--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
> Putting Torsten's usual fantasies aside ("Carpi" BTW does very well
as an ethnonym related to the mountains, and is neatly attested for
the 3rd c.AD, and for the Gothic period if you please), and leaving
the Charudes and Ariovistus where they belong,
I had hoped for some criticism to the point, but of course you can't
be in good shape always.
> let's look at something more worthwhile.
I'm not stopping you.
> The Croats clearly enter history as players in and around the Avar
political context. C. Porphyrogenitos cites Byzantine administrative
material from the the time of Heraclius[610-641] (DAI c. 30 wr. ca.
951), where he makes some interesting points: (a)The use of the term
"Belochrovatia" ("White Croatia") indicates the Slavic component; but
(b) The names of the leaders of the Croatian migration to their new
homeland are hardly Slavic.
>
> Does Gol/ab offer any theories as to these names?
>
> They are (I transliterate fro0m Bury): KLUKAS. LOVELOS.
KOSENTZES. MU(K)HLO. KHROVATOS (B's conjecture. Cld be something else)
>
Isn't it annoying I'm the only one who read the book?
G. doesn't mention them, I'm afraid.
What is B's conjecture, BTW?
I have a Meillet 'Le slave commun' quote for you, which matches as far
as a linguist can go (people must have some minimum language), your
idea of Slavic ethnogenesis ex nihilo:
'Le vocabulaire slave indique la conservation d'une vie patriarchale
sans prestige, et sans trace ancienne d'une organisation sociale plus
large que l'agglomération familiale... Ainsi le slave garde beaucoup
du vocabulaire indo-européen, amputé de quelques-uns des termes les
plus caractéristiques de la civilisation aristocratique
indo-européenne. Mais il présente les mots indo-europeens qu'il
conserve sous des formes en grande partie remaniées.'
Torsten