From: Arnaud Fournet
Message: 61616
Date: 2008-11-14
----- Original Message -----
From: kishore patnaik
I said nothing about the ancient Aryans (Indo-Aryans? Indo-Iranians?).
The question was about PIE-speakers. But since you ask, the available
evidence shows that they indeed had a system of political organisation
that could, in a loose way, be called "kingship", with a single person
(the ra:jan) being regarded as the leader, set apart from his subjects
and exercising supreme political and military power as well as important
religious and symbolic functions.
Piotr
One more gross misinterpretation - As per accepted understanding, PIE
(another misconcept, I must confess, how much do you really know about PIE
politcal systems, if PIE really exists?) kings never performed religious
functions.
KP
=======
I'm surprised that M. Gasiorowski went so far as he did,
considering the fact that you (M. Patnaik) are very likely to misuse
whatever statement he made.
Personally, I would have stated only two things.
1. there's a PIE root *H(3)re:g "to lead, to command" that very much looks
like the basis for another word *re:g that surfaces in historical languages
with "king" meaning.
2. there's no particular reason to think this meaning fits what we can
imagine for the PIE society, even in its most recent datation.
A.
========
I agree I am irrerevant but then, I want you to be more straight forward.
Kishore patnaik
===========
Indo-Iranians were North-Western Asian Nomads,
Do you think these people had "kings" ?
You need pastures, not kings in that kind of living conditions.
A.