Trolls, Dwarfs and Goblins were Romans and Elves were Greeks.
Aggie-tom
Ages period makes is quite obvious that Trolls, Dwarfs, Goblins and Elves
were racial memories of Greco-Roman contact with northern Europe.
In Celtic and Norse dialects the world Elf and words similar to it are all
taken to mean "To Shine". This is the same meaning as the word Hellene.
In the mythology Elves were considered highly intelligent, and masters
inventions, as were the Greeks.
The Elves were regarded as servants of the Dwarfs and Trolls.
Trolls used to be associated with bridges and attacked anyone that crossed
without their permission. The Romans were experts at bridge and road
building and kept those guarded.
Dwarfs were the mythological miners for precious stones and it was the
Romans who exploited these stones.
Goblins had a bad reputation for trouble and feuding as did the Romans.
Now for the linguistics.
Obviously Elf is a corruption of Ellines
elves = h-elles = hellenes
Troll is an obvious corruption of Dromos which in Greek the lingua franca of
Europe means Road. The word Road derives from the word Roman.
troll = t-rolos = d-romos = roman
Dwarf is a corruption of Romfaian which is the name of the broad sward after
which the Greeks named the Romans.
dwarf = dworfoi = worfoi = orfai = romfai = romans
Goblin is a corruption of Romai which is the name of the Byzantines who were
always feuding with each other.
goblin = goblain = rovlain = romai
--
Another myth debunked by Aggie-tom
()__()
( o o )
> ^ <
( | | | | ) #
( | | | | ) ||
" - " =="
REAL
Chris Camfield
<cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote:
>Analysis of the mythology which was concocted in the Byzantine and Middle
>Ages period makes is quite obvious that Trolls, Dwarfs, Goblins and Elves
>were racial memories of Greco-Roman contact with northern Europe.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
This one really takes the cake, Aggie. Thank you for giving me such a
good laugh this morning.
Chris
Boxdan476
"Aggie-tom" <cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote in message
news:9l09bi$rn0$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
xxx
> Analysis of the mythology which was concocted in the Byzantine and Middle
> Ages period makes is quite obvious that Trolls, Dwarfs, Goblins and Elves
> were racial memories of Greco-Roman contact with northern Europe.
>
> In Celtic and Norse dialects the world Elf and words similar to it are all
> taken to mean "To Shine". This is the same meaning as the word Hellene.
>
> In the mythology Elves were considered highly intelligent, and masters
> inventions, as were the Greeks.
>
> The Elves were regarded as servants of the Dwarfs and Trolls.
servants to Dwarfs and Trolls (reference, not interpretation)
Aggie-tom
"xxx" <x...@y.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15ddf1032...@proxy.news.easynews.com...
> In article <9l09bi$rn0$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>, you say...
> > Analysis of the mythology which was concocted in the Byzantine and
Middle
> > Ages period makes is quite obvious that Trolls, Dwarfs, Goblins and
Elves
> 'quite obvious' to whome?
>
> > were racial memories of Greco-Roman contact with northern Europe.
> >
> > In Celtic and Norse dialects the world Elf and words similar to it are
all
> > taken to mean "To Shine". This is the same meaning as the word Hellene.
> >
> > In the mythology Elves were considered highly intelligent, and masters
> > inventions, as were the Greeks.
> Can you give me a reference where Elves were masters of invention?
Try reading "The Elves and the Shoemaker" by the brothers Grimm. You know it
was one of the stories they collected that they based their linguistic law
of Consonantal Shit on.
> >
> > The Elves were regarded as servants of the Dwarfs and Trolls.
> Can you give me a reference where Elves were ever considered
> servants to Dwarfs and Trolls (reference, not interpretation)
The Lord of The Rings, Book 1, The Fellowship of the Ring. J R R Tolkein.
HISSSSSS.......
Look what you've done to Aggie-tom
Chris Camfield
<cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote:
>"xxx" <x...@y.com> wrote in message
[snip]
>> Can you give me a reference where Elves were masters of invention?
>
>Try reading "The Elves and the Shoemaker" by the brothers Grimm. You know it
>was one of the stories they collected that they based their linguistic law
>of Consonantal Shit on.
Brothers Grimm? Not an original source. *smirk*
>> > The Elves were regarded as servants of the Dwarfs and Trolls.
>> Can you give me a reference where Elves were ever considered
>> servants to Dwarfs and Trolls (reference, not interpretation)
>
>The Lord of The Rings, Book 1, The Fellowship of the Ring. J R R Tolkein.
Tolkien? Based on what I know of the books, not only is this almost
certainly false, again, Tolkien is not authentic historical mythology.
A laugh in the morning and a laugh in the evening, keep it up, Aggie!
Chris
Aggie-tom
"Chris Camfield" <ccam...@email.com> wrote in message
news:3b74d14...@news1.on.sympatico.ca...
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2001 19:42:52 +0100, "Aggie-tom"
> <cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote:
>
> >"xxx" <x...@y.com> wrote in message
> [snip]
> >> Can you give me a reference where Elves were masters of invention?
> >
> >Try reading "The Elves and the Shoemaker" by the brothers Grimm. You know
it
> >was one of the stories they collected that they based their linguistic
law
> >of Consonantal Shit on.
>
> Brothers Grimm? Not an original source. *smirk*
Nor are either of the Edas or anything else.
There is NO other explanation for the invention of Elves, Dwarves, Trolls
and Goblins except the one I have given.
Why do you think all of the Norse Gods have GREEK names.
Thor = Threvos = Thunderer.
Odin = O Dynatos = The Mighty.
Loki = Logos = The Word. etc.
Eric Stevens
<cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote:
>Why do you think all of the Norse Gods have GREEK names.
Probably for much the same reason that much Greek mythology can be
traced back to the same roots as Norse.
Eric Stevens
There are two classes of people. Those who divide people into
two classes, and those who don't. I belong to the second class.
Inger E
"Eric Stevens" <stev...@clear.net.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:isv9nt4ofpngo6igo...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 11 Aug 2001 08:26:25 +0100, "Aggie-tom"
> <cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote:
>
> >Why do you think all of the Norse Gods have GREEK names.
>
> Probably for much the same reason that much Greek mythology can be
> traced back to the same roots as Norse.
>
>
> Eric Stevens
Eric,
the Norse or better still the Scandinavian Asa-Gods got their name in the
3rd and 4th Century after the Ostrogoths had travelled close to Indus River
and down to Greece.
The Asa-Gods aren't as old here in Scandinavia as some people, Scholars
included thinks. The myths however was the same here as in most of
South-Eastern Europe. Nothing surprising given the fact that the southern
part Sweden's in other word "Götaland"(Gothia or Gothlandia on older maps)
had had close contact with the Hungarian Pusta -Greece- and Black Sea area
since the early Bronze Age.
Inger E
Eric Stevens
wrote:
Perhaps I should have said for much the same reason that that much
Norse mythology can be traced back to the same roots as Greek. I was
really trying to make the point that they share common roots.
Inger E
OK, my mistake while reading your lines. I have been watching the Athletic
Games in Edmonton on TV for the last week. The games takes place in the late
evening and during night-hours here in Sweden so I guess I am a bit
tired.....
Inger E
"Eric Stevens" <stev...@clear.net.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:uiabntcq8mbiaul9c...@4ax.com...
Sylver
> > Can you give me a reference where Elves were ever considered
> > servants to Dwarfs and Trolls (reference, not interpretation)
>
> The Lord of The Rings, Book 1, The Fellowship of the Ring. J R R Tolkein.
>
The Elves were the chosen ones in Tolkien's writings. The Elves and Dwarves in
Tolkien's works were always wary of one another, never really working together.
Now, the only reference that could be misconstrued as the Elves being Servants
of the Dwarves, would perhaps be when the 7 rings were made for the Dwarf Kings,
and the Elves used their magic upon them.
However, the Elves didn't do this because they were in servitude to the
Dwarves. The Trolls were something else entirely. I am hazy on the origin of
them at this point, so I won't write of them. Made by Morgoth were the Orcs,
which were a crude parody of the fair folk, the Elves. In the Tolkien Mythology
(Which really, in my opinion, cannot be used to refute Human Mythology), the
Magical Rings, 20 of which were made in all, there was the One Ring, made by
Sauron, to control all of the others with his own magic. Only the Elves were
able to keep from falling under his power.
That right there, tells us all that the Elves were never under the thrall of
anyone else. There are a few mentions in the Silmarillion about Morgoth trying
to sway the Elves, but not succeeding. Hence, creating the Orcs, as I stated
before.
Geannie (Sylver)
vasif@fisav
news:3B73AE5D...@SPAMTRAPPEDhotmail.com...
> you must have also done some work for Tito in the past.
>
>
--
vasif@fisav says...
REAL knows what he is talking about from personal experience. He, I mean
REAL, sure has worked and is working for various pressure groups. His going
rate is 15 average sized peanuts an hour. Alternatively, he will accept ONE
large penus for a
full day's work.
For the extra large variety, his favorite, he will put in two days' work, he
says.
**************
REAL
so". It has no credibility and you have no credibility.
Here is the real vasif everyone, the vasif full of sexual inuendos and anything
else perverted that enters his mind. Just because he can't cope with opinions in
opposition to his own or whatever else he hates or disagrees with. He nevers
fails to expose what he really is. Remember this next time you "try" to have a
decent debate with this creature
Here's more of Vasifs unsubstantiated "say so" that reveals what he is most
interested in and what he is all about.
"vasif@fisav" wrote:
> REAL, o kologliftis, is doing his usual stuff -- arselicking.
>
> he is such a caring fellow, this asslicking hypocrite.
>
> everytime he sees a pile of dung, he lands down immediately to savor the
> taste and the smell.
>
> ain't that right re REAL?
>
> --
> vasif@fisav
> **************
"vasif@fisav" wrote:
> and i see he likes to trap it inside as well just like a bitch. yes, he will
> trap any "SPAM"... but he likes them long AND thick.
"vasif@fisav" wrote:
> did you know....
>
> that when you scare a bluebottle off one piece of cowdung, it settles
> on another one nearby. and if you scare it off that one it will go
> back to the original bit of cowdung.
>
> and REAL is no different. one can get him off one bit of cowdung but
> he will promptly land on another bit of cowdung. and if you scare him
> off that bit of cowdung, he will only make a beeline for the first
> one.
>
> after all there are only a limited number of cowdungs. just watch this
> bluebottle fly off from one to the other poking his nose in turns into
> each cake and sip what is to him the "nectar".
"vasif@fisav" wrote:
> pronto!!! send a mavrokavlo to REAL, the super arch-hypocrite of various
> news groups.
>
> he is asking for it. he is begging for it. poor freskopaidhi. he likes to be
> manhandled.
"vasif@fisav" wrote:
> Ace,
>
> you should realize that it is different types of masts that REAL loves.
>
> he is being his true REAL hypocritical self. and as for the masts capable
> of penetrating siberia, well? i don't know. REAL is not interested in that.
> he is more interested in other penetrations.
Derrick Everett
<uiabntcq8mbiaul9c...@4ax.com>:
>On Sat, 11 Aug 2001 11:51:27 GMT, "Inger E" <norah....@telia.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"Eric Stevens" <stev...@clear.net.nz> skrev i meddelandet
>>news:isv9nt4ofpngo6igo...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 11 Aug 2001 08:26:25 +0100, "Aggie-tom"
>>> <cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Why do you think all of the Norse Gods have GREEK names.
>>>
>>> Probably for much the same reason that much Greek mythology can
>>> be traced back to the same roots as Norse.
>>>
>>>
>>> Eric Stevens
>>
>>Eric,
>>the Norse or better still the Scandinavian Asa-Gods got their name
>>in the 3rd and 4th Century after the Ostrogoths had travelled close
>>to Indus River and down to Greece.
>>
>>The Asa-Gods aren't as old here in Scandinavia as some people,
>>Scholars included thinks. The myths however was the same here as in
>>most of South-Eastern Europe. Nothing surprising given the fact
>>that the southern part Sweden's in other word "Götaland"(Gothia or
>>Gothlandia on older maps) had had close contact with the Hungarian
>>Pusta -Greece- and Black Sea area since the early Bronze Age.
>
>Perhaps I should have said for much the same reason that that much
>Norse mythology can be traced back to the same roots as Greek. I was
>really trying to make the point that they share common roots.
What are those roots and who has traced them? Do you include the Vanir
as well as the Aesir in the elements that have Greek affinities? If so
then surely not Urd or Mimir?
--
Derrick Everett (deverett at c2i.net)
==== Writing from 59°54'N 10°36'E ====
http://home.c2i.net/monsalvat/index.htm
Aggie-tom
"Sylver" <syl...@subdimension.com> wrote in message
news:3B761637...@subdimension.com...
The relationship described in Tolkein is exactly the same as that between
the Romans and the Greeks in the Hellenistic Period.
Tolkein refers to Black and White Elves, i.e. Ptolemaic Egyptians and Syria
Selucids.
Elves were taller than Dwarvs as Greeks were teller than Romans.
When the Trolls came along the Roman army included people from the north as
well so the size limit disappeared.
By the time of the Byzantines the Romans and Greeks were one and the same
and the northern European mythology start referring to Goblins or Romai.
Inger E
the only original Scandinavian God is Frej, it's feminin form is Freja -
both origin from Frö. All the rest you can find in the area Greece-Asia
Minor-Indus Valley.
Inger E
"Derrick Everett" <behb0t...@sneakemail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:90FB702A93...@193.216.69.37...
Lee N Zopff
Do you have any references you could list that would help me find them?
Lord of the Nibelungs
>
> Derrick,
> the only original Scandinavian God is Frej, it's feminin form is Freja -
> Minor-Indus Valley.
Snorri described Frey (Frej) as "the noblest of the Æsir" but really he was one of the Vanir, the fertility gods. As you say his female equivalent was Freia. This pair appeared in the old Scandinavian pantheon as children of the god Njørd (Njörd), who is
sometimes (for reasons that I have never understood) equated to the Germanic fertility goddess Nerthus, whose rites were described by Tacitus.
Obviously Frey was an important god, although more so in Sweden than in Norway and Iceland. Adam of Bremen describes an idol of "Fricco" that was worshipped alongside the idols of Thor and Odin (Odhinn) in the great temple at Uppsala. Further west the
available evidence suggests that Odin was the most important deity for the aristocracy, while Thor was more widely worshipped by the classes of karl and thræl. One would expect the fertility gods also to be universally worshipped by farmers and fishermen.
What is your evidence for Frey as the only deity who had not been imported? (Of course Odin and Thor were imported and I agree with your suggestion that they arrived in Scandinavia relatively recently).
Sylver
> the Romans and the Greeks in the Hellenistic Period.
>
> Tolkein refers to Black and White Elves, i.e. Ptolemaic Egyptians and Syria
> Selucids.
>
> Elves were taller than Dwarvs as Greeks were teller than Romans.
>
> When the Trolls came along the Roman army included people from the north as
> well so the size limit disappeared.
>
> By the time of the Byzantines the Romans and Greeks were one and the same
> and the northern European mythology start referring to Goblins or Romai.
That still doesn't explain how the hell you can decide from reading any of
Tolkien's works, that the Elves were ever under the servitude of anyone. The
drivel you just wrote above has nothing to do with what you wrote before,
citing the FoTR, and not even proving your point with the citation.
Geannie (Sylver)
Inger E
but you certainly put to must trust in Snorre's story telling and forget
that there are many much more reliable sources.
Some written, some artifact proved etc. etc.
Actually the Asa-tro came from the area Greece-Asia Minor-Indus and mingled
together with Frö who was the original one known since the Bronze Age. Frö
and later Frej and Freja have a totally different background then the rest.
They and the traces of them we can see looks much more like the Celtic
God(-traditions). Compare Semain with the rits at same time of year here in
Sweden for example - we still have traditions from those old days known and
belived to be Christian.
The rest of the Asa-Gods derives from the Gods in south-east.
Inger E
"Lord of the Nibelungs" <mimir...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:3B76F522...@hotmail.com...
Unknown
inconclusive as your original hypothesis.
BadAndy
Matt Giwer
Indo-European. Not Greek names but the same root language for Greek and
Germanic.
If I may comment you appear to be going a bit off the deep end calling
everything Greek rather than showing the Aryan language root
connections.
Calling it Greek implies invented in Greece and spread every place
else. Rather we have Greece having had writing upon which some latter
day folks use to suggest primacy of people like the Celts.
--
If you were born after 1973 in the US you
are lucky you were not aborted.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 730
Ryan Lawson
something loose for me.
> Analysis of the mythology which was concocted in the Byzantine and Middle
> Ages period makes is quite obvious that Trolls, Dwarfs, Goblins and Elves
> were racial memories of Greco-Roman contact with northern Europe.
>
> In Celtic and Norse dialects the world Elf and words similar to it are all
> taken to mean "To Shine". This is the same meaning as the word Hellene.
Or it could mean light skinned or sun-worshippers. Elves and Freyr were
associated with the sun. Dark Elves are said to be
the one and same as the Dwarves. I have often wondered if dark and light
elves were for dark and light skinned people or dark and light colored hair.
Who knows for sure.
> In the mythology Elves were considered highly intelligent, and masters
> inventions, as were the Greeks.
As were the often touted Tuatha de Daanan. But the Elves also lived in the
lands of the mounds and are clearly associated with the megalith builders
(aka mariners and farmers who worshipped the sun) and the numerous tumuli in
their lands. The Elves also lived in the land of the Vanir, the gods of the
earth, ocean and fertility. The Celts are their partial descendents.
> The Elves were regarded as servants of the Dwarfs and Trolls.
Land of Gaul and Britain (Elves), servants to the Romans (Dwarves).
> Trolls used to be associated with bridges and attacked anyone that crossed
> without their permission. The Romans were experts at bridge and road
> building and kept those guarded.
Yes, very good.
> Dwarfs were the mythological miners for precious stones and it was the
> Romans who exploited these stones.
Yes, and known for being horny too.
Ryan Lawson
> > Brothers Grimm? Not an original source. *smirk*
>
> Nor are either of the Edas or anything else.
Yep, I have to agree here. Even idiot savants get it right sometimes.
> There is NO other explanation for the invention of Elves, Dwarves, Trolls
> and Goblins except the one I have given.
>
> Why do you think all of the Norse Gods have GREEK names.
>
> Thor = Threvos = Thunderer.
Taranis
> Odin = O Dynatos = The Mighty.
Ogham
> Loki = Logos = The Word. etc.
Still not sure on this one.
Ryan Lawson
was one of the Vanir, the fertility gods.
Yes, I suppose though he in spirit was now an Aesir since he was 'traded' to
them in the settlement of the Aesir and Vanir.
> As you say his female equivalent was Freia. This pair appeared in the
old Scandinavian pantheon as children of the god Njørd (Njörd), who is
> sometimes (for reasons that I have never understood) equated to the
Germanic fertility goddess Nerthus, whose rites were described by Tacitus.
I remember hearing Njord as being the god of the sea. In Denmark actually,
not necessarily Germanic. Denmark is an ancient site of megalith
civilization, associated with the sea and fertility. Perhaps Nerthus was a
consort of Njord? But, doesn't Njord wed a giant or something like that in
one of the saga's?
> Obviously Frey was an important god, although more so in Sweden than in
Norway and Iceland.
Sweden showed some megalith civilization inhabitance and I think there was
activity there too during Celtic times.
> Adam of Bremen describes an idol of "Fricco" that was worshipped
alongside the idols of Thor and Odin (Odhinn) in the great temple at
Uppsala. Further west the
> available evidence suggests that Odin was the most important deity for the
aristocracy, while Thor was more widely worshipped by the classes of karl
and thræl. One would expect the fertility gods also to be universally
worshipped by farmers and fishermen.
> What is your evidence for Frey as the only deity who had not been
imported? (Of course Odin and Thor were imported and I agree with your
suggestion that they arrived in Scandinavia relatively recently).
I tend to agree, but something tells me Odin and Thor might have been around
in another form earlier on.
Aggie-tom
Obviously you have absolutely NO CONCEPT whatsoever of Greek, Roman and
Byzantine history otherwise you would know that the relationship between the
Greek and the Romans is exactly the same as that between the Dwarves and
Elves. The Dwarves and along with them the Trolls were the military men and
the Elves were the intelligencia. Get and Education.
>
> Geannie (Sylver)
>
>
Aggie-tom
"Matt Giwer" <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3B773720...@tampabay.rr.com...
> Aggie-tom wrote:
> >
> > "Chris Camfield" <ccam...@email.com> wrote in message
> > news:3b74d14...@news1.on.sympatico.ca...
> > > On Fri, 10 Aug 2001 19:42:52 +0100, "Aggie-tom"
> > > <cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote:
> > >
> > > >"xxx" <x...@y.com> wrote in message
> > > [snip]
> > > >> Can you give me a reference where Elves were masters of invention?
> > > >
> > > >Try reading "The Elves and the Shoemaker" by the brothers Grimm. You
know
> > it
> > > >was one of the stories they collected that they based their
linguistic
> > law
> > > >of Consonantal Shit on.
> > >
> > > Brothers Grimm? Not an original source. *smirk*
> >
> > Nor are either of the Edas or anything else.
> >
> > There is NO other explanation for the invention of Elves, Dwarves,
Trolls
> > and Goblins except the one I have given.
> >
> > Why do you think all of the Norse Gods have GREEK names.
> >
> > Thor = Threvos = Thunderer.
Missed out the "o" in "Thorevos"
> >
> > Odin = O Dynatos = The Mighty.
> >
> > Loki = Logos = The Word. etc.
>
> Indo-European. Not Greek names but the same root language for Greek and
> Germanic.
>
> If I may comment you appear to be going a bit off the deep end calling
> everything Greek rather than showing the Aryan language root
> connections.
>
> Calling it Greek implies invented in Greece and spread every place
> else. Rather we have Greece having had writing upon which some latter
> day folks use to suggest primacy of people like the Celts.
A date of 2900 BC for the Phaistos disc would indicate that Ionian-Greek was
the basis language for the so-called Proto-Indo-European virtual language
since this is about the time that Proto-Indo-European is believed to have
been dominant. At this date PIE cannot have possibly been the basis of Greek
since distinct Greek already exited. If Greek exited as a separate language
outside of the Proto-Indo-European sphere then PIE cannot have existed
unless it was pure Greek.
Other factors which I shall go into later suggest that the proposed
Proto-Indo-European virtual language cannot not have possibly exited ever.
5000 years ago Europe and the Middles East was dominated by one major
civilisation that through trading links passed its language on to everyone
else as a lingua franca. That language was Greek and that civilisation was
the Proto-Ionians.
The already extant European languages, Celtic, Germanic, Sanskrit, Hittite
etc incorporated common Greek words associated with trade and military
government, such as numbers, names of animals and food crops, names of
governmental positions, common addresses and so on which has given outdated
linguists the false impression that there was a PIE language. At the same
time the Semitic language evolved because of the contact between the
Ionian-Greeks who controlled the northern Middles East and the Egyptians who
controlled the south.
This is the only explanation that fits in with modern Genetics and
Archaeology since Europe was already populated 40,000 years ago in all
directions and this is when the individual European race characteristic
began to evolve in isolation. About 10,000 years ago there were ALREADY well
defined Greek, Slavic, Celtic, Germanic, Iberian, Italian and Hittite
populations who had just began to farm the land. At this time they made
concert with the Phoenicians along the southern coasts of Europe and this
moment can be pinioned precisely in time by looking at the DNA.
The Proto-Indo-European theory on the other had suggests that NO racial
divergence occurred in Europeans until 5000 years ago at the earliest since
at this time everyone is supposed to have been one huge happy family of pure
Aryans, speaking PIE living on the black sea coast. This would leave only
1000 years for all the known racial characteristics to have evolved in the
Greeks, Iberians, Italians and Hittites and so on. This of course is
genetically IMPOSSIBLE since this process actually needed 30,000 years.
Proto-Indo-European therefore can NEVER have existed. There is NO indication
in the DNA whatsoever that any so-called Aryans or any other race for that
matter came from the Black-Sea 5000 years ago and completely subsumed the
existing European cultures and implanted an Aryan hybrid population in their
place. There is NO archaeological evidence to that effect either.
But what there does exist is archaeological evidence, and even written
evidence of a massive trading civilisation based in Greece which controlled
almost all of Europe and parts of the Middle East. This was the Proto-Ionian
civilisation.
Since the Greeks, Iberians, Italians and Hittites were ALREADY separated
from each other well over 10,000 year ago, and were genetically distinct
their languages MUST have evolved separately and cannot have been the same.
After the Ionian Greeks began to dominate Europe the Greek lingua franca
replaced a large proportion of the words in the other extant languages and
added a huge amount of new words that described things and concepts that the
other European had not even heard of until the Greeks came along that is.
Exactly the same thing occurred in the middle east.
Chris Camfield
<cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote:
[snip]
>Obviously you have absolutely NO CONCEPT whatsoever of Greek, Roman and
>Byzantine history otherwise you would know that the relationship between the
>Greek and the Romans is exactly the same as that between the Dwarves and
>Elves. The Dwarves and along with them the Trolls were the military men and
>the Elves were the intelligencia. Get and Education.
This only shows that you are unfamiliar with Tolkien's works, since
the dwarves never conquered the elves. Of course, Tolkien's trolls
were hostile to both elves and dwarves and never allied with either of
them.
Chris
Sylver
> Byzantine history otherwise you would know that the relationship between the
> Greek and the Romans is exactly the same as that between the Dwarves and
> Elves. The Dwarves and along with them the Trolls were the military men and
> the Elves were the intelligencia. Get and Education.
All of that may very well be true. All I'm saying is, do NOT cite Tolkien to
support your theory, like you did before. It will get you nowhere, because it
can't be supported.
Derrick Everett
>
> You may be Lord of the Nibelungs,
Hmmm I think I got a little carried away when I set up this account. I don't usually use this machine for news ...
> but you certainly put to must trust in Snorre's story telling and
> forget that there are many much more reliable sources.
> Some written, some artifact proved etc. etc.
OK I'll bite. I put cautious trust in Snorre. What do we have that is more reliable than the books by Snorre? Providing one takes into account his particular interests and bias, is there any reason to doubt his "story telling"?
>
> Actually the Asa-tro came from the area Greece-Asia Minor-Indus and mingled
> together with Frö who was the original one known since the Bronze Age. Frö
> and later Frej and Freja have a totally different background then the rest.
This sounds like Viktor Rydberg. Or are you alluding to some more recent research?
> They and the traces of them we can see looks much more like the Celtic
> God(-traditions). Compare Semain with the rits at same time of year here in
> Sweden for example - we still have traditions from those old days known and
> belived to be Christian.
Like the midsummer and midwinter (St. Lucia) festivals?
>
> The rest of the Asa-Gods derives from the Gods in south-east.
Probably. Has Thor Heyerdahl found anything there yet?
Brian
news:3B7859B1...@hotmail.com...
Thor is in South-America and are digging out temples and tombs.
Brian
Odysseus
peoples (even as mythology Tolkien's creation was influenced by European
mythic traditions but was never intended to be a retelling of any in
specific), but this shows considerable confusion on the origins and
relations of the races of Middle-Earth.
The Elves were the first creations of the All-Father, and never were
subjugated by any other race; when their worldly ambitions failed of
realization they would emigrate back to the "Undying Lands" of the
Valar. The Elven-smiths who crafted the Rings of Power were taken in for
a while by Sauron, but got wise in time to keep their own three Rings
out of his power. Tolkien does *not* refer to black and white Elves
anywhere AFAIK, certainly not in _The Fellowship of the Ring_, which
contains very little information on earlier Ages than the Third in which
it is set.
The Dwarves were independent creations of Aulė, but more or less in
imitation of the Elves; they kept pretty much to themselves except for
their trade in mineral products. They could be as belligerent as anyone,
but mostly fought defensive wars against the incursion of Orcs into
their underground cities. They and the Elves had a long history of
mutual distrust, which had occasionally manifested in warfare over the
course of earlier ages, but neither race ever conquered the other. The
tree-like Ents were created by Yavanna, consort of Aulė.
Orcs (goblins) and Trolls were created/bred/invented by Morgoth, as
parodies or corruptions of Elves and Ents respectively. The Dwarves had
a powerful hatred for all of their kind, so any 'allegory' requiring
them to be allies has a serious flaw.
Humans were the second creation of the All-Father, somewhat like
'diminished' Elves but given the supreme "Gift" of mortality.
Interestingly the _Silmarillion_ &c. are nearly silent on the origin of Hobbits.
--Odysseus
Aggie-tom
"Odysseus" <odysse...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:3B78BF7D...@yahoo.ca...
> Aggie-tom wrote:
> >
> Orcs (goblins) and Trolls were created/bred/invented by Morgoth, as
> parodies or corruptions of Elves and Ents respectively. The Dwarves had
> a powerful hatred for all of their kind, so any 'allegory' requiring
> them to be allies has a serious flaw.
Not if you considerer the hatred of the anti-Christ or Roman Catholic Pope
and his masters the Franks, who falsely claimed the Romans crown i.e.
Dwarves, had against the Byzantines or Hellenic Romans, Romai or Goblins.
Inger E
you ask what we have more reliable than Snorre. I know that most Scholars
abroad belive so, but we do have more than 250 differents sources(not to
mention several diplomas) telling us about Scandinavians and Norway/Sweden
older than 1115 AD. If we put the diplomas and short annal notes as well as
sources with minor information(less than 20 lines) than I have to tell you
that I have collected more than 1000 sources information on discs by
now.....
Inger E
"Derrick Everett" <mimir...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:3B7859B1...@hotmail.com...
Mark Gerard Miller
[snipping fore and aft]
> Obviously Elf is a corruption of Ellines
>
> elves = h-elles = hellenes
The site referenced below, devoted to matters Indo-European, says that
the word we know as 'elf' was from an IE base meaning 'white.'
Indo-European pre-dates Greek, of course ... unless you have some
information, Aggie-Tom, that IE was derived from Greek?
From http://www.geocities.com/indoeurop/aarchive.html:
"Alfheim
" ‘Elf home,' one of the nine worlds in Norse mythology. It is
located somewhere in the upper atmosphere on a level of the Norse
universe congruent with Asgard and Vanaheim. Alf seems derived from IE
words for 'white' (> Albania, Alps, etc.). Alfheim is where the palace
of the god Frey is located and the home of he 'light elves'. Neither
light elves nor dark elves are involved in the Norse myths, though the
latter, at least, may be synonymous with dwarves. Both seem analogous
to various nature spirit divinities common in the IE mythologies."
Barbara Walker, in her book The Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and
Secrets, says, "The word 'elf' was related to the 'helleder,' people
belonging to Mother Hel as Death-goddess. In general, it meant
heathen, both dead and living." And: "The custom of the Wild Hunt or
Night Ride, sacred to the elf-king (Odin), was transformed into a
procession of wind-riding demons, as at Halloween and other pagan
festivals. Leader of the night riders was called the Erl King, from
Danish 'ellerkonge,' a king of those who belong to Hel. He associated
with the sacred alder tree."
An interesting note on elves from Walker: "The paradise of Alfaheimr
(Elf-land) was always matriarchal, inhabited by the bright female
spirits who made the sun. Like their eastern counterparts the
'dakinis,' these Valkyries or fairies could be both beautiful and
hideous, representing both birth and death. In the new creation after
doomsday, the new female sun would Glory-of-Elves."
I have a book, "The World Guide to Gnomes, Fairies, Elves and Other
Little People: A Compendium of International Folklore," by Thomas
Keightley, a 19th century mythologist of some note. He offers a
nine-page etymology of the word "fairy," but unfortunately, in the
etymology he delves not into elves.
Much of the information in the "Fairies" article in Man, Myth and
Magic: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Supernatural, is derived
from Keightley's work, I believe. And from that article, we have
(unrelated to etymology) the following:
[begin quote]
FAIRY ETHICS
The fairies have a morality of their own that does not correspond in
all ways with that of respectable humanity. They are great lovers of
cleanliness and order, and excpect this to be respected by the humans
whom they visit. As a rule they have few scruples about taking any
mortal goods, milk, meal or cattle, which they require, but they
punish severely any mortal who steals from them. They hate miserliness
above all things, and love a free, open, cheerful character. Perhaps
because of their interest in fertility, they are rather free and
wanton in their own conduct, and are friendly towards lovers.
Politeness is very important in all dealings with them, though there
are some that must not be thanked. They are passionate lovers of
privacy, and punish spies and eavesdroppers. At the same time they are
grateful for hospitality and kindness, and often repay it
disproportionately. In fairytales, as distinct from these fairy
legends, fairies are fond of disguising themselves in order to test
the kindness of mortals, and reward a cheerfully shared dinner with
magical gifts of great value; this is a widespread fairy trait.
[Mark's note: shades of Hebrews 13:2]
Of all the fairy pilfering habits the most distressing to mortals is
that of stealing babies out of their cradles and leaving changelings
in their place. This belief has probably caused more cruelty and
unhappiness than any other piece of fairylore, for the usual means of
getting rid of a changeling is to ill-treat it, though very
occasionally the mother is told to take special care of it, so as to
win the gratitude of the fairy mother.
[end quote]
Himself,
Mark
Aggie-tom
"Mark Gerard Miller" <mark_g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ea790d2a.01081...@posting.google.com...
> "Aggie-tom" <cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote in message
news:<9l09bi$rn0$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>...
>
> [snipping fore and aft]
>
> > Obviously Elf is a corruption of Ellines
> >
> > elves = h-elles = hellenes
>
> The site referenced below, devoted to matters Indo-European, says that
> the word we know as 'elf' was from an IE base meaning 'white.'
> Indo-European pre-dates Greek, of course ... unless you have some
> information, Aggie-Tom, that IE was derived from Greek?
How about the fact that the Greeks were living in Greece and speaking Greek
15,000 years before there was an sort of Proto-Indo-Eurpean !
90% of the DNA variance in Europeans had already occurred 20,000 years ago.
The main marker present in all Europeans which determines Europeaness the
NRY E173 is estimated to have evoleved 30,000 years ago. This fact more or
less kicks the legs from under the Kurgan warrior and other such Caspian Sea
migration theories. The Migration and interbreeding with other peoples which
made Europe European had already begun 30,000 years ago and so must have the
divergence of any common language.
The Greeks and Sardinians show the greatest genetic mutation and were thus
present the longest.
The problem with the PIE theory is that the Greeks were already there, and
were
probably speaking Greek, 20,000 years ago. The archaeological fact that they
also had the most advanced trading and military civilisation in Europe 5000
years ago, and that nobody else came near, makes the Aegean and NOT the
Caspian sea the primary source for the lingua franca, which can only have
been PURE PROTO-IONIAN GREEK.
The virtual Proto-Indo-European language currently proposed by linguists
cannot have possibly existed because not only does it ignore the DNA
evidence, it ignores the archaeological evidence as well, and it does not
even resemble Proto-Ionian Greek.
If you want to persist with the Proto-Indo-European theory then ignore the
TOSH currently been dished out by the Anglo-Saxon Germanic supremacist
linguists, who can't even speak a word of Greek to save their lives in a
Greek restaurant, and accept the DNA and archaeological evidence. There is
no need for a virtual language. A virtual language as proposed cannot be
substantiated. The Proto-Indo-European language was GREEK.
(See the article in www.sciencemag.org SCIENCE VOL 290 10 NOVEMBER 2000,
"The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans:
A Y Chromosome Perspective", from which I draw my conclusions )
>
> From http://www.geocities.com/indoeurop/aarchive.html:
John Donchig
>
> "Aggie-tom" <cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote in message news:<9l09bi$rn0$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>...
>
> [snipping fore and aft]
>
> > Obviously Elf is a corruption of Ellines
> >
> > elves = h-elles = hellenes
>
> The site referenced below, devoted to matters Indo-European, says that
> the word we know as 'elf' was from an IE base meaning 'white.'
> Indo-European pre-dates Greek, of course ... unless you have some
> information, Aggie-Tom, that IE was derived from Greek?
You know he makes it up as he goes along. He has "proof" and
"information" to back up anything he makes up....errr....says.
John
--
Laissez les bon temps roulez!
Mark Gerard Miller
> I have a book, "The World Guide to Gnomes, Fairies, Elves and Other
> Little People: A Compendium of International Folklore," by Thomas
> Keightley, a 19th century mythologist of some note. He offers a
> nine-page etymology of the word "fairy," but unfortunately, in the
> etymology he delves not into elves.
All or part of this book is on-line at
http://www.belinus.co.uk/folklore/FaerypiecesKeightley.htm. To see the
etymology of the word 'fairy,' click on the Introduction tab. It has
stories from all over Europe about the little people.
Mark
Mark Gerard Miller
> I have a book, "The World Guide to Gnomes, Fairies, Elves and Other
> Little People: A Compendium of International Folklore," by Thomas
> Keightley, a 19th century mythologist of some note. He offers a
> nine-page etymology of the word "fairy," but unfortunately, in the
> etymology he delves not into elves.
Me of little fata. Keightley does in fact address the etymology of
'elf.' From http://www.belinus.co.uk/folklore/FMythAlfar.htm:
[begin quote]
Of the origin of the word Alf nothing satisfactory is to be found.
Some think it is akin to the Latin albus, white; others, to alpes,
Alps, mountains. There is also supposed to be some mysterious
connexion between it and the word Elf or Elv, signifying water in the
northern languages; an analogy which has been thought to correspond
with that between the Latin Nympha and Lympha. Both relations,
however, are perhaps rather fanciful than just. Of the derivation of
Alf; as just observed, we know nothing certain, [d] and the original
meaning of Nympha would appear to be a new-married woman, [e] and
thence a marriageable young woman; and it. was applied to the supposed
inhabitants of the mountains, seas, and streams, on the same principle
that the northern nations gave them the appellation of men and women,
that is, from their imagined resemblance to the human form.
Whatever its origin, the word Alf has continued till the present day
in all the Teutonic languages. The Danes have Elv, pl. Elve; the
Swedes, Elf pl. Elfvar m. Elfvor f.; and the words Elf-dans and
Elf-blaest, together with Olof and other proper names, are derived
from them. The Germans call the nightmare Alp; and in their old poems
we meet with Elbe and Elbinne, and Elbisch occurs in them in the bad
sense of elvish of Chaucer and our old romancers; and a number of
proper names, such as Alprecht, Alphart, Alpinc, Alpwin [f] were
formed from it, undoubtedly before it got its present ill sense. [g]
In the Anglo-Saxon, Aelp or Aelpen, with its feminine and plural,
frequently occurs. The Oreas, Naias, and Hamodryas of the Greeks and
Romans are rendered in an Anglo-Saxon glossary by Munt-alpen,
rae-aelpen, and pelb-aelpen [h] Aelp is a component part of the proper
names Aelfred and Aelfric; and the author of the poem of Judith says
that his heroine was Aelp-rcine (Elf-sheen), bright or fair as an elf.
But of the character and acts of the elfs no traditions have been
preserved in Anglo-Saxon literature. In the English language, Elf;
Elves, and their derivatives are to be found in every period, from its
first formation down to this present time.
[end quote]
Melvin
Michael Kuettner
Mark Gerard Miller <mark_g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ea790d2a.01081...@posting.google.com...
> Barbara Walker, in her book The Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and
> Secrets, says, "The word 'elf' was related to the 'helleder,' people
> belonging to Mother Hel as Death-goddess. In general, it meant
> heathen, both dead and living." And: "The custom of the Wild Hunt or
> Night Ride, sacred to the elf-king (Odin), was transformed into a
> procession of wind-riding demons, as at Halloween and other pagan
> festivals. Leader of the night riders was called the Erl King, from
> Danish 'ellerkonge,' a king of those who belong to Hel. He associated
> with the sacred alder tree."
>
German umlaut). And he's so called also in regions who never
had contact with the Danes. So the root has to be older
(and not Scandinavic).
And the "wild hunt" is called "Wilde Jagd" over here.
Again - no Scandinavian influences.
The "wild hunt" doesn't have anything to do with Scand.
mythology; it's roots are Celtic.
> An interesting note on elves from Walker: "The paradise of Alfaheimr
> (Elf-land) was always matriarchal, inhabited by the bright female
> spirits who made the sun.
Why should this be interesting ?
Anyone who writes a book called
"The *Women's* Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets" clearly has an
agenda; and as I've seen from the sample given she doesn't let
facts stand in her way.
Declaring *Odin* (Scand. mythology) as the Erl king (Celtic myth.)
rather shows that she doesn't know what she's talking about.
Cheers,
Michael Kuettner
Mark Gerard Miller
> > What is your evidence for Frey as the only deity who had not been
> imported? (Of course Odin and Thor were imported and I agree with your
> suggestion that they arrived in Scandinavia relatively recently).
>
> I tend to agree, but something tells me Odin and Thor might have been around
> in another form earlier on.
Where were Odin and Thor imported from? And what is your source for this statement?
Mark
Mark Gerard Miller
> Mark Gerard Miller <mark_g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ea790d2a.01081...@posting.google.com...
> <snip>
> > Barbara Walker, in her book The Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and
> > Secrets, says, "The word 'elf' was related to the 'helleder,' people
> > belonging to Mother Hel as Death-goddess. In general, it meant
> > heathen, both dead and living." And: "The custom of the Wild Hunt or
> > Night Ride, sacred to the elf-king (Odin), was transformed into a
> > procession of wind-riding demons, as at Halloween and other pagan
> > festivals. Leader of the night riders was called the Erl King, from
> > Danish 'ellerkonge,' a king of those who belong to Hel. He associated
> > with the sacred alder tree."
> >
> Strange; the German language calls him "Erlkoenig" (oe is the
> German umlaut). And he's so called also in regions who never
> had contact with the Danes. So the root has to be older
> (and not Scandinavic).
> And the "wild hunt" is called "Wilde Jagd" over here.
> Again - no Scandinavian influences.
> The "wild hunt" doesn't have anything to do with Scand.
> mythology; it's roots are Celtic.
>
> > An interesting note on elves from Walker: "The paradise of Alfaheimr
> > (Elf-land) was always matriarchal, inhabited by the bright female
> > spirits who made the sun.
>
> Why should this be interesting ?
I thought it was interesting that the sun will be called Glory of
Elves in the hereafter. I don't mind if you don't find it interesting.
Do you mind if I do?
> Anyone who writes a book called
> "The *Women's* Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets" clearly has an
> agenda; and as I've seen from the sample given she doesn't let
> facts stand in her way.
> Declaring *Odin* (Scand. mythology) as the Erl king (Celtic myth.)
> rather shows that she doesn't know what she's talking about.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Michael Kuettner
Bring it up with her. I just reported what she wrote.
Mark
Michael Kuettner
with the paragraph below.
Maybe I should have written - "Why doesn't this surpise me ?"
> > Anyone who writes a book called
> > "The *Women's* Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets" clearly has an
> > agenda; and as I've seen from the sample given she doesn't let
> > facts stand in her way.
> > Declaring *Odin* (Scand. mythology) as the Erl king (Celtic myth.)
> > rather shows that she doesn't know what she's talking about.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Michael Kuettner
>
> Bring it up with her. I just reported what she wrote.
Calm down. I didn't shoot the messenger, did I ?
You reported what she wrote and I said why I have some
problems with her point of view.
I didn't criticize you but her.
There's no need to get defensive; let's have a jolly good
discussion instead.
Cheers,
Michael Kuettner
PS : I'm posting from s.h.a. - I think we should drop
the Greek culture group. Note f'ups
Mark Gerard Miller
> news:ea790d2a.01081...@posting.google.com...
> <snip>
> > Barbara Walker, in her book The Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and
> > Secrets, says, "The word 'elf' was related to the 'helleder,' people
> > belonging to Mother Hel as Death-goddess. In general, it meant
> > heathen, both dead and living." And: "The custom of the Wild Hunt or
> > Night Ride, sacred to the elf-king (Odin), was transformed into a
> > procession of wind-riding demons, as at Halloween and other pagan
> > festivals. Leader of the night riders was called the Erl King, from
> > Danish 'ellerkonge,' a king of those who belong to Hel. He associated
> > with the sacred alder tree."
> >
> Strange; the German language calls him "Erlkoenig" (oe is the
> German umlaut). And he's so called also in regions who never
> had contact with the Danes. So the root has to be older
> (and not Scandinavic).
Well, in the Cassell Dictionary of Norse Myth and Legend, Andy
Orchard, author, there is a section called "wild hunt." I am not going
to copy it out, but suffice it to say that the Norse had a wild hunt,
common in later folk tale, but that "Instances in Norse myth and
legend tend to be restricted to vision of wild female riders."
I can't vouch for the reliability of the material that follows. But
for a refutation of what Michael wrote above here, in general and in
specific with respect to the Danes, please see this link at the
Indo-European Database:
http://www.geocities.com/cas111jd/norse/german_origin.htm
Excerpt:
"The Germanic languages originated in the area of southern Scandinavia
and the southwestern Baltic coastal areas. Even well into the Iron
Age, when, they were still confined to this area which was a cultural
backwater compared to the blossoming Mediterranean cultures of Greece
and Rome and the nascent Celtic Halstatt and La Tene cultures. Many
archaeologists like to finally identify them with the Jasdorf culture
about 500 BC. For centuries before Jasdorf they had remained in the
so-called Scandinavian Bronze Age.
"The archaeological antecedents of the Germans in their earliest known
homeland are not difficult and very interesting to trace. They
included a basal population of 'Forest Neolithic' hunter-gatherers
that are probably directly descended from the local Mesolithic
populations. Adopting little more than pottery and polished stone
tools, they seem part of a circum-Baltic and north Russian population
that emerged into history as the Finnish-speaking populations. In
archaeology they are recognized by their pottery, the so-called Pitted
Ware. The Ertebolle culture of Denmark was the most successful of
their group in the west Baltic."
I don't know how much credence to put in this and the links that
follow as there is no author listed, though I would put more credence
in it than in someone who claims the Scandinavians don't have a wild
hunt. In fact, here, from the article WILD HUNT in Man, Myth and
Magic: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Supernatural:
"Belief in its existence was at one time widespread over all northern
Europe. ... Odin, god of the dead, or Woden, his Germanic counterpart,
is generally thought to have been the original leader of the Wild
Hunt."
> And the "wild hunt" is called "Wilde Jagd" over here.
> Again - no Scandinavian influences.
> The "wild hunt" doesn't have anything to do with Scand.
> mythology; it's roots are Celtic.
I don't know about the roots, but now, with the links I am about to
give, we have others who say that the Wild Hunt does in fact have to
do with Scandinavia. Read them if you want to, or not, I don't care.
Start here, http://www.geocities.com/cas111jd/norse/norse_odin.htm,
where both the Scandinavian and Celtic wild hunts are referenced.
Then please see http://www.geocities.com/cas111jd/norse/norse_ullr.htm
Excerpt:
Ullr "also had some overlap with Odin, for sometimes he rode in the
Wild Hunt - and sometimes led it. He was adopted into Christianity as
St. Hubert, the patron saint of hunters."
Also,
at http://www.geocities.com/cas111jd/early_religion/skygod_heavenly.htm
we have this:
"In the Germanic pantheon the ‘Heavenly Sky God’ was Odin,
Woden, and Woten in Old Norse, Old English, and Old German,
respectively. The most plausible interpretation of his name relates it
to Gothic wóds, Norse oedi, Old English wodness, etc, ‘rage,
fury’. This is thought to have come from Odin’s role as
leader of the ‘Wild Hunt’ or ‘Raging Host’,
where he rode across the stormy night skies in search of battlefield
slain to take back to Valhalla, his home. Nevertheless, in addition to
such epithets as ‘All-Father’ and ‘The High
One’, Odin’s is easily identified as the Heavenly Sky God
by his immaculate spear, symbol of sovereignty, and by his eagle
helmet and eagle-plumed garb, the totemic bird also of Zeus and
Jupiter. In the Heavenly Sky God tradition he was also the god to whom
oaths were sworn. In one myth, the legendary Swedish king Gylfi went
to Asgard where he met the Norse triad. Of the three, Hog ("High")
undoubtedly corresponded to Odin."
and at http://www.geocities.com/cas111jd/norse/norse_frigga.htm we
have:
"The Winiliers' appeal to Frigga before battle is curious. It further
suggests the connection between Frigga and Freya, the leader of the
Valkyries on their Wild Hunt with Odin. The Valkyries (the fateful
"Choosers" of the battle slain) can be considered the war-like aspect
of the 'Fates'. Indeed, worship of the fate goddess(es) seems to have
been part of official state cults in both Scandinavia and Germany.
Conveniently distinguished in Norse mythology by name and function for
us today and the Valkyries and Norns, they seem to have been more
anciently referred to as the Dises ('Spirits'). The goddesses of this
more vague notion seem to have included functions of both Valkyries
and Norns (Indeed, the Norn Skuld is also found as a Valkyrie). Thus,
we can see how Frigga could have been included in this story instead
of Freya."
> > An interesting note on elves from Walker: "The paradise of Alfaheimr
> > (Elf-land) was always matriarchal, inhabited by the bright female
> > spirits who made the sun.
>
> Why should this be interesting ?
> Anyone who writes a book called
> "The *Women's* Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets" clearly has an
> agenda; and as I've seen from the sample given she doesn't let
> facts stand in her way.
She definitely has an agenda. Unless I'm wrong her agenda is to
counter the age-long agendas of the Christian, Jewish and Muslims
traditions, which, except for the Catholics and Mary, deny any
divinity in the female. (Not to say Mary is seen as divine in the
doctrine, though the people see her that way.)
As to "facts," I'm sure Walker's right on some and wrong on others.
Sometimes errors of fact in mythology are more properly called
"variations," though I concede it's not kosher to make up one's own
variations. That is more properly fiction than myth. Truthfully I
don't know enough about mythology to judge whether Walker is as
cracked as everybody in here claims. I spend more time making myths
than I do studying them.
Regards,
Mark
Michael Kuettner
Mark Gerard Miller <mark_g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ea790d2a.01081...@posting.google.com...
> "Michael Kuettner" <mik...@eunet.at> wrote in message
news:<42ye7.37$6P4....@nreader1.kpnqwest.net>...
> > Strange; the German language calls him "Erlkoenig" (oe is the
> > German umlaut). And he's so called also in regions who never
> > had contact with the Danes. So the root has to be older
> > (and not Scandinavic).
>
> Well, in the Cassell Dictionary of Norse Myth and Legend, Andy
> Orchard, author, there is a section called "wild hunt." I am not going
> to copy it out, but suffice it to say that the Norse had a wild hunt,
> common in later folk tale, but that "Instances in Norse myth and
> legend tend to be restricted to vision of wild female riders."
>
While over here (Austria) the wild hunt is composed of males -
led by the 'fool' (fool in the sense of not caring about danger).
> I can't vouch for the reliability of the material that follows. But
> for a refutation of what Michael wrote above here, in general and in
> specific with respect to the Danes, please see this link at the
> Indo-European Database:
>
Strange sentence.
You mean : "I don't know if what I'm going to cite is
tuppence worth but it refutes what Michael wrote".
Strange logic.
You've misread my post, I guess.
I stated that the myth of the 'wild hunt' couldn't be of
Germanic or Scandinavian origin because it's also
known in areas where neither Scands nor Germans
dwelled.
And the 'wild hunt' is known in Celtic cultures.
<snip language>
> I don't know how much credence to put in this and the links that
> follow as there is no author listed, though I would put more credence
> in it than in someone who claims the Scandinavians don't have a wild
> hunt. In fact, here, from the article WILD HUNT in Man, Myth and
> Magic: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Supernatural:
>
I didn't state that they don't have a 'wild hunt';
I stated that the origins of it were Celtic.
> "Belief in its existence was at one time widespread over all northern
> Europe. ... Odin, god of the dead, or Woden, his Germanic counterpart,
> is generally thought to have been the original leader of the Wild
> Hunt."
>
Sorry; but no.
Odin never was a god in these parts; still we've got the 'wild
hunt' led by the fool or the 'Wilder Jaeger' (in later times).
>
> > And the "wild hunt" is called "Wilde Jagd" over here.
> > Again - no Scandinavian influences.
> > The "wild hunt" doesn't have anything to do with Scand.
> > mythology; it's roots are Celtic.
>
> I don't know about the roots, but now, with the links I am about to
> give, we have others who say that the Wild Hunt does in fact have to
> do with Scandinavia. Read them if you want to, or not, I don't care.
>
Yep; they may have been known in Scandinavia; but they didn't stem from
there.
<snip>
> Excerpt:
>
> Ullr "also had some overlap with Odin,
_SOME OVERLAP_ ?
That's a nice general sentence.
But where and when was an overlap between Odin and
Ullr ?
<snip Odin>
Again - What has Odin got to do with the 'wild hunt' ?
>
> "The Winiliers' appeal to Frigga before battle is curious. It further
> suggests the connection between Frigga and Freya, the leader of the
> Valkyries on their Wild Hunt with Odin. The Valkyries (the fateful
> "Choosers" of the battle slain) can be considered the war-like aspect
> of the 'Fates'. Indeed, worship of the fate goddess(es) seems to have
> been part of official state cults in both Scandinavia and Germany.
> Conveniently distinguished in Norse mythology by name and function for
> us today and the Valkyries and Norns, they seem to have been more
> anciently referred to as the Dises ('Spirits'). The goddesses of this
> more vague notion seem to have included functions of both Valkyries
> and Norns (Indeed, the Norn Skuld is also found as a Valkyrie). Thus,
> we can see how Frigga could have been included in this story instead
> of Freya."
>
Where is *any* reference to the wild hunt regarding Frigga ?
<snip>
> > Why should this be interesting ?
> > Anyone who writes a book called
> > "The *Women's* Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets" clearly has an
> > agenda; and as I've seen from the sample given she doesn't let
> > facts stand in her way.
>
> She definitely has an agenda. Unless I'm wrong her agenda is to
> counter the age-long agendas of the Christian, Jewish and Muslims
> traditions, which, except for the Catholics and Mary, deny any
> divinity in the female. (Not to say Mary is seen as divine in the
> doctrine, though the people see her that way.)
>
AFAIK, they also deny divinity in the male (except for two men).
*g*
So she's a feminist with an agenda.
> As to "facts," I'm sure Walker's right on some and wrong on others.
Why ?
This is s.h.a (see my other post).
Here we like to clarify things instead of shooting the messenger.
<snip>
Cheers,
Michael Kuettner
PS : Note follow-ups.
I don't think soc.culture.greek is interested in this discussion.
Alice Turner
"Mark Gerard Miller" <mark_g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ea790d2a.01081...@posting.google.com...
Funny, I was just looking that up today. According to both the OED
and -The Encyclopedia of Fantasy-, the "fairy-peri" connection is
suspect, a case of hononym (which I can never spell). Sylvia
Townsend-Warner did wonders with it in -The Kingdoms of Elfin- though,
for which I am grateful. I bookmarked the link--thanks. Does it include
all of Keightley? He's quite famous.
I'm going to delve into a lot on fairies in this ng in the immediate
future. Mark, up for that? Iain? I hope some of our Scandinavian friends
are. And Germans! That would be great.
Alice
Alice Turner
From the OED, first part of a long entry:
elf (___), n.1 Forms: 1 ælf, ylf (app. recorded only in pl. ylfe), 3
alve, 5 alfe, 57 elfe, 4 elf. Plural elves: 1 ylfe, 3 alven, 67
elfes, Sc. elvis, 8 elfs, 6 elves. See also elven, auf, oaf1.
[OE. ælf str. masc. = OHG. alp (MHG., mod.G. alp nightmare, ON. álfr
(Da. alf) elf:–OTeut. *al_o-z; a parallel type *al_i-z (cf. Sw. elf, Da.
elv) appears in late WSax. *ylf (found in pl. ylfe:–*ielfe) = Mercian,
Kent. *elf, Northumb. *ælf, one or other of which is represented in the
mod. word. (The mod.G. elf is believed to be adopted from Eng.; MHG. had
elbe a female elf.)
Some have compared the Teut. word with the Skr. rbhu, the name given to
the three genii of the seasons in Hindu mythology.]
1. Mythol.
a. The name of a class of supernatural beings, in early Teutonic belief
supposed to possess formidable magical powers, exercised variously for
the benefit or the injury of mankind.
They were believed to be of dwarfish form, to produce diseases of
various kinds, to act as incubi and succubi, to cause nightmares, and to
steal children, substituting changelings in their place. The Teutonic
belief in elves is probably the main source of the mediæval superstition
respecting fairies, which, however, includes elements not of Teutonic
origin; in general the Romanic word denotes a being of less terrible and
more playful character than the ‘elf’ as originally conceived. In mod.
literature, elf is a mere synonym of fairy, which has to a great extent
superseded it even in dialects. Originally elf was masculine, elven
feminine; but in 13th and 14th c. the two seem to have been used
indifferently of both sexes. In mod. use elf chiefly, though not always,
denotes a male fairy.
Fairy (this is me again) came from France with the Norman conquest and
appears to be merely a homynym (can't spell that) with the Persian peri,
though one would wish for more. That left-field Hindu thing is
interesting, though.
Alice
Mark Gerard Miller
> Mark Gerard Miller <mark_g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ea790d2a.01081...@posting.google.com...
> > "Michael Kuettner" <mik...@eunet.at> wrote in message
> news:<42ye7.37$6P4....@nreader1.kpnqwest.net>...
> <snip>
Michael Kuettner wrote:
> > > "The *Women's* Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets" clearly has an
> > > agenda; and as I've seen from the sample given she doesn't let
> > > facts stand in her way.
Mark Miller wrote:
> > She definitely has an agenda. Unless I'm wrong her agenda is to
> > counter the age-long agendas of the Christian, Jewish and Muslims
> > traditions, which, except for the Catholics and Mary, deny any
> > divinity in the female. (Not to say Mary is seen as divine in the
> > doctrine, though the people see her that way.)
Michael Kuettner wrote:
> AFAIK, they also deny divinity in the male (except for two men).
> *g*
> So she's a feminist with an agenda.
I wasn't talking solely about humans. I was talking about three of the
world's major religions denying any divinity in any female entity
whatsoever (except, maybe, Sophia).
Mark
Michael Kuettner
<snip>
> Michael Kuettner wrote:
> > AFAIK, they also deny divinity in the male (except for two men).
> > *g*
> > So she's a feminist with an agenda.
>
> I wasn't talking solely about humans. I was talking about three of the
> world's major religions denying any divinity in any female entity
> whatsoever (except, maybe, Sophia).
>
They deny her divinity; but they also deny that Mohammed
was divine.
So I think it's not really fair to Islam to state that they
deny divinity to women when they also deny it to men
(and especially Mohammed).
Cheers,
Michael Kuettner
Unknown
not, then apparently I've missed something.
Maybe this is "the typical me-too newsgroup thread"?
Michael Kuettner
Alice Turner <pei...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3b7b6...@news1.prserv.net...
<snip>
> snippety-snip--down boys!
>
> From the OED, first part of a long entry:
> elf (___), n.1 Forms: 1 ælf, ylf (app. recorded only in pl. ylfe), 3
> alve, 5 alfe, 57 elfe, 4 elf. Plural elves: 1 ylfe, 3 alven, 67
> elfes,
> Sc. elvis,
Now they're claiming Elvis as one of theirs !
;-)
> 8 elfs, 6 elves. See also elven, auf, oaf1.
> [OE. ælf str. masc. = OHG. alp (MHG., mod.G. alp nightmare,
Be careful with dictionaries.
The common German form of elfes (Elfen) is Alb (alp is rather
exotic - even in MHG).
Elfes were believed to bring bad dreams - Albdruck or Albtraum.
> ON. álfr
> (Da. alf) elf:-OTeut. *al_o-z; a parallel type *al_i-z (cf. Sw. elf,
Da.
> elv) appears in late WSax. *ylf (found in pl. ylfe:-*ielfe) = Mercian,
> Kent. *elf, Northumb. *ælf, one or other of which is represented in
the
> mod. word. (The mod.G. elf is believed to be adopted from Eng.; MHG.
had
> elbe a female elf.)
Are they sure it shouldn't be Albe ?
Thanks for the quote !
Cheers,
Michael Kuettner
Mark Gerard Miller
> news:ea790d2a.01081...@posting.google.com...
> > mark_g...@hotmail.com (Mark Gerard Miller) wrote in message
> news:<ea790d2a.01081...@posting.google.com>...
> >
> > > I have a book, "The World Guide to Gnomes, Fairies, Elves and Other
> > > Little People: A Compendium of International Folklore," by Thomas
> > > Keightley, a 19th century mythologist of some note. He offers a
> > > nine-page etymology of the word "fairy," but unfortunately, in the
> > > etymology he delves not into elves.
> >
> > All or part of this book is on-line at
> > http://www.belinus.co.uk/folklore/FaerypiecesKeightley.htm. To see the
> > etymology of the word 'fairy,' click on the Introduction tab. It has
> > stories from all over Europe about the little people.
>
> Funny, I was just looking that up today. According to both the OED
> and -The Encyclopedia of Fantasy-, the "fairy-peri" connection is
> suspect, a case of hononym (which I can never spell). Sylvia
> Townsend-Warner did wonders with it in -The Kingdoms of Elfin- though,
> for which I am grateful. I bookmarked the link--thanks. Does it include
> all of Keightley? He's quite famous.
I think not. Down toward the bottom of the bottom later chapters
aren't highlighted and are not accessible. It must be an ongoing
project.
> I'm going to delve into a lot on fairies in this ng in the immediate
> future. Mark, up for that? Iain? I hope some of our Scandinavian friends
> are. And Germans! That would be great.
I would love to discuss fairies. One of the more interesting aspects
of them, to me, is that in some stories and traditions they're strong,
fey (of course), lethal ones.
Melvin
Ryan Lawson
> Well, in the Cassell Dictionary of Norse Myth and Legend, Andy
> Orchard, author, there is a section called "wild hunt." I am not going
> to copy it out, but suffice it to say that the Norse had a wild hunt,
> common in later folk tale, but that "Instances in Norse myth and
> legend tend to be restricted to vision of wild female riders."
The Norse culture had Celtic influences so no doubt certain things in common
will be found between the two.
DMB
> Ages period makes is quite obvious that Trolls, Dwarfs, Goblins and Elves
> were racial memories of Greco-Roman contact with northern Europe.
AGGIE-TOM, Mark Miller and friends:
This is an interesting thread, although Aggie-tom's lingustic analysis
was very far from "obvious", as others have pointed out. But the main
reason I'm responding is to object to the idea that you've "debunked
another myth". The idea that elves and such are "racial memories"
debunks nothing. That's what myths are, among the other things. That's
one of the ways that myth encodes cultural evolution; the old
culture's gods are demoted by the newer cultures and thereby made
smaller and/or more sinister. The Christian devil, for example, is an
amalgamation of Greco-Roman underworld gods. There is a certain kind
of logic to it. If anything, its remarkable and astonishing that
historical realities can be symbolically preserved in legends and
myths.
I'd like to disagree with at least one of M.G.Miller's ideas as well.
The notion that Greeks spoke Greek in Greece 10, 20 or 30 thousand
years ago defies the nature of cultural and linguistic evolution.
Language simply doesn't stand still that long. Language is a living,
breathing, dynamic thing. The kind of English, for example, spoken
just 500 years ago would be very difficult for the contemporary ear to
understand. When time is streched out into tens of thousands of years
comprehension gets nearly impossible. Also the Greek pantheon tells us
about the layers of culture in much the same way that elves and devils
do. It shows us that the Greeks conquered and/or evolved out of an
earlier matriarchal society, most likely one that inhabited the area
prior to their arrival.
And just to be fair in distributing objections and disagreements,
please allow me to scold at large. Its seems that nearly all the posts
contained way too much detail and not enough insight, too much mean
and not enough meaning. The effort seems to be toward impressing and
not informing. And for god's sake, if you're too tired to make any
sense, then go take a nap.
Please notice that the value of myth lies below the surface of the
story, under the characters. That's exactly why there are so many
similarities between Greco-Roman gods and Nordic gods, liguistically
and otherwise. Under the appearances, they are the same things.
They're just different ways of referring to the same mysterious
energies, different clothes on the same guy. Myths aren't just a bunch
of old soap operas, ya know! Show some respect for them and for each
other, will ya?
DMB (To be dumb, all I need is U.)
Josh Geller
DMB <dbuc...@classicalradio.org> wrote:
> "Aggie-tom" <cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote in message
> news:<9l09bi$rn0$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>...
>> Analysis of the mythology which was concocted in the Byzantine and Middle
>> Ages period makes is quite obvious that Trolls, Dwarfs, Goblins and Elves
>> were racial memories of Greco-Roman contact with northern Europe.
> AGGIE-TOM, Mark Miller and friends:
> This is an interesting thread, although Aggie-tom's lingustic analysis
> was very far from "obvious", as others have pointed out.
As long as you accept his major theses, that the current Cypriot
dialect of Greek, as he learned it as a child, is identical with the
Greek of very ancient times, and that the people who have
mistranslated Greek texts over the millenia were obeying the orders of
some kind of Jewish conspiracy, nothing could be more obvious.
Basically, he is insane. But who has ever met a Cypriot who was not
insane?
> But the main
> reason I'm responding is to object to the idea that you've "debunked
> another myth". The idea that elves and such are "racial memories"
> debunks nothing.
Which they certainly are, though not of Greeks and Romans.
> That's what myths are, among the other things. That's
> one of the ways that myth encodes cultural evolution; the old
> culture's gods are demoted by the newer cultures and thereby made
> smaller and/or more sinister.
That's not what's happening in this case, or not the whole of it.
There were groups of small forest dwellers in Europe, as there are now
in Africa.
People remembered about them after they were dead.
There were also Neanderthals, and dire wolves, giant pigs, elephants
and so on. All of them took their place in the stories.
> The Christian devil, for example, is an
> amalgamation of Greco-Roman underworld gods.
The Christian devil is the Christian underworld god.
This becomes a lot clearer after you've learned to physically place
the various topoi. Once you understand that Heaven specifically refers
to the Arctic sky and Hell specifically refers to the Antarctic
sky. that Earth is the plane drawn through the solstitial ane
equinoctial points, and that this terminology is as close to universal
as no matter, once you understand this particularly things become
really a lot clearer.
> There is a certain kind
> of logic to it. If anything, its remarkable and astonishing that
> historical realities can be symbolically preserved in legends and
> myths.
The amazing thing is that this idea amazes people.
Human beings have been just like they are now, with brains just as big
and the same kinds of motivations for at least 100,000 years. To
imagine that our ancestors weren't motivated to preserve information
or capable of devising methods to pass this information along is what
should be the incredible idea.
> I'd like to disagree with at least one of M.G.Miller's ideas as well.
> The notion that Greeks spoke Greek in Greece 10, 20 or 30 thousand
> years ago defies the nature of cultural and linguistic evolution.
> Language simply doesn't stand still that long. Language is a living,
> breathing, dynamic thing. The kind of English, for example, spoken
> just 500 years ago would be very difficult for the contemporary ear to
> understand.
English is a special case, and the past 500 years have been
particularly busy years.
Arabic is effectively the same language that it was 1500 years ago,
and Sanskrit is the same language that it was 4000 years ago.
You might argue that Arabic has been kept comprehensible by the
universality of the Quran in the Arabic speaking world, but Sanskrit
is kept comprehensible by people who do not use writing in their
practice though they are all literate.
One of the more interesting things about Sanskrit is that the Sanskrit
alphabet is a collection of sounds: it can be written in any arbitrary
set of characters.
> When time is streched out into tens of thousands of years
> comprehension gets nearly impossible.
This is your opinion, or someone elses opinion that you are
expressing.
> Also the Greek pantheon tells us
> about the layers of culture in much the same way that elves and devils
> do. It shows us that the Greeks conquered and/or evolved out of an
> earlier matriarchal society, most likely one that inhabited the area
> prior to their arrival.
There were certainly political and cultural changes, though what you
say here is simplistic: more the fashionable ideas of eighty or a
hundred years ago than a reflection of what actually occurred.
Joe Jefferson
>
> > > > The Elves were regarded as servants of the Dwarfs and Trolls.
> > > Can you give me a reference where Elves were ever considered
> > > servants to Dwarfs and Trolls (reference, not interpretation)
> >
> > The Lord of The Rings, Book 1, The Fellowship of the Ring. J R R Tolkein.
> >
>
> The Elves were the chosen ones in Tolkien's writings. The Elves and Dwarves in
> Tolkien's works were always wary of one another, never really working together.
> Now, the only reference that could be misconstrued as the Elves being Servants
> of the Dwarves, would perhaps be when the 7 rings were made for the Dwarf Kings,
> and the Elves used their magic upon them.
> However, the Elves didn't do this because they were in servitude to the
> Dwarves. The Trolls were something else entirely. I am hazy on the origin of
> them at this point, so I won't write of them. Made by Morgoth were the Orcs,
> which were a crude parody of the fair folk, the Elves.
Trolls were made in imitation of the dwarves, in the same way that orcs
were imitations of elves. They were fashioned from stone, and returned
to stone in sunlight.
However, the original question referred to refrences in *mythology* of
elves serving dwarves, not examples from fiction.
--
Joe of Castle Jefferson
http://www.primenet.com/~jjstrshp/
Site updated October 1st, 1999.
"Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless; maintain the rights of the
poor and oppressed. Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them from the
hand of the wicked." - Psalm 82:3-4.
Sylver
> > parodies or corruptions of Elves and Ents respectively. The Dwarves had
> > a powerful hatred for all of their kind, so any 'allegory' requiring
> > them to be allies has a serious flaw.
>
> Not if you considerer the hatred of the anti-Christ or Roman Catholic Pope
> and his masters the Franks, who falsely claimed the Romans crown i.e.
> Dwarves, had against the Byzantines or Hellenic Romans, Romai or Goblins.
Can someone please explain to me what the previous reply has to do with
Aggie-Tom's added rant? As I recall, this particular strain of this thread
started because of a reference to Tolkien that was being used out of context
to support a theory that didn't make much sense to begin with, really.
Geannie (Sylver)
Nicolas
Nicolas
"vasif@fisav" wrote:
>
> "REAL" <traprea...@SPAMTRAPPEDhotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3B73AE5D...@SPAMTRAPPEDhotmail.com...
> > you must have also done some work for Tito in the past.
> >
> >
>
> --
> vasif@fisav says...
>
> REAL knows what he is talking about from personal experience. He, I mean
> REAL, sure has worked and is working for various pressure groups. His going
> rate is 15 average sized peanuts an hour. Alternatively, he will accept ONE
> large penus for a
> full day's work.
>
> For the extra large variety, his favorite, he will put in two days' work, he
> says.
>
> **************
--
*Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the pursuit
of justice is no virtue. Barry Goldwater
Joe Jefferson
>
> Also the Greek pantheon tells us
> about the layers of culture in much the same way that elves and devils
> do. It shows us that the Greeks conquered and/or evolved out of an
> earlier matriarchal society, most likely one that inhabited the area
> prior to their arrival.
Matrilineal perhaps, but there is no good evidence that humans have ever
created a matriarchal culture.
Mark Gerard Miller
> I'd like to disagree with at least one of M.G.Miller's ideas as well.
> The notion that Greeks spoke Greek in Greece 10, 20 or 30 thousand
> years ago defies the nature of cultural and linguistic evolution.
> Language simply doesn't stand still that long. Language is a living,
> breathing, dynamic thing.
I didn't mean to imply that the people who lived in Greece many
millennia ago spoke anything resembling Greek. I was being kind of sly
with Aggie-Tom when I asked if he had information that Indo-European
(whatever that was) was derived from Greek and not vice-versa. I read
recently on http://linguistlist.org, I think, that languages lose and
gain about 8 percent of their words per millennium. Or was it every
500 years? I can't remember. But after just a thousand years, what
with the other changes that a language undergoes in pronunciation,
inflection, stress, etc., it sounds much different.
Aggie-Tom's claim that the Greeks were speaking Greek so long ago
shows that he doesn't know as much about language as linguists think
they know about language.
Mark
Sylver
Joe Jefferson wrote:
> Sylver wrote:
> >
> > > > > The Elves were regarded as servants of the Dwarfs and Trolls.
> > > > Can you give me a reference where Elves were ever considered
> > > > servants to Dwarfs and Trolls (reference, not interpretation)
> > >
> > > The Lord of The Rings, Book 1, The Fellowship of the Ring. J R R Tolkein.
> > >
> >
> > The Elves were the chosen ones in Tolkien's writings. The Elves and Dwarves in
> > Tolkien's works were always wary of one another, never really working together.
> > Now, the only reference that could be misconstrued as the Elves being Servants
> > of the Dwarves, would perhaps be when the 7 rings were made for the Dwarf Kings,
> > and the Elves used their magic upon them.
> > However, the Elves didn't do this because they were in servitude to the
> > Dwarves. The Trolls were something else entirely. I am hazy on the origin of
> > them at this point, so I won't write of them. Made by Morgoth were the Orcs,
> > which were a crude parody of the fair folk, the Elves.
>
> Trolls were made in imitation of the dwarves, in the same way that orcs
> were imitations of elves. They were fashioned from stone, and returned
> to stone in sunlight.
>
> However, the original question referred to refrences in *mythology* of
> elves serving dwarves, not examples from fiction.
Aggie-Tom himself gave us the reference from Tolkien, which in my Second Paragraph of
the quoted text that I wrote, I wrote something along the lines that one cannot use
Tolkien's mythology of Middle-Earth to refute the mythologies of Human history, since
they are two totally different things. Twasn't me, who would use a world of fiction
to prove a point of human mythology.
Geannie (Sylver)
P.S. Thanks for the reference of the Trolls. I knew that Morgoth created them, I just
couldn't remember the race that they were supposed to parody. Couldn't remember
whether it was the Ents or the Dwarves. I'm a titch rusty on my studies of Tolkien.
Mark Gerard Miller
> Arabic is effectively the same language that it was 1500 years ago,
> and Sanskrit is the same language that it was 4000 years ago.
I thought Sanskrit was spoken only in ritual and religious situations,
not by the general public. And the reason that it is the same as it
was 4,000 (more like 3,500?) years ago was because a man started
setting down, in writing, a grammar. There has been an effort to
preserve Sanskrit as much as possible in its "original" form. There
has been a similar effort to exactly and precisely preserve the Koran
in its original form, which may have had an effect on preserving the
language as it was long ago unto the present day.
With respect to Sanskrit, see here for someone who knows what he's
talking about:
http://linguist.emich.edu/~ask-ling/archive-most-recent/msg05202.html
> You might argue that Arabic has been kept comprehensible by the
> universality of the Quran in the Arabic speaking world, but Sanskrit
> is kept comprehensible by people who do not use writing in their
> practice though they are all literate.
>
> One of the more interesting things about Sanskrit is that the Sanskrit
> alphabet is a collection of sounds: it can be written in any arbitrary
> set of characters.
>
> > When time is streched out into tens of thousands of years
> > comprehension gets nearly impossible.
>
> This is your opinion, or someone elses opinion that you are
> expressing.
Linguists will say the same thing. I found something interesting about
the rate of change of language on http://linguistlist.org the other
day and misstated it in another part of this thread. Quote: "This
approximate rate of
change, in the cases where we have fairly good historical evidence, is
about 17% or 18% loss of basic vocabulary (that is, substitution of
borrowed words, coined words or otherwise losing completely the
original
form of the word) per millennium. Using this figure, two identical
languages which then separate and have no contact (and making the
assumption that therefore the particular vocabulary items lost over
time
would be completely independent) would, after about 20,000 years then
have remaining only about 4% of their original vocabulary."-- linguist
James M. Fidelholtz in the thread "The Mother of All Languages," as
quoted at
http://linguist.emich.edu/~ask-ling/archive-most-recent/msg05124.html
> > Also the Greek pantheon tells us
> > about the layers of culture in much the same way that elves and devils
> > do. It shows us that the Greeks conquered and/or evolved out of an
> > earlier matriarchal society, most likely one that inhabited the area
> > prior to their arrival.
>
> There were certainly political and cultural changes, though what you
> say here is simplistic: more the fashionable ideas of eighty or a
> hundred years ago than a reflection of what actually occurred.
What did actually occur, then?
Mark
Josh Geller
Mark Gerard Miller <mark_g...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> dcl...@best.com (Josh Geller) wrote in message
> news:<cvCf7.13955$Up.3...@sea-read.news.verio.net>...
>> Arabic is effectively the same language that it was 1500 years ago,
>> and Sanskrit is the same language that it was 4000 years ago.
> I thought Sanskrit was spoken only in ritual and religious situations,
> not by the general public.
There are people whose mother tongue is Sanskrit.
They are families of brahmins, who raise their children (as theywere
raised; this has been going on for some time) as Sanskrit
speakers. They learn Hindi and English and so on later in childhood.
There are, btw, different dialects of Sanskrit.
> And the reason that it is the same as it
> was 4,000 (more like 3,500?) years ago was because a man started
> setting down, in writing, a grammar.
May be.
As I point out below, the writing is optional. There is this set of
sounds, that are learned exactly. Each one is associated with a
letter, but they are learned orally.
> There has been an effort to
> preserve Sanskrit as much as possible in its "original" form. There
> has been a similar effort to exactly and precisely preserve the Koran
> in its original form, which may have had an effect on preserving the
> language as it was long ago unto the present day.
There are dialects of Sanskrit as there are dialects of Arabic.
> With respect to Sanskrit, see here for someone who knows what he's
> talking about:
> http://linguist.emich.edu/~ask-ling/archive-most-recent/msg05202.html
This is interesting, well-known, and not particularly supportive of
your position.
I excerpt a few lines:
I'm afraid we can't ask how "old" a language is: the question is
meaningless.
Indo-Aryan language were present in the Indian subcontinent no
later than 1500 BC. Sometime between 1500 and 1000 BC, a
literary language arose among the Indo-Aryan speakers.
Note the first sentence, and the hedging on the dates.
In fact, these dates are almost entirely meaningless. All you can say
is that one event happened after the other. The dates assigned to
these events are mostly based on ideas about history - notably the
idea of an 'Aryan invasion of India' occurring around 1500 BC - which
is not holding up under close examination. If there was an 'Aryan
invasion of India' it happened a long time before 1500 BC.
Check out
http://sarasvati.simplenet.com/ieindex.htm
>> You might argue that Arabic has been kept comprehensible by the
>> universality of the Quran in the Arabic speaking world, but Sanskrit
>> is kept comprehensible by people who do not use writing in their
>> practice though they are all literate.
>> One of the more interesting things about Sanskrit is that the Sanskrit
>> alphabet is a collection of sounds: it can be written in any arbitrary
>> set of characters.
>>> When time is streched out into tens of thousands of years
>>> comprehension gets nearly impossible.
>> This is your opinion, or someone elses opinion that you are
>> expressing.
> Linguists will say the same thing. I found something interesting about
> the rate of change of language on http://linguistlist.org the other
> day and misstated it in another part of this thread. Quote: "This
> approximate rate of change, in the cases where we have fairly good
> historical evidence, is about 17% or 18% loss of basic vocabulary
> (that is, substitution of borrowed words, coined words or otherwise
> losing completely the original form of the word) per millennium.
Maybe, maybe not.
We have been discussing, I note, two exceptions: Sanskrit and Arabic.
I certainly don't have any trouble questioning the assumptions behind
currently fashionable ideas in linguistics. If they're only half as
wrong as currently fashionable ideas in archaeology they are way far
wrong.
I am very skeptical about all of this. It rests on so many
assumptions.
In any case, it needs to be re-evaluated in light of the historical
evidence, which itself is undergoing a process of re-evaluation.
I'm not sure why people find the idea of large-scale religious,
political and cultural structures and institutions existing 10,000
(say) years ago more fantastic or unbelievable than the idea of
large-scale religious, political and cultural structures and
institutions existing 4,000 years ago.
>>> Also the Greek pantheon tells us
>>> about the layers of culture in much the same way that elves and devils
>>> do. It shows us that the Greeks conquered and/or evolved out of an
>>> earlier matriarchal society, most likely one that inhabited the area
>>> prior to their arrival.
>> There were certainly political and cultural changes, though what you
>> say here is simplistic: more the fashionable ideas of eighty or a
>> hundred years ago than a reflection of what actually occurred.
> What did actually occur, then?
It's not impossible to know.
To know, however, you first have to get over the idea that you, as a
modern person, are more intelligent or better informed about history
than people who lived in the remote past.
What do the stories say?
There have been, and will be again, many destructions of
mankind arising out of many causes; the greatest have been
brought about by the agencies of fire and water, and other
lesser ones by innumerable other causes. There is a story,
which even you have preserved, that once upon a time
Phaethon, the son of Helios, having yoked the steeds in his
father's chariot, because he was not able to drive them in
the path of his father, burnt up all that was upon the earth,
and was himself destroyed by a thunderbolt.
... just when you and other nations are beginning to be
provided with letters and the other requisites of civilized
life, after the usual interval, the stream from heaven, like
a pestilence, comes pouring down, and leaves only those of
you who are destitute of letters and education; and so you
have to begin all over again like children, and know nothing
of what happened in ancient times, either among us or among
yourselves.
Timaeus
Josh Geller
> news:<cvCf7.13955$Up.3...@sea-read.news.verio.net>...
>> Arabic is effectively the same language that it was 1500 years ago,
>> and Sanskrit is the same language that it was 4000 years ago.
> I thought Sanskrit was spoken only in ritual and religious situations,
> not by the general public.
Among Indian scholars, it is like Latin was in the West up until
recently, or like Hebrew was among Jews until the modern refoundation
of the language. It is used in ritual and religious situations, but
not only in ritual and religious situations. It provides a lingua
franca among the intelligentisa.
When Alberuni went to India a thousand years ago, and wanted to do
scientific and historical research, he didn't bother learning the
local dialects. He learned Sanskrit, and was able to talk to anyone he
was interested in talking to.
Aggie-tom
"DMB" <dbuc...@classicalradio.org> wrote in message
news:6264b1de.01081...@posting.google.com...
> "Aggie-tom" <cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote in message
news:<9l09bi$rn0$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>...
> > Analysis of the mythology which was concocted in the Byzantine and
Middle
> > Ages period makes is quite obvious that Trolls, Dwarfs, Goblins and
Elves
> > were racial memories of Greco-Roman contact with northern Europe.
>
> AGGIE-TOM, Mark Miller and friends:
> This is an interesting thread, although Aggie-tom's lingustic analysis
> was very far from "obvious", as others have pointed out. But the main
> reason I'm responding is to object to the idea that you've "debunked
> another myth". The idea that elves and such are "racial memories"
> debunks nothing. That's what myths are, among the other things. That's
> one of the ways that myth encodes cultural evolution; the old
> culture's gods are demoted by the newer cultures and thereby made
> smaller and/or more sinister. The Christian devil, for example, is an
> amalgamation of Greco-Roman underworld gods. There is a certain kind
> of logic to it. If anything, its remarkable and astonishing that
> historical realities can be symbolically preserved in legends and
> myths.
NOT TRUE. Christ was the amalgamation of the Greco-Roman Assyro-Babylonian
and Egyptian underworld Gods.
Satan was the daemonisation by the Roman Jews of the Mittani kings who went
by the name of Shuttarna by the Assyrians. Shuttarna became Shitan in Arabic
and Satanas in Greek meaning Adversary. In Latin it became Saturnus. In
Hebrew, which evolved until the Hellenistic era, it beacme Jacob. So the
Jews made their own founder into their own devil out of ignorance of the
phonology of his name.
Beelzebub was the daemonisation by the Roman Jews of the Tyrian kings who
went by the name of Baal-Assur = Baleazarus, Badezorus, Balatorus,
Belshazer, and Pileser. Again the Jews were so ignorant that they ended up
making their so-called prophet Daniel who took the name Belshaer into their
own devil.
>
> I'd like to disagree with at least one of M.G.Miller's ideas as well.
> The notion that Greeks spoke Greek in Greece 10, 20 or 30 thousand
> years ago defies the nature of cultural and linguistic evolution.
What language were the Greeks speaking if it was not Greek. Nobody conquered
the Greeks until the Romans and the Greeks conquered most of Europe and Asia
about 5,000 years ago and Greek became the lingua franca which is why
Indo-European and Semitic languages show huge similarities with Greek.
Agreed the Greek on 20,000 years ago did not have the same vocabulary as
today, but then things like the plough, the wheel, the chariot and so on had
not been invented so there was no word for them. Virtually every Semitic
word to do with Horses and Chariot warfare is derived from Greek indicating
that these were Greek inventions, a fact with is backed up by the
Archaeological evidence of the Proto-Ionian Equatai (Hyksos/Eqwash)
conquests of Europe, Asia and Egypt.
> Language simply doesn't stand still that long. Language is a living,
> breathing, dynamic thing. The kind of English, for example, spoken
> just 500 years ago would be very difficult for the contemporary ear to
> understand.
Shakespearean English difficult ?
>When time is streched out into tens of thousands of years
> comprehension gets nearly impossible.
English is different now form the way it was not because it had become
corrupted over the years but because in reality is was made up of 3 of 4
different languages that had been merged into one another.
At the root of English is Ancient Greek which makes up 50% of all English
words and was the lingua franca until 400AD. On top of that is a mixture of
Dutch, French and Celtic.
June R Harton
"Josh Geller" <dcl...@best.com> wrote in message
news:cvCf7.13955$Up.3...@sea-read.news.verio.net...
>But who has ever met a Cypriot who was not insane?
You appear to be "blinded by racism, xenophobia and propaganda"
as Gail Schneider wrongly accused another.
from: Spirit Of Truth
(using June's e-mail to communicate to you)!
Linda Burchard
item. I put it aside to check it out of the library and lost it.
The title escapes my memory, it either has something to do with
ancient witchcraft spells or with binding spells. Anyway,
I uncovered a beautiful story about some great battle fought in
Europe, perhaps some 1600 years ago. Something about how the
horses were sent into the battlefield on behalf of all the monarchs.
The kings on the battlefield, took the names of their steeds, ie.
Archimedes, Anabraxas, etc., a ceremony or right that was invoked
by the god Iona.
I believe, from memory, the book or the chapter of the book, was
called the 'Binding of the Beast'. I am wondering if anyone
can furnish me some information on the Four Horsemen of the
Apocalypse or perhaps some historic information on the time and
place of this battle.
It appears to be a great tale. I'm not sure if greek charioteers
were involved, not sure about the historic date.
Please contact me, ans...@angelfire.com, if you have any information
about this piece of history.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Linda J. Burchard
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
++
Linda Burchard wrote:
> Some time ago I was shelving a book and came across an unusual
> item. I put it aside to check it out of the library and lost it.
>
> The title escapes my memory, it either has something to do with
> ancient witchcraft spells or with binding spells. Anyway,
> I uncovered a beautiful story about some great battle fought in
> Europe, perhaps some 1600 years ago. Something about how the
> horses were sent into the battlefield on behalf of all the monarchs.
> The kings on the battlefield, took the names of their steeds, ie.
> Archimedes, Anabraxas, etc., a ceremony or right that was invoked
> by the god Iona.
>
> I believe, from memory, the book or the chapter of the book, was
> called the 'Binding of the Beast'. I am wondering if anyone
> can furnish me some information on the Four Horsemen of the
> Apocalypse or perhaps some historic information on the time and
> place of this battle.
>
> It appears to be a great tale. I'm not sure if greek charioteers
> were involved, not sure about the historic date.
>
> Please contact me, ans...@angelfire.com, if you have any information
> about this piece of history.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Linda J. Burchard
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Linda,
You are saying that ancient Greek monarchs were named after their horses? Btw,
Macedonians were monarchical, Greeks's weren't . Homeland of democracy and all
that.
Not monarchical myself,
Galina
Aggie-tom
"++" <arch...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:3B82F5D0...@erols.com...
The FYROMian viper openns its venomous mouth.
Greeks's weren't monarchical... TOSH.
Lets see shall we. Among others there were the kings Sparta, and Sicyon, not
forgetting Corinth, and Messenia oh and then there was Macedonia. And who
could forget the kings of Athens from Melanthus though to Cleidicus son of
Aesimides.
> Not monarchical myself,
>
> Galina
>
Voyager
and black propaganda. !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Spartans were monarchical but the were Greeks you fool.
Thebeans were monarchical but the were Greeks you fool.
Macedonians were monarchical but they were Greeks you fool.
Even Athenians were monarchical for a long time before they
establish democracy.
Only total morons can believe you lies and nonsense.
You're pathetic.
Voyager
++ <arch...@erols.com> aka the famous freak wrote
Chris Camfield
Of course, by the _Classical_ period Sparta had a mixed governmental
system involving kings, assembly, and council of elders, Sicyon and
Corinth I believe were both oligarchies, etc.
Chris
Mark Gerard Miller
> NOT TRUE. Christ was the amalgamation of the Greco-Roman Assyro-Babylonian
> and Egyptian underworld Gods.
This is a central theme of yours. You keep saying it as if it's bad,
as if it's some great indictment. In what mythos is there not
borrowing from other cultures and gods?
Mark
Toxotis
But maybe she is not educated in Greek history.
Give her the benefit of a doubt.
Have a nice day.
Toxotis
Voyager
Toxotis wrote
June R Harton
"Chris Camfield" <ccam...@email.com> wrote in message
news:3b83361...@news1.on.sympatico.ca...
There were still kings in Cyprus. And don't forget Pyrrhus.
Michael Lightfoot
> There were still kings in Cyprus. And don't forget Pyrrhus.
>
Pyrrhus and the other Epirote kings weren't Greek, although the
Epirotes were a highly Hellenised society, being "just next door" as it
were.
DMB
> DMB wrote:
> >
> > Also the Greek pantheon tells us
> > about the layers of culture in much the same way that elves and devils
> > do. It shows us that the Greeks conquered and/or evolved out of an
> > earlier matriarchal society, most likely one that inhabited the area
> > prior to their arrival.
>
> Matrilineal perhaps, but there is no good evidence that humans have ever
> created a matriarchal culture.
>
> poor and oppressed. Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them from the
> hand of the wicked." - Psalm 82:3-4.
Hey Joe: Wouldn't you rather discuss the layers of culture encoded in
the ancient Greek pantheon? I mean, why bother with such petty nit
picking? Why not move the conversation forward instead? Why not
address the status of the ancient goddesses in their culture instead
of insisting on a certain form of the least operative word? What do
you suppose those Amazon myths are all about? Maybe you've got some
ideas about Demeter, Persephone, Hera or Athena? Why not say something
about the point I was making? And if you think it really is important
to refer to such cultures as matrilineal rather than matriarchal,
maybe you'd like to explain why. Don't leave us hanging like that. I
thought the latter refered to social power structures, while the
former refered to family lines. Are we talking about mythology or
family trees?
You're not suggesting that pre-Patriarchal societies didn't
conspicuously emphasize female fertility, are you? Have you seen the
ruins on Malta? You're not really suggesting that we should expect
much good evidence about anything from cultures that existed before
1750 BC. That was awfully long ago. Does the word prehistoric mean
anything to you? What about Psalm 82? C'mon Joe, defend the cause of
the weak and maintain the rights of the oppressed. Say something
constructive about your favorite goddess.
Or maybe you'd rather chew on this idea; People don't create cultures
of any kind whatsoever. Its the other way around. Cultures create
people. (You know, just to say something strange and provocative.) And
hey Joe, where you goin' with that gun in your hand?
DMB
Odysseus
>
> > However, the Elves didn't do this because they were in servitude to the
> > Dwarves. The Trolls were something else entirely. I am hazy on the origin of
> > them at this point, so I won't write of them. Made by Morgoth were the Orcs,
> > which were a crude parody of the fair folk, the Elves.
>
> Trolls were made in imitation of the dwarves, in the same way that orcs
> were imitations of elves. They were fashioned from stone, and returned
> to stone in sunlight.
>
> "... Maybe you have heard of Trolls? They are mighty strong.
> But Trolls are only counterfeits, made by the Enemy in the
> Great Darkness, in mockery of Ents, as Orcs were of Elves.
> We are stronger than Trolls. We are made of the bones of
> the earth. ..." --"Treebeard", in _LOTR_ Bk.III Ch.4
According to Treebeard at least, the Ents were the model for the Trolls.
--Odysseus
Sylver
>
> > "... Maybe you have heard of Trolls? They are mighty strong.
> > But Trolls are only counterfeits, made by the Enemy in the
> > Great Darkness, in mockery of Ents, as Orcs were of Elves.
> > We are stronger than Trolls. We are made of the bones of
> > the earth. ..." --"Treebeard", in _LOTR_ Bk.III Ch.4
>
> According to Treebeard at least, the Ents were the model for the Trolls.
>
> --Odysseus
Right. Like I said, I couldn't remember exactly what the Trolls were. And you're
right. Enough on the subject.
Geannie.
--
Call your damnable hunt,
And we shall see,
Who I drag,
Screaming to hell with me!
~Gunter Diorn
Doppler Dog
Sing, O Goddess, of a post by Michael Lightfoot,
that terrible curse that brought unnumbered woes upon USENET, and hurled to
Hades many brave bytes, making the electrons the carrion of dogs and vultures:
On what grounds was Epirus "not Greek"? We are speaking of a time
when the notion of "Greece" as a nation state did not exist. Did
they not speak Greek in Epirus? Did they not have Greek customs?
Then why do you say it was "not Greek"?
--
Please remove knickers to reply.
REAL
Doppler Dog wrote:
Any grounds that say Epirus isn't "Greek" also applies to Athens, Sparta, Ionia
and anything to do with the Hellenic civilisation.
The evidence belows shows what they themselves believed to be and what others
believed them to be.
Pyrrhus of Epirus (318?-272)
King Pyrrhus of Epirus landed on the southern Italian shore with 30000 men to
defend his fellow Greek speakers (who were resident of Tarentum) against Roman
domination. While Pyrrhus won the first battle, he lost half his men (and
ultimately, the war). The term PYRRHIC VICTORY comes from this devastating
battle. (From Haaren's Famous Men of Greece)
Famous Men of Greece Trade Paperback, 146 Pages, Greenleaf Press, October 1989
ISBN: 1882514017 Author: Shearer, Cynthia A. / Haaren, John H. / Poland, A. B.
Also
Pausanias, Description of Greece
XI. The Athenians have also a statue of Pyrrhus. This Pyrrhus was not related to
Alexander, except by ancestry. Pyrrhus was son of Aeacides, son of Arybbas, but
Alexander was son of Olympias, daughter of Neoptolemus, and the father of
Neoptolemus and Aryblas was Alcetas, son of Tharypus. And from Tharypus to
Pyrrhus, son of Achilles, are fifteen generations. Now Pyrrhus was the first who
after the capture of Troy disdained to return to Thessaly, but sailing to Epeirus
dwelt there because of the oracles of Helenus. By Hermione Pyrrhus had no child,
but by Andromache he had Molossus, Pielus, and Pergamus, who was the youngest.
Helenus also had a son, Cestrinus, being married to Andromache after the murder of
Pyrrhus at Delphi. Helenus on his death passed on the kingdom to Molossus, son of
Pyrrhus, so that Cestrinus with volunteers from the Epeirots took possession of
the region beyond the river Thyamis, while Pergamus crossed into Asia and killed
Areius, despot in Teuthrania, who fought with him in single combat for his
kingdom, and gave his name to the city which is still called after him. To
Andromache, who accompanied him, there is still a shrine in the city. Pielus
remained behind in Epeirus, and to him as ancestor Pyrrhus, the son of Aeacides,
and his fathers traced their descent, and not to Molossus. Down to Alcetas, son of
Tharypus, Epeirus too was under one king. But the sons of Alcetas after a quarrel
agreed to rule with equal authority, remaining faithful to their compact; and
afterwards, when Alexander, son of Neoptolemus, died among the Leucani,
and Olympias returned to Epeirus through fear of Antipater, Aeacides, son of
Arybbas, continued in allegiance to Olympias and joined in her campaign against
Aridaeus and the Macedonians, although the Epeirots refused to accompany him.
Olympias on her victory behaved wickedly in the matter of the death of Aridaeus,
and much more wickedly to certain Macedonians, and
for this reason was considered to have deserved her subsequent treatment at the
hands of Cassander; so Aeacides at first was not received even by the Epeirots
because of their hatred of Olympias, and when after wards they forgave him, his
return to Epeirus was next opposed by Cassander. When a battle occurred at
Oeneadae between Philip, brother of Cassander, and
Aeacides, Aeacides was wounded and shortly after met his fate. The Epeirots
accepted Alcetas as their king, being the son of Arybbas and the elder brother of
Aeacides, but of an uncontrollable temper and on this account banished by his
father. Immediately on his arrival he began to vent his fury on the Epeirots,
until they rose up and put him and his children to death at night. After killing
him they brought back Pyrrhus, son of Aeacides.
XXXV. The Emperor Trajan granted civic freedom and autonomy to the people of
Mothone. In earlier days they were the only people of Messenia on the coast to
suffer a disaster like the following: Thesprotian Epirus was ruined by anarchy.
For Deidameia the daughter of Pyrrhus, being without children, handed over the
government to the people when she was on the
point of death. She was the daughter of Pyrrhus, son of Ptolemy, son of Alexander,
son of Pyrrhus. I have told the facts relating to Pyrrhus the son of Aeacides in
my account of the Athenians. Procles the Carthaginian indeed rated Alexander the
son of Philip higher on account of his good fortune and for the brilliance of his
achievements, but said that Pyrrhus was the better man in infantry and cavalry
tactics and in the invention of stratagems of war. When the Epirots were rid of
their kings, the people
threw off all control and disdained to listen to their magistrates, and the
Illyrians who live on the Ionian sea above Epirus reduced them by a raid. We have
yet to hear of a democracy bringing prosperity to a nation other than the
Athenians; the Athenians attained to greatness by its means, for they surpassed
the Greek world in native wit, and least disregarded the
established laws. Now the Illyrians, having tasted empire and being always
desirous of more, built ships, and plundering others whom they fell in with, put
in to the coast of Mothone and anchored as in a friendly port. Sending a messenger
to the city they asked for wine to be brought to their ships. A few men came with
it and they bought the wine at the price which the inhabitants asked, and
themselves sold a part of their cargo. When on the following day a larger number
arrived from the town, they allowed them also to make their profit. Finally women
and men came down to the ships to sell wine and trade with the barbarians.
Thereupon by a bold stroke the Illyrians carried off a number of men and still
more of the women. Carrying
them on board ship, they set sail for the Ionian sea, having desolated the city of
the Mothonaeans.
Also:
So Pyrrhus was the first to cross the Ionian Sea from Greece to attack the Romans.
And even he crossed on the invitation of the Tarentines. For they were already
involved in a war with the Romans, but were no match for them unaided. Pyrrhus was
already in their debt, because they had sent a fleet to help him in his war with
Corcyra, but the most cogent arguments of the
Tarentine envoys were their accounts of Italy, how its prosperity was equal to
that of the whole of Greece, and their plea that it was wicked to dismiss them
when they had come as friends and suppliants in their hour of need. When the
envoys urged these considerations, Pyrrhus remembered the capture of Troy, which
he took to be an omen of his success in the war, as he was a descendant of
Achilles making war upon a colony of Trojans. Pleased with this proposal, and
being a man who never lost time when once he had made up his mind, he immediately
proceeded to man war ships and to prepare transports to carry horses and
men-at-arms. There are books written by men of no renown as historians, entitled
Memoirs. When I read these I
marvelled greatly both at the personal bravery of Pyrrhus in battle, and also at
the forethought he displayed whenever a contest was imminent.
So on this occasion also when crossing to Italy with a fleet he eluded the
observation of the Romans, and for some time after his arrival they were unaware
of his presence; it was only when the Romans made an attack upon the Tarentines
that he appeared on the scene with his army, and his unexpected assault naturally
threw his enemies into confusion. And being
perfectly aware that he was no match for the Romans, he prepared to let loose
against them his elephants. The first European to acquire elephants was Alexander,
after subduing Porus and the power of the Indians; after his death others of the
kings got them but Antigonus more than any; Pyrrhus captured his beasts in the
battle with Demetrius. When on this occasion they came in sight the Romans were
seized with panic, and did not believe they were animals. For although the use of
ivory in arts and crafts all men obviously have known from of old, the actual
beasts, before the Macedonians crossed into Asia, nobody had seen at all except
the Indians themselves, the Libyans, and their neighbours.
This is proved by Homer, who describes the couches and houses of the more
prosperous kings as ornamented with ivory, but never mentions the beast; but if he
had seen or heard about it he would, in my opinion have been much more likely to
speak of it than of the battle between the Dwarf-men and cranes. Pyrrhus was
brought over to Sicily by an embassy of the Syracusans.
The Carthaginians had crossed over and were destroying the Greek cities, and had
sat down to invest Syracuse, the only one now remaining. When Pyrrhus heard this
from the envoys he abandoned Tarentum and the Italiots on the coast, and crossing
into Sicily forced the Carthaginians to raise the siege of Syracuse. In his
self-conceit, although the Carthaginians, being Phoenicians of Tyre by ancient
descent, were more experienced sea men than any other non-Greek people of that
day, Pyrrhus was nevertheless encouraged to meet them in a naval battle, employing
the Epeirots, the majority of whom, even after the capture of Troy, knew no thing
of the sea nor even as yet how to use salt. Witness the words of Homer in the
Odyssey:--
Nothing they know of ocean, and mix not salt
with their victuals.
---------------
Also
Plutarch's Lives, still inspirational after 19 centuries: 15 Ancient Greek Heroes
(www.e-classics.com)
P Y R R H U S (319 - 272 B.C.) P U R R O S by Plutarch
In Pyrrhus' wild career of restless trouble-making, we see a soul incapable of
satisfaction. He was a mighty man of war, and nearly conquered Rome, but he could
never finish what he started before getting distracted by a new project.
Epirus is on the northwestern coast of Greece. The kings there were descended
from that Pyrrhus (a.k.a. Neoptolemus) who was the son of Achilles, the famous
Greek warrior of the Trojan War. Both Pyrrhus and Alexander were worthy
descendants of Achilles, who, like them, was a fiery warrior whose restless soul
could never be at peace.
-------------
.....when Appius Claudius heard that the Roman senate was about to vote on peace
with Pyrrhus, he commanded his servants to carry him there in his chair, and his
sons and sons-in-law carried him in. Appius Claudius was very old, and he was
blind. He had been retired for many years, and only this crisis had roused him to
action. Out of reverence for this distinguished general, the senate was
respectfully silent.
"My blindness," he said, "has been a great annoyance to me, but now that I hear
about these dishonorable proposals of yours, I wish I were deaf as well. Do you
remember your brave words about Alexander? How you bragged that if he dared to
come into Italy, he would not now be called 'the Great.' Today you prove that
those words were nothing but foolish arrogance. You tremble at the name of
Pyrrhus, who was only a servant to one of Alexander's guards [Demetrius], and
comes here as a fugitive from enemies at home. Do not persuade ourselves that
making him your friend is the way to get rid of him. Oh no -- that is the way to
invite over others from Greece, who will despise Rome as easy prey. That is what
you can look forward to if Pyrrhus gets away unpunished."
Chris Camfield
<doppl...@my-deja.knickers.com> wrote:
>
>Sing, O Goddess, of a post by Michael Lightfoot,
>that terrible curse that brought unnumbered woes upon USENET, and hurled to
>Hades many brave bytes, making the electrons the carrion of dogs and vultures:
>
>> On Friday 24 August 2001 19:58 June R Harton burbled:
>>
>> > There were still kings in Cyprus. And don't forget Pyrrhus.
>> >
>> Pyrrhus and the other Epirote kings weren't Greek, although the
>> Epirotes were a highly Hellenised society, being "just next door" as it
>> were.
>>
>
>On what grounds was Epirus "not Greek"? We are speaking of a time
>when the notion of "Greece" as a nation state did not exist. Did
>they not speak Greek in Epirus? Did they not have Greek customs?
It would appear not...
Perseus Project database:
"In ancient times Epirus was considered backward. This is probably
due to the fact that the interior of the land was mountainous and this
natural obstruction prevented most communication, isolating the people
from the rest of Greece. The inhabitants of Epirus were only partly
Hellenic, and spoke other dialects than Greek. The Hellenic
influence came from the Elean colonies in Kassope and from the
Corinthian colonies at Ambracia and Corcyra. Despite this reputation
for being uncultured, Epirus boasted not only the oracle of Zeus at
Dodona, but the oracle of the dead at Acheron, both of which drew a
great number of pilgrims to the area."
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0004&query=head%3D%233428
From Thucydides, speaking of a Spartan military expedition to the
area:
"The Hellenic troops with him consisted of the Ambraciots, Leucadians,
and Anactorians, and the thousand Peloponnesians with whom he came;
the barbarian of a thousand Chaonians, who, belonging to a nation that
has no king, were led by Photius and Nicanor, the two members of the
royal family to whom the chieftainship for that year had been
confided. With the Chaonians came also some Thesprotians, like them
without a king, some Molossians and Atintanians led by Sabylinthus,
the guardian of king Tharyps who was still a minor, and some
Paravaeans, under their King Oroedus, accompanied by a thousand
Orestians, subjects of King Antiochus and placed by him under the
command of Oroedus." (Thuc. II.80.1)
"A panic seizing the Chaonians, great numbers of them were slain; and
as soon as they were seen to give way the rest of the barbarians
turned and fled." (Thuc. II.81.1)
Note that the Chaonians and Molossians were peoples of Epirus;
Thucydides quite plainly uses "barbaroi" in these passages.
Chris
Michael Lightfoot
>
> Note that the Chaonians and Molossians were peoples of Epirus;
> Thucydides quite plainly uses "barbaroi" in these passages.
>
Thank you for that clarification, Chris. I had always understood from
reading various histories of ancient Greece, that there was a veneer of
Hellenism overlaying an "Illyrian" culture. Many of the names (both
personal and place) are decidedly non-Greek.
I also understand that Pyrrhus' family had married into various
Hellenic families, so he spoke Greek rather than an Illyrian language.
Many of the cultures bordering the traditional Hellenic areas also
displayed this mixture of Hellenic and native society. Examples are
Caria and Phrygia. And then there is the definite snobbery of the
Athenians for anyone from the outlying colonies (see the references to
"the Paphlagonian" in one of Aristophanes' plays.)
It is such a complex issue, not helped by some posters to these groups
who see everything as black and white.
REAL
Chris Camfield wrote:
> On 28 Aug 2001 15:57:15 +1000, Doppler Dog
> <doppl...@my-deja.knickers.com> wrote:
> >
> >Sing, O Goddess, of a post by Michael Lightfoot,
> >that terrible curse that brought unnumbered woes upon USENET, and hurled to
> >Hades many brave bytes, making the electrons the carrion of dogs and vultures:
> >
> >> On Friday 24 August 2001 19:58 June R Harton burbled:
> >>
> >> > There were still kings in Cyprus. And don't forget Pyrrhus.
> >> >
> >> Pyrrhus and the other Epirote kings weren't Greek, although the
> >> Epirotes were a highly Hellenised society, being "just next door" as it
> >> were.
> >>
> >
> >On what grounds was Epirus "not Greek"? We are speaking of a time
> >when the notion of "Greece" as a nation state did not exist. Did
> >they not speak Greek in Epirus? Did they not have Greek customs?
>
> It would appear not...
Any grounds that say Epirus isn't "Greek" also applies to Athens, Sparta, Ionia and anything to
June R Harton
> >On what grounds was Epirus "not Greek"? We are speaking of a time
> >when the notion of "Greece" as a nation state did not exist. Did
> >they not speak Greek in Epirus? Did they not have Greek customs?
> It would appear not...
You are completely incorrect. Haven't you yet read Herodotos yet?
Throughout the tribes of Epirus are described as Hellenic!
> Perseus Project database:
> "In ancient times Epirus was considered backward. This is probably
> due to the fact that the interior of the land was mountainous and this
> natural obstruction prevented most communication, isolating the people
> from the rest of Greece. The inhabitants of Epirus were only partly
> Hellenic, and spoke other dialects than Greek.
False.
> The Hellenic
> influence came from the Elean colonies in Kassope and from the
> Corinthian colonies at Ambracia and Corcyra.
False.
> Despite this reputation
> for being uncultured, Epirus boasted not only the oracle of Zeus at
> Dodona, but the oracle of the dead at Acheron, both of which drew a
> great number of pilgrims to the area."
>
>
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0004&que
ry=head%3D%233428
> Note that the Chaonians and Molossians were peoples of Epirus;
> Thucydides quite plainly uses "barbaroi" in these passages.
> Chris
Read this again:
Taken from N. G. L. Hammond's "The Macedonian State:
The Origins, Institution and History," Calrendon Press, Oxford,
1989, pp. 413.pp. 12-14:"
4. The Language of the Macedonians.
What language did these 'Macedones' speak? The name itself
is Greek in root and in ethnic termination. It probably means
'highlanders,' and it is comparable to Greek tribal names such
as 'Orestai' amd 'Oreitai,' meaning 'mountain-men.' A reputedly
earlier variant, 'Maketai,' has the same root, which means 'high,'
as in the Greek adjective 'makednos' or the noun mekos.'
The genealogy of eponymous ancestors which Hesiod
recorded (p. 3 above) has a bearing on the question of Greek
speech. First, Hesiod made Macedon a brother of Magnes;
as we know from inscriptions that the Magnetes spoke the Aeolic
dialect of the Greek language, we have a predisposition to
suppose that the Macedones spoke the Aeolic dialect.
Secondly, Hesiod made Macedon and Magnes first cousins
of Hellen's three sons -- Dorus, Xouthus, and Aeolus -- who
were the founders of three dialects of Greek speech, namely
Doric, Ionic, and Aeolic. Hesiod would not have recored this
relationship, unless he had believed, probably in the seventh
century, that the Macedones were a Greek-speaking people.
The next evidence comes from Persia. At the turn of the
sixth century the Persians described the tribute-paying peoples
of their province in Europe, and one of them was the
'yauna takabara,' which meant the 'Greeks wearing the hat.'
[27] There were Greeks in Greek city-states here
and there in the province, but they were of various origins
and not distinguished by a common hat, the 'kausia.'
We conclude that the Persians believed the Macedonians to
be speakers of Greek. Finally, in the latter part of the fifth
century a Greek historian, Hellanicus, visited Macedonia and
modified Hesiod's genealogy by bringing Macedon and his
descendants firmly into the Aeolic branch of the Greek-speaking
family.
[28] Hesiod, Persia, Hellanicus had no motive for making
a false statement about the language of the Macedonians,
who were then an obscure and not a powerful people.
Their independent testimonies should be accepted as
conclusive. That, however, is not the opinion of most scholars.
They disregard or fail to assess the evidence which I have cited,
[29] and they turn instead to 'Macedonian' words and names,
or/and to literary references. Philologists have studied words
which have been cited as 'Macedonian' in ancient lexica and
glossaries, and they have come to no certain conclusion; for
some of the words are clearly Greek, and some are clearly not
Greek. That is not surprising; for as the territory of the
Macedonians expanded, they overlaid and lived with peoples
who spoke Illyrian, Paeonian, Thracian and Phrygian, and they
certainly borrowed words from them which excited the authors
of lexica and glossaries. The philological studies result in a
verdict, in my opinion, of 'non liquet.' [30]
The toponyms of the Macedonian homeland are
the most significant. Nearly all of them are Greek: Pieria, Lebaea,
Heracleum, Dium, Petra, Leibethra, Aegae, Aegydium, Acesae,
Acesamenae; the rivers Helicon, Aeson, Leucus, Baphyras, Sardon,
Elpe'u's, Mitys; lake Ascuris and the region Lapathus.
The mountain names Olympus and Titarium may be pre-Greek;
Edessa, the earlier name for the place where Aegae was founded,
and its river Ascordus were Phrygian. [31]
The deities worshipped by the Macedones and the names
which they gave to the months were predominantly Greek,
and there is no doubt that these were not borrowings.
To Greek literary writers before the Hellenistic period the
Macedonians were 'barbarians.' The term referred to their way
of life and their institutions, which were those of the 'ethne' and
not of the city-state, and it did not refer to their speech. We can
see this in the case of Epirus. There Thucydides called the tribes
'barbarians.' But inscriptions found in Epirus have shown conclusively
that the Epirote tribes in Thucydides' lifetime were speaking Greek
and used names which were Greek. [32]
In the following century 'barbarian' was only one of the abusive
terms applied by Demosthenes to Philip of Macedon and his people.[33]
In passages which refer to the Macedonian soldiers of Alexander
the Great and the early successors there are mentions of
a Macedonian dialect, such as was likely to have been spoken in the
original Macedonian homeland. On one occassion Alexander
'called out to his guardsmen in Macedonian ('Makedonisti'),
as this [viz. the use of 'Macedonian'] was a signal ('symbolon') that
there was a serious riot.' Normally Alexander and his soldiers
spoke standard Greek, the 'koine,' and that was what the Persians
who were to fight alongside the Macedonians were taught. So the
order 'in Macedonian' was unique, in that all other orders were in
the 'koine.' [34] it is satisfactorily explained as an order in broad
dialect, just as in the Highland Regiment a special order for a particular
purpose could be given in broad Scots by a Scottish officer who
usually spoke the King's English.The use of this dialect among
themselves was a characteristic of the Macedonian soldiers
(rather that the officers) of the King's Army. This point is made
clear in the report -- not in itself dependable -- of the trial of
a Macedonian officer before an Assembly of Macedonians, in
which the officer (Philotas) was mocked for not speaking in dialect. [35]
In 321 when a non-Macedonian general, Eumenes, wanted
to make contact with a hostile group of Macedonian infantrymen,
he sent a Macedonian to speak to them in the Macedonian dialect,
in order to win their confidence. Subsequently, when they and the
other Macdonian soldiers were serving with Eumenes, they
expresed their affection for him by hailing him in the Macedonian dialect
('Makedonisti'). [36] He was to be one of themselves. As Curtius
observed, 'not a man among the Macedonians could bear to part
with a jot of his ancestral customs.' The use of this dialect was one
way in which the Macedonians expressed their apartness from the
world of the Greek city-states. [27] See J. M. Balcer in 'Historia' 37
(1988) 7.[28] FGrH 4 F 74 [29] Most recently E. Badian in
Barr-Sharrar 33-51 disregards the evidence as set out
in e.g. HM 2.39-54, when it goes against his view that the
Macedonians (whom he does not define) spoke a language other
than Greek. [30] The matter is dicussed at some length
in HM 2. 39-54 with reference especially to O. Hoffmann,
'Die Makedonen, ihre Sprache und ihre Volkstun' (Goettingen, 1906)
and J. Kalleris, Les Anciens Macedoniens I (Athens, 1954);
see also Kalleris II and R. A. Crossland in the CAH 3.1.843ff.
[31] For Edessa see HM 1.165 and for the Phrygians
in Macedonia 407-14. Olympus occurs as a Phrygian personal
name. [32] See Hammond, 'Epirus' 419ff. and 525ff.
[33] As Badian, loc. cit. 42, rightly observes: 'this, of course,
is simple abuse.'[34] Plu. 'Alex.'51.6[35] Curtius 6.8.34-6.
[36] PSI XII 2(1951) no. 1284, Plu. Eun.14.11.
Badian, loc. cit. 41 and 50 n.66, discusses the former
and not the latter, which hardly bears out his theory that
Eumenes 'could not directly communicate with Macedonian
soldiers,' and presumably they with him. Badian says in his
note that he is not concerned with the argument as to whether
Macedonian was a 'dialect' or 'a language.' Such an argument
seems to me to be at the heart of the matter. We have a
similar problem in regard to Epirus, where some had thought
the language of the people was Illyrian. In Plu.'Pyrrh.'1.3
reference was made to 'the local 'phone,'' which to me means
'dialect' of Greek; it is so in this instance because Plutarch
is saying that Achilles was called 'in the local 'phone' Aspestos.'
The word 'Aspestos' elsewhere was peculiar to Greek epic,
but it survived in Epirus in normal speech. It is of course
a Greek and not an Illyrian word. See Hammond, 'Epirus' 525ff.,
for the Greek being the language of central Epirus
in the fifth century B.C. "
""""
"Ancient allegations that the Macedonians were non-Greeks all had their
origin in Athens at the time of the struggle with Philip II. Then as now,
political struggle created the prejudice. The orator Aischines once even
found it necessary, in order to counteract the prejudice vigorously fomented
by his opponents, to defend Philip on this issue and describe him at a
meeting of the Athenian Popular Assembly as being 'Entirely Greek'.
Demosthenes' allegations were lent on appearance of credibility by the fact,
apparent to every observer, that the life-style of the Macedonians, being
determined by specific geographical and historical conditions, was different
from that of a Greek city-state. This alien way of life was, however, common
to western Greeks of Epeiros, Akarnania and Aitolia, as well as
to the Macedonians, and their fundamental Greek nationality was never
doubted. Only as a consequence of the political disagreement with Macedonia
was the issue raised at all."
Malcolm Errington, "A History of Macedonia", Univ. of California Press,
LA, 1990
"The Molossians were the strongest and, decisive for Macedonia, most
easterly of the three most important Epeirot tribes, which, like Macedonia
but unlike the Thesprotians and the Chaonians, still retained their
monarchy. They were Greeks, spoke a similar dialect to that of Macedonia,
suffered just as much from the depredations of the Illyrians and were in
principle the natural partners of the Macedonian king who wished to tackle
the Illyrian problem at its roots."
Malcolm Errington, "A History of Macedonia", California University Press,
1990.
"Certainly the Thracians and the Illyrians were non-Greek speakers,
but in the northwest, the peoples of Molossis {Epirot province}, Orestis
and Lynkestis spoke West Greek. It is also accepted that the Macedonians
spoke a dialect of Greek and although they absorbed other groups into
their territory, they were essentially Greeks."
Robert Morkot, "The Penguin Historical Atlas of Ancient Greece",
Penguin Publ., 1996
Chris Camfield
To you I'd make an argument that by the late 4th century the Epirotes
might have been hellenized so much that they did indeed speak Greek
(when they might not have before); however June's quotes in reference
to Greek inscriptions in Epirus written in Greek would indicate that
Thucydides may have been exercising some Athenian snobbery.
I personally don't give that much weight to mythical genealogies.
Consider that something said about the kings of a place might not
apply to the people; by tradition the Spartan kings were of a
different background than the rest of the Spartans, for instance.
Chris
Aggie-tom
BULLSHIT.
The Spartan kings ate in the same halls as the common people and were
regarded no differently. They never placed themselves above the people like
the kings of the east did.
>
> Chris
Chris Camfield
<cyprusandhe...@i.am-SPAM-TRAP> wrote:
>
>"Chris Camfield" <ccam...@email.com> wrote in message
>news:3b8d0a28...@news1.on.sympatico.ca...
>> On Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:39:35 +1000, REAL
>> <traprea...@SPAMTRAPPEDhotmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
>> I personally don't give that much weight to mythical genealogies.
>> Consider that something said about the kings of a place might not
>> apply to the people; by tradition the Spartan kings were of a
>> different background than the rest of the Spartans, for instance.
>
>BULLSHIT.
>
>The Spartan kings ate in the same halls as the common people and were
>regarded no differently. They never placed themselves above the people like
>the kings of the east did.
That isn't what I said.
According to the myth, they were supposed to be the descendents of the
Heraclidae, right? Eurystheus persecuted Heracles' children and his
old mother, and they fled to Athens. Later, Temenus, the other
Heraclids, and the Dorians (who until this point in time had all lived
in northern Greece) invaded the Peloponnese and took it over. The
Heraclids _weren't_ Dorians.
Chris
June R Harton
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:39:35 +1000, REAL
> <traprea...@SPAMTRAPPEDhotmail.com> wrote:
> To you I'd make an argument that by the late 4th century the Epirotes
> might have been hellenized so much that they did indeed speak Greek
> (when they might not have before);
No, the Histories show a much earlier situation. look at this for one
example:
[2.55] This was what I heard from the priests at Thebes; at Dodona, however,
the women who deliver the oracles relate the matter as follows:- "Two black
doves flew away from Egyptian Thebes, and while one directed its flight to
Libya, the other came to them. She alighted on an oak, and sitting there
began to speak with a human voice, and told them that on the spot where she
was, there should henceforth be an oracle of Jove. They understood the
announcement to be from heaven, so they set to work at once and erected the
shrine. The dove which flew to Libya bade the Libyans to establish there the
oracle of Ammon." This likewise is an oracle of Jupiter. The persons from
whom I received these particulars were three priestesses of the Dodonaeans,
the eldest Promeneia, the next Timarete, and the youngest Nicandra - what
they said was confirmed by the other Dodonaeans who dwell around the temple.
[2.56] My own opinion of these matters is as follows:- I think that, if it
be true that the Phoenicians carried off the holy women, and sold them for
slaves, the one into Libya and the other into Greece, or Pelasgia (as it was
then called), this last must have been sold to the Thesprotians. Afterwards,
while undergoing servitude in those parts, she built under a real oak a
temple to Jupiter, her thoughts in her new abode reverting - as it was
likely they would do, if she had been an attendant in a temple of Jupiter at
Thebes - to that particular god. Then, having acquired a knowledge of the
Greek tongue, she set up an oracle. She also mentioned that her sister had
been sold for a slave into Libya by the same persons as herself.
[2.57] The Dodonaeans called the women doves because they were foreigners,
and seemed to them to make a noise like birds. After a while the dove spoke
with a human voice, because the woman, whose foreign talk had previously
sounded to them like the chattering of a bird, acquired the power of
speaking what they could understand. For how can it be conceived possible
that a dove should really speak with the voice of a man? Lastly, by calling
the dove black the Dodonaeans indicated that the woman was an Egyptian. And
certainly the character of the oracles at Thebes and Dodona is very similar.
Besides this form of divination, the Greeks learnt also divination by means
of victims from the Egyptians.
> however June's quotes in reference
> to Greek inscriptions in Epirus written in Greek would indicate that
> Thucydides may have been exercising some Athenian snobbery.
Thucydides, with a General's viewpoint, in many places simply
apparantly refers to different 'forces' of one type or another....in the
case you illustrated the description by him probably simply meant
''tribal'' non-city state folk.
Regardless, there are several more descriptions in Herodotos which,
almost incidentally, mention the same type of fact as I posted above
re the Epirotes....that they are Greek.
REAL
Chris Camfield wrote:
> To you I'd make an argument that by the late 4th century the Epirotes
> might have been hellenized so much that they did indeed speak Greek
> (when they might not have before); however June's quotes in reference
> to Greek inscriptions in Epirus written in Greek would indicate that
> Thucydides may have been exercising some Athenian snobbery.
>
> I personally don't give that much weight to mythical genealogies.
> Consider that something said about the kings of a place might not
> apply to the people; by tradition the Spartan kings were of a
> different background than the rest of the Spartans, for instance.
>
> Chris
What is the consensus of the date of Homers writings? Besides what's to show that before the late
4th century they weren't already "Hellenes" ... why the assumption they they were "hellenized".
Chris Camfield
<JUNEH...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>"Chris Camfield" <ccam...@email.com> wrote in message
>news:3b8d0a28...@news1.on.sympatico.ca...
>> On Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:39:35 +1000, REAL
>> <traprea...@SPAMTRAPPEDhotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> To you I'd make an argument that by the late 4th century the Epirotes
>> might have been hellenized so much that they did indeed speak Greek
>> (when they might not have before);
>
>No, the Histories show a much earlier situation. look at this for one
>example:
I'm not quite sure what these examples are supposed to prove; we know
that there were colonies from southern Greek polies in the area, so
the existence of at least some Greek speakers is beyond question.
However, I wasn't being particularly serious; the quotation from
Hammond seemed pretty convincing.
Chris
Myros Pimenakis
What is wrong with "hellenized"?
MSP
June R Harton
"[2.55] This was what I heard from the priests at Thebes; at Dodona, however, the women who deliver the oracles relate the matter as follows:- "Two black doves flew away from Egyptian Thebes, and while one directed its flight to Libya, the other came to them. She alighted on an oak, and sitting there began to speak with a human voice, and told them that on the spot where she was, there should henceforth be an oracle of Jove. They understood the announcement to be from heaven, so they set to work at once and erected the shrine. The dove which flew to Libya bade the Libyans to establish there the oracle of Ammon." This likewise is an oracle of Jupiter. The persons from whom I received these particulars were three priestesses of the Dodonaeans, the eldest Promeneia, the next Timarete, and the youngest Nicandra - what they said was confirmed by the other Dodonaeans who dwell around the temple.
be true that the Phoenicians carried off the holy women, and sold them for
slaves, the one into Libya and the other into Greece, or Pelasgia (as it was
then called), this last must have been sold to the Thesprotians. Afterwards, while undergoing servitude in those parts, she built under
Besides this form of divination, the Greeks learnt also divination by means
of victims from the Egyptians."
almost incidentally, mention the same type of fact as I posted above
Joe Jefferson
>
> Joe Jefferson <jjst...@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<3B7F14...@mindspring.com>...
> > DMB wrote:
> > >
> > > Also the Greek pantheon tells us
> > > about the layers of culture in much the same way that elves and devils
> > > do. It shows us that the Greeks conquered and/or evolved out of an
> > > earlier matriarchal society, most likely one that inhabited the area
> > > prior to their arrival.
> >
> > Matrilineal perhaps, but there is no good evidence that humans have ever
> > created a matriarchal culture.
>
> the ancient Greek pantheon? I mean, why bother with such petty nit
> picking? Why not move the conversation forward instead?
Because it's not nit-picking. "Matrilineal" and "matriarchial" have very
different meanings, and using the wrong one can lead to all sorts of
confusion.
A matrilineal culture is one that traces descent through the female line
- from mother to daughter and from mother's brother to sister's son. In
a matrilineal culture, a boy inherits property, associations, titles,
obligations, etc. from his maternal uncle instead of his father.
A matriarchal culture, if one existed, would be one in which political
power is held by the eldest female in a clan - the female equivalent of
a patriarchy. Such a society might also be matrilineal, but there is no
reason why it necessarily would be.
> You're not suggesting that pre-Patriarchal societies didn't
> conspicuously emphasize female fertility, are you?
I'm not merely suggesting, but actually saying that there is no evidence
that there were any pre-patriarchal societies: it seems to be the
earliest form of human political organization. And not just human - Both
gorilla and chimpanzee bands are led by an old male.
Fascination with female sexuality in myth and/or ritual is not something
limited to prehistoric times. It appears even in late medieval Europe,
with the adoration of the Virgin juxtapositioned against the
quasi-religious cult of romantic love. However mythology, taken by
itself, is not a reliable guide to the social structures of the culture
in which it is found. Sometimes characters in myth follow the
established norms of society, while other times they violate them with
impunity. (Look, for example, at the frequency with which one finds
incestuous relationships in myth.)
> What about Psalm 82? C'mon Joe, defend the cause of
> the weak and maintain the rights of the oppressed. Say something
> constructive about your favorite goddess.
Hmmm. I'm not sure that I have a favorite goddess (unless you count the
Hercules/Xena version of Aphrodite). Perhaps Old Woman Momoy
(great-grandmother of the Chumash hero twins Thunder and Fog.)
> Or maybe you'd rather chew on this idea; People don't create cultures
> of any kind whatsoever. Its the other way around. Cultures create
> people. (You know, just to say something strange and provocative.)
I see. And cultures come from where, then?
> And hey Joe, where you goin' with that gun in your hand?
Goin' to shoot my old lady, 'cause I caught her messin' around with
another man. <g>
--
Joe of Castle Jefferson
http://www.primenet.com/~jjstrshp/
Site updated October 1st, 1999.
Joe Jefferson
Ah. Thank you. I guess I need to read LOTR again before the movie comes
out.
June R Harton
> <JUNEH...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> >"Chris Camfield" <ccam...@email.com> wrote in message
> >news:3b8d0a28...@news1.on.sympatico.ca...
> >> On Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:39:35 +1000, REAL
> >> <traprea...@SPAMTRAPPEDhotmail.com> wrote:
> >> To you I'd make an argument that by the late 4th century the Epirotes
> >> might have been hellenized so much that they did indeed speak Greek
> >> (when they might not have before);
> >No, the Histories show a much earlier situation. look at this for one
> >example:
Mike Cleven
Joe Jefferson wrote:
>
> DMB wrote:
> >
> > Joe Jefferson <jjst...@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<3B7F14...@mindspring.com>...
> > > DMB wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Also the Greek pantheon tells us
> > > > about the layers of culture in much the same way that elves and devils
> > > > do. It shows us that the Greeks conquered and/or evolved out of an
> > > > earlier matriarchal society, most likely one that inhabited the area
> > > > prior to their arrival.
> > >
> > > Matrilineal perhaps, but there is no good evidence that humans have ever
> > > created a matriarchal culture.
> >
> > Hey Joe: Wouldn't you rather discuss the layers of culture encoded in
> > the ancient Greek pantheon? I mean, why bother with such petty nit
> > picking? Why not move the conversation forward instead?
>
> Because it's not nit-picking. "Matrilineal" and "matriarchial" have very
> different meanings, and using the wrong one can lead to all sorts of
> confusion.
>
> A matrilineal culture is one that traces descent through the female line
> - from mother to daughter and from mother's brother to sister's son. In
> a matrilineal culture, a boy inherits property, associations, titles,
> obligations, etc. from his maternal uncle instead of his father.
Well, that's _one_ matrilineal system; not _all_ of them necessarily
operate that way. In some cultures, inheritance might be entirely on
the female side, i.e. mother-to-daughter; in many, the son is
foster-fathered by the maternal uncle (this is typical in
Fraser-Columbia Plateaux societies) but inheritance of lands and other
rights still comes from the father's side, or (as in Coastal cultures in
the same region) by actual conferment and merit. Then there's the
Icelandic variant, where if your mother survives your father by many
years equivalent to your own age, your last name switches from a
patronymic to a matronymic, i.e. Thorvaldssen (-on) to Helgassen (-on)
if your dad's name was Thorvald and your mom's was Helga and your dad
had been dead for 10 years and you turned eleven years of age.
>
> A matriarchal culture, if one existed, would be one in which political
> power is held by the eldest female in a clan - the female equivalent of
> a patriarchy. Such a society might also be matrilineal, but there is no
> reason why it necessarily would be.
Not necessarily a clan; could be a secret society, as at Samothrace or
Eleusis, as is believed.
>
> > You're not suggesting that pre-Patriarchal societies didn't
> > conspicuously emphasize female fertility, are you?
>
> I'm not merely suggesting, but actually saying that there is no evidence
> that there were any pre-patriarchal societies: it seems to be the
> earliest form of human political organization. And not just human - Both
> gorilla and chimpanzee bands are led by an old male.
>
> Fascination with female sexuality in myth and/or ritual is not something
> limited to prehistoric times. It appears even in late medieval Europe,
> with the adoration of the Virgin juxtapositioned against the
> quasi-religious cult of romantic love.
Which is all quite amusing, since medieval-era romantic love was about
_requited_ love (having an affair with someone else's woman and
_getting_away_with_it_); vs. _unrequited_ love which is the hallmark of
Romantic-era romantic love ("Heathcliffe, oh Heathcliffe....").
However mythology, taken by
> itself, is not a reliable guide to the social structures of the culture
> in which it is found. Sometimes characters in myth follow the
> established norms of society, while other times they violate them with
> impunity. (Look, for example, at the frequency with which one finds
> incestuous relationships in myth.)
In nearly all pagan religions, be they Greek, Egyptian, Norse or
Hindic. Bestiality also features large (helped along by shape-shifting
powers held by the Gods and other immortal types).
>
> > What about Psalm 82? C'mon Joe, defend the cause of
> > the weak and maintain the rights of the oppressed. Say something
> > constructive about your favorite goddess.
>
> Hmmm. I'm not sure that I have a favorite goddess (unless you count the
> Hercules/Xena version of Aphrodite). Perhaps Old Woman Momoy
> (great-grandmother of the Chumash hero twins Thunder and Fog.)
Just to be on the safe side, always good to pay homage to Artemis, or at
least Demeter (depending on whether it's The Virgin or The Mother
attribute you're invoking); they can be vengeful if offended, which is
the scary thing about goddesses. "Hell hath no fury like a woman
scorned"; yeah, true, but what about a _goddess_? No wonder Zeus was
always trying to stay out of Hera's way!
Have to agree with you about the modern TV version of Aphrodite,
though. IMHO she's the most accurately-depicted deity on that whole
group of shows.....and intensely yummie to boot. Enough to turn a queer
boy straight.....
>
> > Or maybe you'd rather chew on this idea; People don't create cultures
> > of any kind whatsoever. Its the other way around. Cultures create
> > people. (You know, just to say something strange and provocative.)
>
> I see. And cultures come from where, then?
Eggs, where else?
>
> > And hey Joe, where you goin' with that gun in your hand?
>
> Goin' to shoot my old lady, 'cause I caught her messin' around with
> another man. <g>
What if she shoots first?
MC
Mike Cleven
Joe Jefferson wrote:
>
> Odysseus wrote:
> >
> > Joe Jefferson wrote:
> > >
> > > > However, the Elves didn't do this because they were in servitude to the
> > > > Dwarves. The Trolls were something else entirely. I am hazy on the origin of
> > > > them at this point, so I won't write of them. Made by Morgoth were the Orcs,
> > > > which were a crude parody of the fair folk, the Elves.
> > >
> > > Trolls were made in imitation of the dwarves, in the same way that orcs
> > > were imitations of elves. They were fashioned from stone, and returned
> > > to stone in sunlight.
> > >
> > Not to belabour the point, which is indeed drifting off-topic, but JFTR:
> >
> > > "... Maybe you have heard of Trolls? They are mighty strong.
> > > But Trolls are only counterfeits, made by the Enemy in the
> > > Great Darkness, in mockery of Ents, as Orcs were of Elves.
> > > We are stronger than Trolls. We are made of the bones of
> > > the earth. ..." --"Treebeard", in _LOTR_ Bk.III Ch.4
> >
> > According to Treebeard at least, the Ents were the model for the Trolls.
>
> Ah. Thank you. I guess I need to read LOTR again before the movie comes
> out.
As should we all. Myself, I'm looking forward to the endless TV series
based on the Silmarillion....
MC