Re: Scythian tribal names: Paralatai

From: stlatos
Message: 59477
Date: 2008-07-05

--- In, "david_russell_watson" <liberty@...>
> --- In, "stlatos" <stlatos@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In, "david_russell_watson" <liberty@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > You still haven't, seemingly, looked at the myths themselves,
> > > wherein Thrita and Thraetaona Athwiya simply cannot be treated
> > > separately from one another or from Trita Aptya of the Vedas.
> >
> > What does this have to do with an additional possible connection
> > with Scythian?
> What it's meant to show is that 'Thraetaona' is connected to
> 'Thrita', and hence not as easily equatable to 'Targitaus',
> which involves at least a different suffix and possibly an
> entirely different root or roots. I don't accept the sound
> changes by which you claim to have shown otherwise, remember.
> > Just because Thraetaona- was probably once seen as Thrita's son
> > doesn't mean their names are directly related.
> It does lend to their names being related, but there's more
> to it than that, as their stories and other attributes also
> overlap considerably.

I don't see it. The distinction between A:thwiya- and Thraetaona-
(and Thrita- and K@...@sa:spa-) can't be removed just because they had
certain similarities.

I think the problem is that there's one more generation than seems
"necessary" for the myth to "work", but that's an old feature.
Consider this:

Zeus 'sky (god)'
Targitaos '(man)'
Leip., Arp., Kol. '(ancestors)'

Tvisto / Tvisco 'twin (god)'
Mannus 'man'
Ing., Herm., Ist. '(ancestors)'

It's exactly the same. Why doesn't Zeus directly father the three
founders and be the first in the land instead? Why doesn't Tvisto
directly father the three founders and perform whatever feats Mannus
may have done instead? He could have, but that's not the myth.
Mannus was the first man, Targitaos was the first man in the Scythian
lands: it's from this MAN, not the original god, that groups of men
are descended from. The Vedic comparison should bring out the
original godly nature of *Thritas A:thwiyas; nothing so clear for
*Thraitaunas Kr,s.ra:swas exists.

When their names are more different the difference between them is
clearer. Characters can be combined to shorten or simplify a myth (it
happens all the time), but the older myth obviously had three
generations. It's possible that the descent of (man) from a god is
the late addition, explaining the seemingly "unnecessary" difference
between gen. 1 and 2.

> Reading some literature on their myths and you'll find the
> suggestion more than once that Thraetaona and Thrita both are
> reflexes of the same original Proto-Indo-Iranian mythological
> character. That fact, along with the strong similarity in
> their names, does suggest to me that 'Thraetaona' is no less
> based upon the word for 'third' than 'Thrita'.

I've read plenty to make up my own mind. The identification between
father and son might possibly have increased in the legends leading to
the Avesta, but the distinction is clear enough for Targitaos and
others to be original.