Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Vojing and voding

Expand Messages
  • Torsten
    ... Same as dux, and vojevoda. I know, but I think there s a lesson to be learned in the development. The developments in the sense of this word at the early
    Message 1 of 21 , Jul 10, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "bmscotttg" <BMScott@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@>
      > wrote:
      >
      > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "t0lgs001" <st.9eor9e@>
      > > wrote:
      >
      > [...]
      >
      > >> The Wüterich above, Dracula, was a "Wajde", i.e. a Wojwode
      > >> (voyvoda) (yet in his country his rank was above of that of a
      > >> "mere" Heeresführer, he was kind of Herzog).
      >
      > > Erh, you do know that heri-zogo actually means "Heeresführer"?
      >
      > Etymologically speaking, yes, but at a very early date the word
      > had already acquired the narrower sense that George obviously
      > has in mind.
      >


      Same as dux, and vojevoda.
      I know, but I think there's a lesson to be learned in the development. The developments in the sense of this word at the 'early date' you mention are a function of the sociological changes a nomad army-leader and his attached army undergo and by necessity must undergo after they reach their goal of installing themselves on top of their unwilling agricultural neighbors, they are not a causeless, one-off event. This also means that the two senses are not immobile and mutually exclusive, they are stages in the development af a function as changed by outer circumstances. In other words, in an established sedentary state, a Heeres-führer under a duke/Herzog might be 'mere' but in the nomadic people/army (where the people *is* the army) the Herzog and the Heeres-führer is the same person (Attila, Djengis Khan etc).

      You should try this book:
      http://www.amazon.com/History-Goths-Herwig-Wolfram/dp/0520069838


      Torsten
    • t0lgs001
      ... Heeresführer (without hyphenation) is 100% OK. ... A bit above the mere rank of a general . Esp. such leaders as Attila, Temüdjin-Djingis, who were
      Message 2 of 21 , Jul 10, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        >This also means that the two senses are not immobile and mutually
        >exclusive, they are stages in the development af a function as
        >changed by outer circumstances. In other words, in an established
        >sedentary state, a Heeres-führer

        Heeresführer (without hyphenation) is 100% OK.

        >under a duke/Herzog might be 'mere' but in the nomadic
        >people/army (where the people *is* the army) the Herzog and the
        >Heeres-führer is the same person (Attila, Djengis Khan etc).

        A "bit" above the "mere" rank of a "general". Esp. such leaders as
        Attila, Temüdjin-Djingis, who were kagans of the khans (some
        kind of "shah-in-shah"). Moreover, many of them were perceived
        by their underlings as members of (even "ancient") "royal" clans
        (often of Scythian extraction) or at least of "white" (noble) tribes.
        They weren't always simple "meritocrats". (AFAIK even Arminius wasn't
        "hoi-polloi". And some Sarmatians who disappeared in Germanic
        masses also had their own clan symbols = tamgas, didn't they?)

        Even in today's governments: often the Heeresführer is the
        minister or secretary of Defense, but his senior colleague, the
        president of the cabinet or the president of the state, is often
        the "supreme chief of the armed forces." (Much the more in
        medieval times the monarch as compared with his carrier of
        the "spatha".)

        So, in Asian terms, Odin, if not a deity, but a "prophet", might
        have been a kakhan (kagan) "king of kings" and at the same
        time tarkhan "chief over metallurgy (weapons) and shamanic or
        religious matters" (usually, a tarkhan was a "viceroy" or kind of a
        duke or a Herzog in Western terms). (Unfortunately, I am not
        quite acquainted with the corresponding Scythian-Sarmatian-Alan
        & Persian termini. I vaguely remember only "ban", seemingly
        introduced by Avar's Bayan, and bäg/beg/bey.)

        George

        PS: Anyway, the assumptions "water + hunting" seem quite an
        den Haaren herbeigezogen. Warriors "castes" usually used other
        metaphors in order to illustrate their prowess. Esp. those mounted
        ones in the East, whose beloved symbols were eagles and other
        accipiter-like birds (mythical symbols for many "royal" clans of
        the steppes, esp. the Tögrül bird), the lion, the leopard (cf.
        Turkic names Baybars), the Cervidae (the founding mythical
        symbol for the Hungarians, along with the kartal eagle, the symbol
        of the founding dynasty) and, of course, the horse. Even Goths,
        Gepids et al. borrowed these accipiter symbols & customs (see
        their ornaments and jewelry). The famous Vandals were actually an
        Alan-Vandal symbiosis, as was the Goth-Alan one that founded
        Catalonia. (They were ahead of their times as far as chivalry, the
        long joust lance techniques (against which the Roman legionnaire was
        a consummate victim), the long sword, the curved sabre, esp. the
        Scythian bow and the "arkan" lasso on a pole. Compared to that,
        what could have been a swamp and marsh hopping "Recke" that hid
        in forests? Perhaps a... hit-and-run guerrilla fighter. :-))
      • Torsten
        ... Erh, I kind of knew that, but there are people reading here who don t know German. ... You have a tendency to ignore what I write and substitute what you
        Message 3 of 21 , Jul 10, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "t0lgs001" <tolgs001@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          >
          > >This also means that the two senses are not immobile and mutually
          > >exclusive, they are stages in the development af a function as
          > >changed by outer circumstances. In other words, in an established
          > >sedentary state, a Heeres-führer
          >
          > Heeresführer (without hyphenation) is 100% OK.

          Erh, I kind of knew that, but there are people reading here who don't know German.


          > >under a duke/Herzog might be 'mere' but in the nomadic
          > >people/army (where the people *is* the army) the Herzog and the
          > >Heeres-führer is the same person (Attila, Djengis Khan etc).
          >
          > A "bit" above the "mere" rank of a "general". Esp. such leaders as
          > Attila, Temüdjin-Djingis, who were kagans of the khans (some
          > kind of "shah-in-shah"). Moreover, many of them were perceived
          > by their underlings as members of (even "ancient") "royal" clans
          > (often of Scythian extraction) or at least of "white" (noble)
          > tribes.


          You have a tendency to ignore what I write and substitute what you think. The *ŋWod- would be the whole people, inasmuch as they are on a single campaign. The *ŋWod-in- is its leader, and there's no implication in that of a subdivided hierarchy.


          > They weren't always simple "meritocrats".

          I don't understand what you are trying to say, other than that it seems you are still distinguishing between civilian and military 'imperium' which is meaningless in a nomadic society at war.

          > (AFAIK even Arminius wasn't "hoi-polloi". And some Sarmatians who
          > disappeared in Germanic masses also had their own clan symbols =
          > tamgas, didn't they?)

          And?

          > Even in today's governments: often the Heeresführer is the
          > minister or secretary of Defense, but his senior colleague, the
          > president of the cabinet or the president of the state, is often
          > the "supreme chief of the armed forces." (Much the more in
          > medieval times the monarch as compared with his carrier of
          > the "spatha".)

          Civilian society, so irrelevant.


          > So, in Asian terms, Odin, if not a deity, but a "prophet", might
          > have been a kakhan (kagan) "king of kings" and at the same
          > time tarkhan "chief over metallurgy (weapons) and shamanic or
          > religious matters" (usually, a tarkhan was a "viceroy" or kind of a
          > duke or a Herzog in Western terms). (Unfortunately, I am not
          > quite acquainted with the corresponding Scythian-Sarmatian-Alan
          > & Persian termini. I vaguely remember only "ban", seemingly
          > introduced by Avar's Bayan, and bäg/beg/bey.)

          You might be interested in Germanic kingship then
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_monarchy
          No distinction between the military, judicial and religious function.

          I haven't looked into matters Turkic, which I probably should have done. In this case, however, it doesn't seem relevant.


          > George
          >
          > PS: Anyway, the assumptions "water + hunting" seem quite an
          > den Haaren herbeigezogen. Warriors "castes" usually used other
          > metaphors in order to illustrate their prowess. Esp. those mounted
          > ones in the East, whose beloved symbols were eagles and other
          > accipiter-like birds (mythical symbols for many "royal" clans of
          > the steppes, esp. the Tögrül bird), the lion, the leopard (cf.
          > Turkic names Baybars), the Cervidae (the founding mythical
          > symbol for the Hungarians, along with the kartal eagle, the symbol
          > of the founding dynasty) and, of course, the horse. Even Goths,
          > Gepids et al. borrowed these accipiter symbols & customs (see
          > their ornaments and jewelry). The famous Vandals were actually an
          > Alan-Vandal symbiosis, as was the Goth-Alan one that founded
          > Catalonia. (They were ahead of their times as far as chivalry, the
          > long joust lance techniques (against which the Roman legionnaire was
          > a consummate victim), the long sword, the curved sabre, esp. the
          > Scythian bow and the "arkan" lasso on a pole. Compared to that,
          > what could have been a swamp and marsh hopping "Recke" that hid
          > in forests? Perhaps a... hit-and-run guerrilla fighter. :-))


          He would have been, after the pre-Indo-European, Pre-Uralic civilization, which lived on the rivers before the advent of cavalry and which coined the phrase, disappeared. But the word survived.

          cf. the discussion of the reflexes of *ŋW- (> *w-, *n-, *m-) starting at
          http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/62123
          more here:
          http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/63784


          Torsten
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.