 letters) have not been
deciphered. If Hubert is right in suggesting that the
Celtic words represent in all cases name+patronymic
combinations, then "teiwa..i.." might have been a
Germanic patronymic constructed out of either a god
name or of something that had some of the same sounds
as a god name.*****
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ