On Words Part II

We want to talk about words again (for Part I see here).

We’ve come across an interesting “Swebic” etymology in Wilhelm Obermüller‘s Deutsch-Keltisches, Geschichtlich-Geographisches Wörterbuch Volume 2 (published 1868).  The book is full of rather outrageous assertions.  Nonetheless, we thought why not review what Obermüller proposes and maybe we will find something interesting?  And so it was that we found this:

“Suebos is a Celtic word that means water forest (watery forest) or forest water from sua water and bos, bus forest.”

This, of course, brought to our heads the thought we had about the Veneti, namely that the word wundan meant water in Old Prussian (see here) – as, indeed, does vanduo in Lithuanian.  And, a few paragraphs down below we came across this in Obermüller’s curious book:

“That the explanation (etymology) of water people is correct can also be seen in the fact that the Ravenna Geographer calls the Swebes Jani from ean water, thus the same [name] as the Eneti or Veneti.”

Not sure where the Jani comes from.

Then goes on to say:

“The Swebes fall in the same category [too] as the Finns, who also name themselves ‘water people’ from buinne.”

Now, the important thing here is that “water people” does not mean “living by the ocean or sea.”  Rather, a river might suffice or a lake.  This, of course, is not very descriptive and for good reason – most early clans and tribes obviously had to live by a source of fresh water (if you have to ask why, well…).  Thus, differentiating between people on this basis could only tell us that they were likely less advanced than those who could afford to live away from the rivers, e.g., because of aqueducts.

But when one thinks a bit more about this, the implications are quite interesting.  For example, where does the word rik as in Reich as in “kingdom” come from?  Could it be that originally it referred to a river?  After all, that word is Indo-European:

• rives (Latin);
• rith (Anglo-Saxon);
• river (English);
• řeka (Czech);
• rieka (Slovak);
• река, i.e., reka (Russian);
• rio (Spanish);
• rega, rego, reguerro (also… Spanish but only in Northwestern Spain);

So perhaps the first “kingdoms” or countries were just “realms” along rivers?  And hence all the Gallic rix‘s (Vercingeto-rix) and all the Germanic rik’s (Theude-ric) or Theude-rik)?

And speaking of rivers, what about these Suebi?

Isn’t the Slavic word for Elbe Labe?  Labe, yes, but better yet it is Łaba in Polish.   Łaba with our favorite “Ł”, i.e., to bring it back to the English pronunciation – “w”.  That is, in Polish, you would say, roughly, Waba.  The letter “z”, on the other hand, is directional meaning – in some contexts – “from where” you come from.  Now, apparently, in West Slavic languages, it was originally “iz” but this is not certain.

Now, if you ask where do you come from and the answer has to be “from Elbe”, you could say “Z Łaby” or “zwaby” or “swaby” but pronounced “suaby”.  (Łaby is the genitive case of Łaba – or, rather, it is the genitive case acting in place of the ablative case – which Polish does not have).  Of course, to accept this – putting aside etymological/linguistic objections – one would have to accept that the Suabi spoke Slavic or something close to that language.

So now we have:

• Suabi as in “from the River Łaba (Elbe)“;

and, as per this discussion:

• Suavi [or Sowaveanni] as in “from/of the River Soława (Saale)”;

At least these two rivers are real close!  So maybe these were really two different peoples?  One living on the Saale and the other on the Elbe?  However, even in that case, the Swebes would have had to be Slavic in order for the, e.g., Nemetes = Niemcy = Nemcy name to work.

Copyright ©2015 jassa.org All Rights Reserved