You are on page 1of 12



ISSN 0324-1653


1. Georges-Jean Pinault. Grec , un messager qui vient de loin ........... 2. . . .............................. 3. Todor At. Todorov. Cent ans depuis la naissance du professeur Roger Bernard (19081997). Une vie consacre la Bulgarie ............................. 4. Victor Friedman. Turkish Infinitives in Balkan Romani: from Codeswitching to Paradigm Shift ........................................................................................ 5. . . .................................................................................................... 6. . . . . ........................................................................... 7. Charalambos Symeonidis. Bulgarische Lehnbersetzungen aus dem Griechischen bei Eigennamen ..................................................................... 8. Olga M. Mladenova. Balkan Cultural Interactions of the Early Modern Period .......................................................................................................... 9. Helmut W. Schaller. Zu den Anfngen der Balkanlinguistik im 19. Jahrhundert ... 10. Svetlana Janakieva. Der thrakische Flussname # .............................. 11. Metka Furlan. The Proto-Slavic Hydrographic Term *vydra spring Bulgarian Dialect vdra small clear spring ................................................ 12. Harvey E. Mayer. The Radical-Conservative Bulgarian Dialect Literary Macedonian ................................................................................................. 13. Sorin Paliga. Perun Ignis Invictus, Ignis ternus. Briefly on Fire, Ovens, Cremation and Eternity ................................................................................ 14. Biliana Mihalova. Note etymologique sur gr. Amalov ..................................... 15. Vclav Blaek. Lexica Anatolica III .................................................................. 16. Ani Kemalova. A Greek Loan in Bulgarian Language ...................................... 17. Corinna Leschber. Umdeutung von Maskenbrauchtum durch Volksetymologie: bulg. kuk, kukove vs. rumn. cuc, cuci ............................

3 15 21 27 33 51 61 67 85 101 107 115 119 129 133 139 143

18. Zbigniew Rusek. Professor Kazimierz Polaski (6. April 1929 6.February 2009). Member of the Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN) and the Polish Academy of Art and Sciences (PAU). .................. 151


[] ut tu, deus, ignis edax consumas mortuas curas eorum, recreans eos immortaliter. (O God, you are the consuming fire that can burn away their love for these things and re-create the men in immortal life.) St. Augustine, Confessiones, V, 3, 4

Perun, the supreme god of the Slavs (or at least of some of the Slavs) before the adoption of Christianity, the bright god of ethnic groups venerating we know that fire, including the practice of cremation during burial rites: all this has been, for decades, the reason for debates and the source of various hypotheses. Some readers surely remember Ivan Duridanovs paper Slaw. *Perun balt. Perknas heth. Peruna? Das Ende eines Mythos, published in BE/LB almost a decade ago. At that time, I felt little convinced of his hypothesis. Meanwhile, incited by the audacious approach to a difficult issue indeed, I reconsidered my initial adversity, and found indeed that the origin of Perun may be a good occasion for discussion of veneration of fire among old Slavs, in the context of similar beliefs of other neighbouring groups, mainly the Thracians, who also practised, among other rites, cremation. And cremation is, as we know, an example of venerating fire: purifying fire, eternal fire Before analysing the essence of Perun, a brief digression is yet necessary. I now agree with the basic idea that the origin of Perun should be analysed otherwise, perhaps in a surprising way. Let us make the first step. Briefly on Romanian pururi, de-a pururi, pururea, de-a pururea eternally1 Pururi eternally is, beyond any doubt, one of the archaic words in Romanian,



also in constructions like de-a pururi, de-a pururea with he same meaning, lit. for the eternity, in the eternity. The origin of this term has been debated, usually considered of unknown origin. R u s s u (1981) held the word for indigenous, i.e. of Thracian origin, presumably related to Albanian prher, with the same meaning. R u s s u was yet less convincing in suggesting an etymon. The word is presumably very old, but the original meaning seems obscure. Let us try to unveil it. The root pur fire We may abruptly assert that pururi literally meant, some time in ProtoRomanian, fires, the plural form of a reconstructable singular *pur fire. It must have been the indigenous Thracian word for fire, perhaps more specifically the eternal sacred fire. After the Roman conquest, the generic term gradually became focus, with the initial meaning hearth. The existence of a Thracian root pur- with the meaning fire was demonstrated a long time ago by D e t s c h e w (1957: 386), related to Greek pyr, pyrs fire, German Feuer, English fire etc. Some time later, M u u (1982: 148151), bringing forth other arguments regarding the Thracian and Phrygian forms with root pur-, assumed that the basic meaning must have been fire, and presumably some derived meanings like having the colour of fire = blond hair, bright, shining. All these seem clear, but how and why the later meaning became eternally, with the plural form? Eternal Fires In order to understand the context of the eternal fires of those times, we should refer to two components of the non-Christian cults in Dacia, indigenous and Oriental. Indeed, Oriental cults represent a crucial component of Roman Dacia (S a n i e: 1981). So, on the one hand, we know that many indigenous rites were connected to fire, some of them preserved until Modern times, e.g. the cults connected to summer and winter solstices. The cult connected to St. Ignat (with a folk etymology referring to his name, associated to ignis), on December 21st and mainly Christmas, with various fire rites all over Europe. Bdni veer, lit. the night of logs, i.e. the night of burning logs is a familiar example, I think, in Bulgaria (see D u r i d a n o v: 1993). Another crucial detail is that the Thracians in general, and the Dacians in particular, practised cremation as the main burial rite, until gradually replaced by the Christian rite of inhumation. Briefly, cremation and associated rites are a strong support for the hypothesis that sacred fire had a central role in the sacred life of the Thracians. On the other hand, as an Oriental cult, the veneration of Sol Invictus is well documented. The rites defined as Sol Invictus Invincible Sun or, perhaps, eternal Sun are also well documented and analysed. Using the term first analysed, pur, pl. pururi eternally, we may translate sun de-a pururi = sun [venerated] for ever, in the eternity. We should not forget that, in the year 321, Sunday was decreed as day of the sun, dies solis, day of rest, and thus preserved so far in some Germanic

Perun Ignis Invictus, Ignis ternus


languages, Sun-day, Sonn(e)-tag. This occurred in the days of Constantine the Great, then the emperor of the Occident, then (beginning with 324) the unique emperor after Licinius was captured and assassinated. We should therefore surmise that under both the indigenous Thracian and Oriental influence, the rites connected to sacred fire as reflecting the holy Sun were powerful and deeply influenced folk beliefs. It is under such an influence that the indigenous Thracian form pur fire was adapted by the Romanised population and then used with reference to the holy, eternal fire. As time went on and Thracian language turned extinct, the original meaning was forgotten, so pur became associated to eternity in general as a religious and philosophical term. Also, in the process of full assimilation of the word, it was later integrated in the category of neutral nouns, and got the plural ending -uri, in competition with ending -e. Thracian forms derived from root pur- fire must be discussed in the context of other related forms, e.g. the series represented by Czech p cinders, (still) burning ashes, and Polish perz, perzyna, among other Slavic forms. Other related Indo-European forms are also clear: Greek pyr, pyrs fire; English fire, German Feuer; Umbrian pir, Tokharian A por, B puwar, pwr, Armenian hur all meaning fire. In Slavic, root pur- fire was in competition with *og fire, which is related to Latin ignis and Lithuanian ugnis, and has become the usual word for fire in Slavic. Reconstructing the Past Proto-Romanian must have preserved a form *pur- fire of Thracian origin, with an etymon quite clearly explained in the Indo-European context quoted above. As Thracian turned extinct, the word lost its initial meaning, which had been meanwhile replaced by foc < focus, initially hearth, i.e. fire in the hearth, then fire in general. At that time, under the pressure of various rites connected to fire, both indigenous and Oriental, pur began to be used exclusively in a religious, nonChristian context, and gradually got the meaning eternal fire, then eternal, when the heathen rites turned extinct as well. The place of Perun Perun was associated with eternal re. Let us quote an authoritative work dedicated to the Slavic mythology, O v s e c (1991: 113, and the whole chapter dedicated to Perun, pp. 110-119). Speaking of the relationship PerunPrkunas (Lithuanian) and Perkunas (Latvian), Ovsec writes: [] Enako kot Perunu, so tudi njemu vzdrevali v svetih gajih veni ogenj. [] As in the case of Perun, he [Perkunas] is dedicated to eternal fire on the occasion of holy processions. The importance of fire in the context of Slavic creeds is well known. We must assume that every hypostasis of fire had its sacred aspect and, sometimes at



least, its own god: god of hearth fire (where bread and food in general was prepared), god of thunder fire, beyond any doubt god of the Sun-fire the god of the shining sky and/or thunder, as with all Indo-Europeans. With cremation as a burial rite, just like the Thracians among others, the problem of eternal fire with the old Slavs seems a clear issue. It is also clear that fire, with its various hypostases in daily life and sacred beliefs, influenced the general conceptions of the Slavs, and it is therefore entirely logical to assume that the supreme god of the old Slavs, at least of the old Eastern Slavs, was a god associated with fire, the sacred, eternal fire, perhaps the sun viewed as eternal giver of heat and life, fire seen as the cosmic giver of life and prosperity. Also, considering the clear etymological tableau of the forms derived from IE root *pur- fire, there is one question of detail, which should be answered: was the name of Perun an indigenous Slavic form, or a borrowed form? I will try to develop on it. Proto-Slavic A, B and C On the occasion of the International Congress of Slavists in Ljubljana, Aleksandar Loma presented a most interesting paper, in which he used Proto-Slavic A with reference with the group of Slavic forms following the phonetic rules of evolution from Balto-Slavic to Proto-Slavic, and Proto-Slavic B with reference to the group of forms having West Iranian character. On some recent occasions, starting from our previous studies and also developing on Lomas Proto-Slavic A and B hypothesis, which I find the most interesting and the most convincing for the last decades, I argued that in what we conventionally label as Proto-Slavic there were THREE, not two basic SATEM components: Balto-Slavic (A), West Iranic (B) and, also crucial, North Thracian, which I added to the two previous groups already defined by Loma. There were therefore three satem idioms, which contoured what we label Proto-Slavic, now re-labelled, following our view, Proto-Slavic A, B and C of Balto-Slavic, West Iranian and North Thracian character, respectively. Discriminating these three satem components is the task of the linguistic analysis. To these components, we must add Germanic (mainly Gothic, I assume), Finno-Ugrian and, later, East Romance elements. And, for sure, some elements of unknown origin, maybe of Pre-Indo-European origin or, in any case, non-IndoEuropean (see the discussions in P a l i g a, T e o d o r: 2009, ready for print when this paper is being written). So, with the root *pur- fire as obvious etymon, we lack a clear trace of the origin: a Balto-Slavic, a West Iranian or a North Thracian element? When posed like this, the problem may seem unconvincing: are there North Thracian elements in Proto-Slavic? We answered positively, and added some examples. One of them is, for sure, sto one hundred, despite the still largely spread view that, on the contrary, this would be a Slavic element in Romanian (a first paper on this topic in P a l i g a: 1988; meanwhile, have re-discussed the topic several times2). As clearly proved in all the books dedicated to the Slavic mythology, e.g.

Perun Ignis Invictus, Ignis ternus


O v s e c: 1991, Slavic mythology had various influences. Two basic elements are of West Iranian origin, very probably: bog and raj. I would venture add Perun as North Thracian influence. My reconstruction is Thracian *pur- fire > Slavic *prun, after vocalization Per-un, Pior-un, the phonetic phase recorded in documents, and which did not survive for too long: Christianity was already advancing to the Slavic world too. The memory of Perun survived for some time, and was later processed in the Pre-Romantic and Romantic period. Perun is, in my view, related to Romanian pur-uri, (de-a) pururi, (de-a) pururea eternally as an obvious Thracian heritage with parallels in many IndoEuropean languages, including forms like Czech p, which I find inheritied from the Balto-Slavic lexical fund, not borrowed. But the relationship fire, asheseternity, eternal is also in Albanian: prhr, prhra eternal, for ever v. prhin to cover with ashes. We shall revert to these forms. The roots Two main series of Proto-Indo-Roots should be considered: I. PIE *pewr-, *pr- (*puHr-o-; *-Hu- > -uH- *pHur, gen. *pH-un-s pHun-s) re (see B e z l a j III: 39; Rejzek, Machek etc.) AHD fiur, Germ. Feuer, English fire Umbrian pir Greek pyr Arm. hur Tokh. A por Hittite pahhur In Slavic: Old Slavic (unattested) *pyr fire Czech p burning ashes (hav popel), pit se, zapit se Upper Lusacian pyri to melt Old Russian prej burning ashes in the hearth Slovene zapriti se to make red = to heat under fire, get the colour of fire (absent in Bezlaj), prh decorated Easer egg = colour of fire, reddish II. IE *gwher- to heat, to warm, (in P o k o r n y guher- 493 and bh(e)reu143) 1. With evolution gwh > g OCS *gor, gorti, gorta/gorta; o-grade is normal in forms related to a state; related with ar- < gorti Arm. er horko, vedro Lith. dial. gari, garti hom (borrowed?) Irish gorim heji Old Indian gh ti burns, is in flames 2. With evolution *gwher-, *gwhr- > Germanic b, Greek th, Lat. f, Thracian p Old English beornan, byrnan (intransitive), brnan (transitive) to burn



Greek I warm up myself, am warm, hot, warm, hot warm (< *gwher-m(n)o) Latin f: furnus, fornus, fornx oven So, where is the place of Thracian in this scheme? Let us have a look at another series of archaic Romanian forms: perpel to roast, to grill; also prpli (prpli, prpli). The basic meaning is to burn/roast (e.g. meat) by turning it around; fig. also to make someone upset, curious. DEX refers to Bulg. pripalja and S.-Cr. pripaliti, from root paliti to burn and prefix pri-. The main problem of this explanation is that the phonetic evolution is not possible. The word is created by reduplication, then haplology (as in other cases), *per-per-l- > perpeli, prpli. prjol to scorch, to burn (especially with reference to the military technique of burning land in order to stop or slow down an invasion). DEX assumes a borrowing from Hung. przslni, perzselni, in its turn of unknown origin; it is, beyond any reasonable doubt, a borrowing from Romanian, as prjoli is obviously related with prli, perpeli and perl. prl (prl, according to another spelling) to singe, to scorch; fig. also to get cheated. The basic root of the series, without reduplication. Note that the treatment of IE kw and gw was NOT symmetrical in Thracian. The hypothesis of a Slavic origin, as advocated in DEX, should be definitely rejected. Bg. is related to Romanian as a common Thracian heritage or rather borrowed from Romanian. prnie large pot for preparing food. Closely related with prli, prjoli, prpli/perpeli and perl from an archaic root to burn, to scorch, hence to prepare food by burning, under fire. In fact, form prnaie (also spelled prnaie) is the exact etymological parallel of Latin furnus. parl to steal. Seems related with, and derived from the same root as, perl, with the basic meaning abrupt move (to steal) like fire, a glimpse of a move. Therefore: perl (hot) ashes (which covers recently burnt coal). Related to perpeli and prli; in this case, as opposed to the others, a development *s-per-; initial s-/z(with positional pronunciation) is a frequent situation in the indigenous, substratum elements, which interferes with words of Latin origin with prefix ex- > Rom. s/z. In all these cases we have a quite clear, I think, evolution from IE *gw(h) to p, which was specific to Thracian. There may be legitimate questions as to whether such an evolution was indeed possible? Our answer is positive: we have a first series of the evolution IE *gwher- to heat, to warm, with evolution gwh > g as in OCS *gor, gorti, and a second series of the evolution *gwher- > gwhr- > Germanic b, Greek th, Lat. f, Thracian p. In this second category we may also quote the series represented by: Old Slavic *praiti Czech prait, praen, prarna, uprait, zprait Polish prazi

Perun Ignis Invictus, Ignis ternus


Russian prjai S.-Cr. pr iti It is quite clear, I think, that this series, with a different phonetic evolution, reects another linguistic stratum: if gorti and its derivatives reect the expected Balto-Slavic evolution from IE *gw(h) to g, this series reects the specic Thracian evolution IE *gw(h) > p. The Romanian form prjol, quoted above, obviously belong to the series represented by Slavic *pr--iti > praiti, in its turn a borrowing from a Thracian dialect. There is, among others, another clear example, which conrms the different evolution from IE * gw(h) to g and b/p. On the one hand, the evolution of IE *gwhe-n- to run for hunt, to pursue wild animals for hunt: Sl. gnati and goniti and gan- (ganti, ganiti) Lith. gen, giti, same meaning and gana, ganti, only referring to pasturing animals, but: Old Irish ben- as in ind-air-ben drive away, drive off, keep away (b < gw), Hittite nanna- to drive, to blow, with g-n > n-n. Also, and closer to our analysis: pnd to still hunt; to stay hidden for hunt. It is doubtful that this word reects a Slavic borrowing (pnditi). The word reects an archaic activity, and may refer to Proto Boreal3 *Ghw-N to run for hunt; to still hunt. Alb. pndr guard is from Romanian. So, on the one hand, Slavic gnati and goniti and, on the other hand, Romanian form (of Thracian origin) pndi, pndi, which reects the evolution *gwh > p, as in Celtic and Germanic. To sum up: 1. A root PIE *pewr-, *pr- re is preserved in Old Slavic (unattested) *pyr re and the modern series represented by Czech p burning ashes (hav popel), pit se, zapit se etc. It is also preserved in Thracian root *pur- re, hence Romanian pururi eternally, for ever. 2. A root IE *gwher- to heat, to warm is preserved, on the one hand, in Slavic gorti, with the Balto-slavic evolution to IE *gwh > g, and with a different phonetic evolution IE *gwh > p in some forms of Thracian origin: perpel, prjol, prl (prl), prnie, parl (-parli), perl (-perl). The Slavic series represented by the form praiti belongs to this group, reflecting the phonetic evolution IE *gwh > p. They must be admitted as borrowings from Thracian. Back again to Perun So, where is the place of Perun in this equation? I nd arguments that if must also reect a borrowing from Thracian, specically from the basic form *pur-, not from the parallel series derived from IE *gwher-. The evolution must have been Thracian *pur- > Slavic (before the 8th century A.D.) *Pr-un > Perun, Piorun. Perun must have been, just like Romanian relic form pururi, the reection of eternal re, ignis invictus, ignis aeternus. Both the etymological analysis and, independently,



the few sources on the basic attributes of Perun lead us to reconstructing his meaning as god of eternal re. A by-question is, of course, whether Baltic forms Prkunas, Perkunas are or are not related to Perun. As far as they are admitted to derive from the same IE root *pur- re, then the answer is positive. Ivan Duridanov rejected this approach several years ago, with some arguments. Perhaps the whole problem may be reconsidered now. A second question refers to the Albanian parallel prhr, prhra eternal, for ever and prhin to cover with ashes. The forms are not included in O r e l, probably because the author did not find any relationship between the two forms; and, also probably, because he considers them derived with prefix pr- and her (Lat. hora) and hi ash, respectively (1998: 146-147). This may be, of course, possible. We assume that the derivational mechanism fireeternal, eternity is too strikingly similar to Romanian so as to assume a mere hazard. In any case, the association fire, ashes eternity, eternal resides on archaic beliefs, disregarding the etymon invoked. Also, if we compare the forms Romanian pr-j-ol-i, Slavic pra--iti (< *pr--iti) and Albanian pr-h-in, we may further assume that Romanian j, Slavic and Albanian h reflect an original phoneme of laryngeal type or, perhaps better, a velar spirant, which we once argumented to have existed in Thracian until ProtoRomanian times. Forms like vtaf/vtah/vta (alternating f/v/s/) indicate that archaic phoneme. But we get back to the velar spirant in Thracian and Proto-Romanian, and its survivals in modern languages on another occasion. Conclusions There were 3 satem idioms, which contributed to contouring the Proto-Slavic profile. To the two already demonstrated by Aleksandar Loma at the International Congress of Slavists in Ljubljana, Proto-Slavic A of Balto-Slavic character; ProtoSlavic B of West Iranian character; add Proto-Slavic C of Thracian or, perhaps better, of Dacian character. The god-name Perun is such an example, and also the series, which shows the evolution IE *gwh > p, against IE *gwh > g, which shows the Balto-Slavic evolution. Therefore Slavic gorti may be held for reflecting the expected IE *gwh > g evolution, whereas the series reflecting the evolution IE *gwh > p reflects the evolution from Indo-European to Thracian. It includes, on the one hand, Romanian forms of Thracian origin (perpel, prjol, prl, prnie, also parl, perl < s-gwher-), also the Slavic forms borrowed from Thracian represented by Slavic pra-iti (< *pr--iti). Hungarian przslni, perzselni is obviously a borrowing from Romanian, it is no need I think to develop too much on this detail. The God-name Perun must continue a borrowing from the Thracian form *pur- fire, as correctly identified and analysed by Detschew many decades ago, with the phonetic evolution *pur- > Pr-un, then, after vocalisation of jer, Perun, Piorun. When this was accomplished, the cult of Perun was being already in the

Perun Ignis Invictus, Ignis ternus


inexorable course of extinction, but the beliefs in the eternal fires persist over centuries and millennia, in various forms in various religious and cultural contexts. The rich vocabulary related to fire and other words with the semantic sphere to burn, to heat (up), to get warm etc, showing once again the importance of fire in the archaic societies, confirms the historical and archaeological data referring to both the late Thracians groups and the Old Slavs in the interval c. 6th to 9th century A.D. NOTES
1 The paper develops here on our former brief study in Academica nr. 8 (20), iunie 1992, p. 14. 2 See also the critic view of Marko Snoj in the posthumous part of France Bezlajs Etymological Dictionary of Slovene, nalised by Prof. Marko Snoj and Metka Furlan. See B e z l a j: 1976-2007, vol. 3: 318. With all respect to Prof. Snoj, I assume he is not right in criticising my view, and hastened a bit in writing that comment. It is obvious to any analysis, that s to is intrusive into the whole system of Slavic numerals. 3 As analysed and defined by : 1986. See an extended comment, with additions in P a l i g a: 2007, which is the enlarged forms of the paper presented at the International Congress of Slavists, Ljubljana, August 2003.

REFERENCES B e z l a j , F r . 1976-2007. Etimoloki slovar slovenskega jezika. Volumes III, IV and V (Index) were completed, corrected and prepared for print by Marko Snoj, Metka Furlan and Simona Klemeni. Ljubljana. D e t s c h e w , D . 1957. Die thrakischen Sprachreste. Wien. D u r i d a n o v, I. 1993. Bulgarian Bdni (veer), bdnik again. Linguistique Balkanique, 36, 2, 101104. 1999-2000. Slaw. *Perun balt. Perknas heth. Peruna? Das Ende eines Mythos. Linguistique Balkanique, 40, 2, 93-108. 2001. Zur Frage der Chronologie der Balkanismen. Linguistique Balkanique, XLI, 1, 3-12. M u u , G . 1982. Din mitologia tracilor. Bucureti. O r e l , V l . 1998. Albanian Etymological Dictionary. Leiden. O v s e c , D . J . 1991. Slovanska mitologija in verovanje (Mitologia i credinele slavilor). Ljubljana. P a l i g a, S. 1988b. Slovansko *sto izzivalen problem? (in Slovene with an English abstract: Slavic *sto a challenging problem?). Slavistina Revija, 36, 4, 349-358. 2006a. Mitologia slavilor. Bucureti. 2006b. An Etymological Lexicon of the Indigenous (Thracian) Elements in Romanian. Bucureti.



2007. Lexikon proto-borealicum et alia lexica etymologica minora. Bucureti, Vol. IV al seriei Opera Omnia. 2008a. Mitologia tracilor. Bucureti. 2008b. Linguistic Marginalia on Slavic Ethnogenesis. Paper for the International Congress of Slavists, Ohrid, Rep. of Macedonia, September 10-16, 2008. (Romanoslavica, 43). P a l i g a , S . , E u g e n S . T . 2009. Lingvistica i arheologia slavilor timpurii. O alt vedere de la Dunrea de Jos (Linguistics and Archaeology of Early Slavs. Another View from the Lower Danube). Trgovite. R u s s u , I . I . 1981. Etnogeneza romnilor. Bucureti. S a n i e, S. 1981. Cultele orientale n Dacia roman. Bucureti. T u r c a n, R. 1998. Cultele orientale n lumea roman. Bucureti. (Romanian version of Les cultes orientaux dans le monde romain, Paris.) , . . 1986. - . .

Authors address: University of Bucharest Department of Slavic Languages Str. Pitar Mo 7-13, et. 1 010451 Bucharest Romania