Re: Semele - k^em- 'the hornless'

About Zalmoxis, things are very controversial.

Real problem about Zalmoxis/Zamolxis is that there is no clear information on him, and on his doctrine. We do not know even its correct name: it is true that we have an attested "Zalmo"degikos, but that does excclude the existent of a "Zamol"... There is alot of scientific papers and books on the topic and opinions are highly contrastant, the most recent ones in Romanian literature belong to Zoe Petre," Practica Nemuririi. O lectura critica a izvoarelor grecesti despre geti" (that is of 2004), respectively the ones of Dan Dana, the student of Zoe Petre and Francois Hartog (he made his phd at Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales from Paris), his phd was published as "Zalmoxis, de la Herodot la Mircea Eliade. Istorii despre un zeu al pretextului" (2008). If anyone knows of something other in Bulgaria on this topic, please tell me. Dan Dana says that the only source for Zalmoxis is the text of Herodotus and all the others are copied from him, that all the interpretations of the nature of Zalmoxis are flawed, etc. In my opinion, many of his jugments are totally flawed and his aproach is extremely rigid, but nevertheles, the book is a must read if just to see the new trends in Romanian historiography....

with respect,
Alexandru B

From: Alexandru Moeller <alxmoeller@...>
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 12:38:08 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Semele - k^em- 'the hornless'

alexandru_mg3 schrieb:

>
>
>
> --- In cybalist@... s.com <mailto:cybalist% 40yahoogroups. com>,
> Alexandru Moeller <alxmoeller@ ...> wrote:
>
> > secondly, Zamolxis was not one and the same with Gebleizis, even
> > in wiki you can find some kind of informations. I see also that the
> > paralelism zemele/gebele has been already mentioned by Kretschmer

> > too.(http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gebeleizis
> <http://ro.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Gebeleizis>)
> > Unfortunately the english version of wiki here is too short and does not
> > mention this aspect.
> > Alex
>
> I don't have any proud to be right or wrong here...
>
> All I did is that I took the original quotation and only next the
> interpreters:
>
> The SINGLE SOURCE here is Herodotus:

yes, IV. 94

>
> 94. As to their claim to be immortal, this is how they show it:
> they
> believe that they do not die, but that he who perishes goes
>
> ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
> TO THE GOD SALMOXIS OR GEBELEXIS, AS SOME OF THEM CALL HIM.
> ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

in the 3 manuscripts the name is not really good to read,
Thomaschek measn it is wroten ///beleizin and maybe there has been
Sebel-eizin or Zibeleizin where Sibel/Zibel should be "thunderbolt"

>
>
> S Herodotus clearly tell us abut one and the same GOD having 2 different
> names
>
> (in my opinion is also the same name with only dialectic differences)
>
>
> Marius

I have pretty doubghts to consider dialectal differences such big
differences : Zalmoxis-?ebeleizis ... which is the reason you think these
are one and the same name? To me it appears to be two difterent name,
too much of vocalic differences here, letting by side the rest..

Alex