|
Post by berschneider on May 3, 2004 10:57:54 GMT -5
symmakhos, "the British Isles, the original home of the Celts.." You lost me there, with that BS. The Kelts were immigrants from the continent, not native sons of the soil. The true homeland of the Kelts is Central Europe - the area from France, Germany, Switzerland, Austria.., not Britain. Britain is where Goidelic Gaelic developed, everywhere else it was Brythonic including Gaulish. Your DNA information was not news. The Scottish Islands have and are populated by people who came from Scandinavia. No Kelts there except immigrants from Scotland proper. Southern England was not the main point of immigration of Scandinavians, it was not in the Danelaw area. It is also reasonable that Southern English have Keltic admixture as did their progenitors the Angles and Saxons. Not all the Kelts jumped ship and headed to Britain. Well, Graeme this is like that Said Muhammad or whatever is his name. These people are so alike. Let him have "his" Egypt too. Please don't break other people's toys. By the way, should I write Celts or Kelts?
|
|
|
Post by berschneider on May 3, 2004 11:01:33 GMT -5
Yes, Bershy, as a matter of fact I did have a few drinks with a friend on an uteservering (didn't find a translation in my archaic ordbok.) Anyway is this board as slow for you as it is for me? This board, Symmy, was a tragedy yesterday. It was so slow, I thought it was dying a painful death. I am glad you had a few drinks - I also had a few drinks. Better explain what is uteservering, you don't need dictionary for that.
|
|
|
Post by Aria88 on May 4, 2004 8:08:40 GMT -5
One ought to write Celts, but pronounce it as Kelts.
|
|
Noric
New Member
Posts: 10
|
Post by Noric on May 4, 2004 16:48:32 GMT -5
berschneider wrote: "Origins of the word Russia/Rossia are known. It is Latinized Russ + ia" --- - Yeah, the unsolved problem is - what is "russ"?... To 'rusalka' and 'ruslo' I can add 'rosa'='dew'. All these russian words are connected with 'water' - It is notable because 'variag' can also be connected with IE 'var'='water'. There is also a town in Russia called 'Staraia Rusa' (=Old Rusa) - which name is unexplained (?) but seem to have no connection with swedes. Russia of 16th century is historically and genetically connected with Rus' of 9th. I can't find any bordering line between them. The question is: if medieval Russian state (of 9th) century was found by swedes and received its name from them than there couldn't be any Russian state before 9th century. The problem of early "russian" state is not clear at all. Novgorod - is too young city for this... There is an unsolved problem of 'Russian Kaganat' - practically unknown state, mentioned f.e. by medieval arabian geography. But the facts let us say - the line from swedes to 'Russland' is too thin. There are only 2 historical facts that ties swedes and name 'Rus' - finnish word 'ruotsi' and the mentioned above incident with emperor Ludovic and 'sueones' (unclear enough). (As I know, finnish 'ruotsi' means 'land of rocks' and refers to part of Sweden and Livonia.) On the other hand we can find many traces of name 'rus' - from Rugen (Ruian) island on Baltic sea to Tmutorokan ('Rus' of the Black Sea). Another intricate question - the connection between 'rugi'-'ruteni'-'ruzzi' and 'Rus'. (And we must not forget serbian 'Ras').
|
|
|
Post by berschneider on May 4, 2004 17:49:47 GMT -5
berschneider wrote: "Origins of the word Russia/Rossia are known. It is Latinized Russ + ia" --- - Yeah, the unsolved problem is - what is "russ"?... To 'rusalka' and 'ruslo' I can add 'rosa'='dew'. All these russian words are connected with 'water' - It is notable because 'variag' can also be connected with IE 'var'='water'. There is also a town in Russia called 'Staraia Rusa' (=Old Rusa) - which name is unexplained (?) but seem to have no connection with swedes. Russia of 16th century is historically and genetically connected with Rus' of 9th. I can't find any bordering line between them. The question is: if medieval Russian state (of 9th) century was found by swedes and received its name from them than there couldn't be any Russian state before 9th century. The problem of early "russian" state is not clear at all. Novgorod - is too young city for this... There is an unsolved problem of 'Russian Kaganat' - practically unknown state, mentioned f.e. by medieval arabian geography. But the facts let us say - the line from swedes to 'Russland' is too thin. There are only 2 historical facts that ties swedes and name 'Rus' - finnish word 'ruotsi' and the mentioned above incident with emperor Ludovic and 'sueones' (unclear enough). (As I know, finnish 'ruotsi' means 'land of rocks' and refers to part of Sweden and Livonia.) On the other hand we can find many traces of name 'rus' - from Rugen (Ruian) island on Baltic sea to Tmutorokan ('Rus' of the Black Sea). Another intricate question - the connection between 'rugi'-'ruteni'-'ruzzi' and 'Rus'. (And we must not forget serbian 'Ras'). Hi Noric, Staraia Rusa is not far from St. Petersburg. It's a dreadful place. What was your point? Ruotsi is not just Finnish word. Swede/n is Rootsi in Estonian. (A) Land of rocks will be kivimaa. This word play is quite pointless. In any case, I am sure Swedes or Danes or Koreans or Negroes but some sort of outsiders helped Russians to establish their state. How could have Russians done that themselves?
|
|
|
Post by berschneider on May 4, 2004 17:51:46 GMT -5
One ought to write Celts, but pronounce it as Kelts. Thank you.
|
|
Noric
New Member
Posts: 10
|
Post by Noric on May 4, 2004 18:48:49 GMT -5
Staraia Rusa is not far from St. Petersburg. It's a dreadful place. What was your point? Well - what 'Rusa' means in this case - do you know? Land of rocks will be kivimaa. Well, it's a retranslation. So what 'ruotsi' means in your opinion? How could have Russians done that themselves? Well, I guess it was a strange kind of ancient russians who do it themselves....
|
|
|
Post by berschneider on May 4, 2004 18:59:35 GMT -5
Well, it's a retranslation. from what language? So what 'ruotsi' means in your opinion? It means a Swed/e, -en, -ish . Well, I guess it was a strange kind of ancient russians who do it themselves.... I don't quite understand what are you trying to say.
|
|
Noric
New Member
Posts: 10
|
Post by Noric on May 4, 2004 19:38:05 GMT -5
You won't believe.. from russian. It means a Swed/e, -en, -ish . Well, where did you learn it from? Some russian scholar says that 'ruotsi' itself means 'land of rocks'='strana skal'. I don' know what he tried to say.. Maybe he meant that it wasn't a word for 'swedes'?.. I don't quite understand what are you trying to say. I'm just laughing... I guess russians do it themselves anyway.
|
|
|
Post by berschneider on May 5, 2004 4:13:12 GMT -5
You won't believe.. from russian. Makes no sense, Noric, you've translated it from Russian into what language? Well, where did you learn it from? Well, I speak and understand some Finnish and Estonian. Why is the silly question. Is there such a thing? says that 'ruotsi' itself means 'land of rocks'='strana skal'. Few exceptions notwithstanding the quality of so-called scholarship in Russia when it comes to humanities is usually very poor. Would Slovenia be considered the land of words (slowo or slovo in most Slavonic languages) or term Switzerland - at least to English speakers - originate from Swiss cheese? I don' know what he tried to say.. Maybe he meant that it wasn't a word for 'swedes'?.. Who is he anyway? I'm just laughing... I guess russians do it themselves anyway. "Russians do it themselves anyway" - what's that supposed to mean? Stop laughing and explain what are youn trying to say.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on May 5, 2004 7:46:14 GMT -5
I prefer the K spelling of Kelt, also celt is a type of tool. In Australia celt is pronounced as selt, and I don't like that. The football club Celtic is also pronounced seltic.
|
|
|
Post by berschneider on May 5, 2004 7:56:00 GMT -5
I prefer the K spelling of Kelt, also celt is a type of tool. In Australia celt is pronounced as selt, and I don't like that. The football club Celtic is also pronounced seltic. Yes, I sin too - when I speak English I say selt. I know it is wrong but my English was corrupted by early association with American scummies. Keltic sounds much nice thougher. PS Is celt a kind of chisel?
|
|
Noric
New Member
Posts: 10
|
Post by Noric on May 5, 2004 16:36:12 GMT -5
Rurik (legendary founder of russian royal dinasty) came with his brothers and clan. They were ‘variagi-rus’. Does it mean ‘ruotsi-vikings’? Not necessarily. ‘Variag’ doesn’t have clear ethnical attribution. Than this is a question of name ‘rus’. ‘Ruotsi’ – just one of possible variants. The problem is – Rurik wasn’t a swede! So – we must think - didn’t his brothers and their clan (“his people”). He possibly was a Fris or Dutch (at his father’s line?) – so why should he call himself ‘ruotsi’=swede? There can be two explanationes – he called himself ‘rus’ but not ‘ruotsi’, he called himself ‘ruotsi’ but it didn’t mean ‘swede’. (Or he didn’t call himself ‘rus’ at all…) So I ask you – what do you know about ethymology and history of name ‘ruotsi’? Was it common name for swedes in 9th century? What makes you think that ‘variag’s were not Slavs? That’s a subject for discussion, not a settled matter. F.e. – the ambassadors of Rus name their king ‘Chacanus’ – what is this – swedish (?) name Hakon, or turkic (?) ‘kagan’? Russian name ‘Oleg’ – is it northern ‘Helg’ or southern ‘Hulagu’ or what?.. etc. P.S. Name of this particular scholar is Kuzmin.
|
|
|
Post by berschneider on May 5, 2004 16:56:57 GMT -5
Rurik (legendary founder of russian royal dinasty) came with his brothers and clan. They were ‘variagi-rus’. Does it mean ‘ruotsi-vikings’? Not necessarily. ‘Variag’ doesn’t have clear ethnical attribution. Than this is a question of name ‘rus’. ‘Ruotsi’ – just one of possible variants. The problem is – Rurik wasn’t a swede! So – we must think - didn’t his brothers and their clan (“his people”). He possibly was a Fris or Dutch (at his father’s line?) – so why should he call himself ‘ruotsi’=swede? There can be two explanationes – he called himself ‘rus’ but not ‘ruotsi’, he called himself ‘ruotsi’ but it didn’t mean ‘swede’. (Or he didn’t call himself ‘rus’ at all…) So I ask you – what do you know about ethymology and history of name ‘ruotsi’? Was it common name for swedes in 9th century? What makes you think that ‘variag’s were not Slavs? That’s a subject for discussion, not a settled matter. F.e. – the ambassadors of Rus name their king ‘Chacanus’ – what is this – swedish (?) name Hakon, or turkic (?) ‘kagan’? Russian name ‘Oleg’ – is it northern ‘Helg’ or southern ‘Hulagu’ or what?.. etc. P.S. Name of this particular scholar is Kuzmin. Well, they did NOT have national passport in those days but the archeological link between Jutland and Ladoga is quite firmly established. Speculation about etymology is all rot. There are Frankish and Novgorodian chronicles, which are pretty straightforward on the matter. Rurik possibly had no brothers - "" The first Russian chronicle, that of Nestor, says that in 862 one Rurik arrived to Slavic lands with his kin from the land of "rus" (identified by Adam of Bremen with Jutland) in 862, built the fortress of Ladoga, and then ruled in Novgorod. Nestor wrong/ly translated Scandinavian words 'sine hus' (with house) and 'tru voring' (with loyal guard) as the names of Rorik's brothers: Sineus and Truvor. "" Rurik dynasty - Rurikovici or Rjurikovichi was not a Russian dynasty by any means - it was Rus dynasty with different branches and intermarriages stretching from Norway to duchy of Moscow (where it ended rather ingnomiously). The first and the only Russian dynasty were Romanovs. I also find it hard to believe that Slavs were capable of establishing a state totally on their own without assistance of their Swedish or Danish neighbours.
|
|
Noric
New Member
Posts: 10
|
Post by Noric on May 6, 2004 6:20:12 GMT -5
{First of all about Rurik - I meant Dane, not Dutch off course.} the archeological link between Jutland and Ladoga is quite firmly established. Why not? They are neighbours. Ladoga was a centre of trade etc. Speculation about etymology is all rot. You don' like linguistics or what?... There is an unsolved problem. Even Dane or Frisian - Rurik wasn't a swede. Russian chronicle says about Rurik's people: "they are called 'variagi rus' - like another ones are called 'swije', another - 'angliane', 'urmane', another - 'g(o)the'..." Looks like swedes are mentioned here by their own name - 'swije'. Should we think that 'rus' mean 'danes' in such case? Ladoga, besides, seem to be founded nearly 750. the land of "rus" (identified by Adam of Bremen with Jutland) Where and when? In book 4 of “Gesta Hammaburgensis…” he says: ““Russian kingdom is <> the largest land of vinuls (= ‘veneds’ – baltic and polabian Slavs)”. Rurik dynasty - Rurikovici or Rjurikovichi was not a Russian dynasty by any means - it was Rus dynasty with different branches and intermarriages . I thought it's tipical for any dinasty, isn't it?
|
|