--- In email@example.com
, Bhrihskwobhloukstroy <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@...> wrote:
> [top-posting corrected]
> 2012/7/31, dgkilday57 <dgkilday57@...>:
> > In researching Hercules Magusanus, I have found several writers citing a
> > Celtic etymology published by Lauran Toorians, "Magusanus and the 'Old Lad':
> > a Case of Germanicised Celtic" (NOWELE 42:13-28, 2003). The Latinized
> > Magusanus (less often Mac-, generally in the dative HERCVLI MAGVSANO) is
> > supposedly borrowed from an oxymoric adjective meaning 'young-old'. I have
> > no access to this paper.
> > The only applicable Celtic roots which I know of are *makWo- 'male
> > descendant, son, young man' and *seno- 'old'. The only way I can arrive at
> > the Germanic consonantism is by assuming a Q-Celtic compound accented on the
> > connecting vowel (which is not in itself a problem), *makWo'-seno-, borrowed
> > before the Lautverschiebung. The earliest known dedication to H.M. is the
> > one from Ruimel, dated to the first half of the first century CE, well
> > before Tacitus.
> > In citing Germanic names, Tacitus (like other early authors) gives the
> > connecting vowel of /o/-stems as -o- (Marcomanni, Longobardi); this appears
> > as -a- in Gmc. texts (even Gothic and Runic Norse). The intermediate stage
> > was apparently -e- (Alemanni, Alamanni). He also retains non-initial -e-
> > before non-rhotic consonants, which later appears as -i- (not merely in
> > umlauting position; Segestes against Sigismundus in Ammian, and Venedi
> > against OHG Winida, etc.). Thus I would expect the Latinized Gmc. reflex of
> > the presumed Q-Celtic loan to be *Magosenus, at least at Ruimel. By the
> > late third century *Magesinus or *Magasinus might be expected. But in fact
> > the vocalism is consistently Magusanus/Macusanus.
> > My hunch is that Magusanus has nothing to do with Celtic, and that Toorians
> > has merely neglected the issue with the vowels in order to create a
> > pseudo-Celtic protoform, but before I nominate her for a Voltaire Award, I
> > would like to know whether she actually did provide an explanation for the
> > vowels. If anyone has read this paper and can inform me, I will appreciate
> > it.
> > Thanks in advance
> > DGK
> Preserved Germanic /o/ as connecting vowel should be in labial context
> (the best mss. have /Langobardi/, not /Longo-/)
According to Anderson's Oxford edition, two mss. of the Germania have <Langobardos> written above the line. The other ms. readings are <Longo-> or <Largo->. I do consider <Langobardos> to be what Tacitus most likely wrote, however, and with more foresight I would have cited <Lango->.
Velleius Paterculus has <Boiohaemum>. Anderson (and some other editors) put <Boihemi nomen> into their text of the Germania. One ms. has <Boiihemi>, another has <Bohemi>, and several have a corrupt univerbation <Boiihaemionem> vel sim. On the basis of V.P., I suspect that T. actually wrote <Boiohaemi nomen>.
Ptolemy has <Teuriokhaimai>. The evidence is slight, but on the whole I agree with Streitberg that the unstressed connecting vowel /o/ has indeed been conserved. That most of the examples have a following labial is a mere sampling accident.
Returning to the original topic, I acquired a copy of Toorians' paper and found that *makWo- is NOT the first element of her presumed Celtic protoform, so there is no issue with getting Q-Celts into contact with pre-shifted Paleo-Germans. Nevertheless, her derivation rests on several daring ad-hoc assumptions, not only in the realm of loanword phonology, but also involving compound morphology, semantics, and theology. The result is imaginative but not particularly convincing, and I think we should look in a different direction to explain Hercules Magusanus.
One source of H.M. not mentioned by Toorians is the coin type issued in the late third century by Postumus, the governor of Gaul who had himself declared emperor. This type is dedicated HERCVLI MAGUSANO. Now, Postumus was fond of Hercules, and issued over a dozen coin types dedicated to H. with different epithets. Other than Magusanus, the epithets are either geographical or straightforwardly honorific. Magusanus is not the latter, so it may well be the former. The center of H.M.'s worship was the temple at Empel on the Meuse, and most of the dedications come from the lower Meuse basin or the adjacent lower Rhine basin (the deltas are intertwined). Therefore, I submit that we are dealing with a Latin geographical adjective <Magusa:nus> 'pertaining to the (lower) Meuse', from *Magusa, the Latinized form of Germanic *Magusi:, a river-name belonging to Hans Krahe's OEH system, inherited from (Old Western) IE *m&2gH-u's-ih2 'persistently strong' vel sim. (fem. sg.).
The other inherited form of this river-name in my view was Venetic *Mahusja, borrowed into Belgic as *Maus^a, and monophthongized in East Belgic as *Mo:sa. West Belgic retained *Maus^a which became Belgo-Latin *Mausa, continued as Walloon <Mouze> [mu:s]. The Gauls had no /o:/, and I make the ad-hoc assumption (see, I admit it) that the East Belgic *Mo:sa had an OPEN [o,:] which was close to the Gaulish SHORT /o/ in timbre, so the river-name was Gallicized as *Mosa:, and became Gallo-Latin <Mosa> (with short /o/ scanned by both Ausonius and Sidonius), now French <Meuse>. The Gaulish form was Germanicized as *Maso: from which we have medieval and modern reflexes (Dutch <Maas>, Flemish <Maes>).
I agree with Nico Roymans' view that the Batavi were created in the late first century BCE by the Romans, who put Chatti from east of the Rhine in charge of the remnants of the Eburones. The inherited Gmc. name *Magusi: would have been preserved by the Chatti, far from Gaulish influence, whereas those native to the Rhine-Meuse delta would have been using *Maso:, borrowed from the Gaulish name.
In sum, I think my theory of Magusanus involves fewer (and less daring) ad-hoc assumptions than Toorians', and I intend to present the details and references in a forthcoming post, "Magusanus and the Meuse".