| |
| ▲ | never_inline 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Watkins wrote his magnum opus on The serpent-slaying myth. You might also like ML West's Indo European Myth and Poetry. So the heroic poetry, mannerbund, the specific characteristics of the King of the Gods who is often associated with both wisdom and war, guest hospitality norms, shared characteristics of epic mythology, the myth of stealing mead / ambrosia. There certainly existed a PIE religion. I don't question your credentials but I also think many things deemed to be IIr innovations may not even be. IIr came through CW -> Sintashta after all and BMAC influences are overstated. For instance, Soma may have a root in this region, but the myth associated with theft of divine intoxicating drink and it's function as the mead of poetry must predate the specific IIr Soma cult. | |
| ▲ | cmrdporcupine a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Maybe tangential (and I agree with you), but “religion” is also a misleading word for many of the practices that Christianity later grouped together as “paganism.” Where these practices often differed strongly from Christianity was that they were not totalizing, overarching, mandatory systems of belief. They were more about practices embedded in daily and civic life -- sacrifices, festivals, acts of veneration, etc. -- than about belief or internal mental state (“Whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life”). They were also generally quite willing to incorporate gods, heroes, and practices from other peoples encountered along the way. IMHO, exclusive, universal, doctrinally policed religion developed partly through the interaction of monotheistic traditions with imperial states, which had strong reasons to standardize institutions and identities; although neither Rome nor the caliphates ever achieved simple religious homogeneity. (And yeah, clearly there's a lot of commonality between many of the cultures derived from early Indo-European migration etc but also incredible diversity and very clear adaptations to wherever they ended up and who they ended up co-existing with) | | |
| ▲ | OutOfHere 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | It is paganism that I consider to be the derogatory and misleading word. Calling it paganism was and is a vile attempt to suppress the local religions, whether you consider them derived from PIE or not. Yes, they were not not overarching, mandatory systems of belief, but is not an excuse to dismiss them as religions. The religions were real. After all, we see the same continuing religious beliefs that you noted (sacrifices, festivals, veneration, etc.) in Hinduism, which traces a direct chain to the PIE religion. |
| |
| ▲ | OutOfHere a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | The "PIE religion" is the name scholars give to the religious pool that is partially reconstructed from the overlapping evidence (poetry+rituals+myth+gods+vocabulary) of its descendants. Each descendant subregion of PIE of course imposed its own religious beliefs and local gods. There is no surprise there. The key thread of derivative localized polytheism, often rooted in the same nature-based phenomenon, however persisted across the regions. Refer to the sibling comment by drivers99. Sky god is not a vague lexeme; it is a critical rooting evidence. You're fooling no one by attempting to cover it up. A shallow dismissal of valid evidence is an attribute of a conman. | | |
| ▲ | TFNA a day ago | parent [-] | | I am an actual Indo-Europeanist and currently employed in the field. Please stop trying to oversell this. The sibling comment is referring to the aforementioned vague lexemes, too vague for much reconstruction of anything meriting being called a common IE religion. Earlier work by scholars like Dumézil, which are common to pop-sci shit and still hang on here and there on Wikipedia, are generally discussed within the field now as cautionary tales. No one has any problem with reconstructing some branch-level stuff like Italic or Indo-Iranian. But projecting it back to even Nuclear/Core Indo-European, let alone Proto-Indo-European, is too fraught with problems. | | |
| ▲ | muststopmyths a day ago | parent [-] | | would you recommend a more recent book comparable to "Empires of the Word" by Nicholas Ostler on the subject of languages ? I am really enjoying the book, but it's over 20 years old at this point. I wonder how much of the information is out of date now. | | |
| ▲ | TFNA a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't recommend any books written for the general public. Too full of compromises, oversimplifications, and obsolete ideas. I can only recommend learning the field through the same course materials used in training the next generation of researchers. Of course, this is a very large time commitment. | | |
| ▲ | cmrdporcupine a day ago | parent [-] | | Honestly David Anthony's book ("Horse Wheel Language") is pretty good, no? Maybe a bit dry for "general public"? Also a bit old at this point? |
| |
| ▲ | OutOfHere a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | stereolambda a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Just out of sympathy cause I think there's a legitimate root to the religious point. Your epistemology comes across as extremely weak, with believing LLMs over scholars, and discriminating which scholars are legitimate based on agreeing with your beliefs. It would pay to at least familiarize yourself with the arguments of the other side, suspending in your mind the whole partisan angle. Honestly I don't think anyone actually powerful nowadays cares one bit about "PIE" religions. What could be happening is some revisionism relying on conveniently selective standards of rigor to bury other scholars. As this is a field famously relying on unclear and very messily transmitted evidence; and these kinds of problems are a very weak point of the humanities overall. But I don't follow this debate at all, so don't have a formed opinion. | | |
| ▲ | OutOfHere a day ago | parent [-] | | > Honestly I don't think anyone actually powerful nowadays cares one bit about "PIE" religions. You obviously don't care about it, and I can see why any scholar of a Semite-based religion would want to suppress the connection, just as a Nazi would want to suppress the holocaust. To me it's a very big deal that the entirety of the PIE derivative religions were destroyed in Europe by the Semitic religious wave. I consider it nothing less than a major cultural massacre. What is weak to you is a big deal to someone else. There is no "other side" here. The word derivations and the cultural commonalities speak for themselves. For the first time in history, we have an intelligence that knows all notable modern and historical languages. It knows their words and antecedents. This is more significant than any scholar. |
| |
| ▲ | muststopmyths a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | The book I mentioned is about languages and their spread through history, not religion. | | |
| ▲ | OutOfHere a day ago | parent [-] | | Even wrt languages, for the first time in history, we have an intelligence that knows all notable modern and historical languages. It knows their words and antecedents. This is more significant than any scholar. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | euroderf a day ago | parent [-] | | And then there is Tuesday, for the forgotten god. | | |
| ▲ | OutOfHere a day ago | parent [-] | | Many of the days of the week are named after ancient nature gods, many of which trace to PIE: PIE sóh₂wl̥ (“sun”)
→ Proto-Germanic sunnǭ (“sun”)
→ Old English sunne (“sun”)
→ Old English Sunnandæg (“Sun's day”)
→ Middle English Sonday / Sunday
→ Sunday PIE mḗh₁n̥s (“moon; month”)
→ Proto-Germanic mēnô (“moon”)
→ Old English mōna (“moon”)
→ Old English Mōnandæg (“Moon's day”)
→ Middle English Monenday / Monday
→ Monday PIE deywós
→ Sanskrit deva, “god”
→ Latin deus, “god”
→ Old Norse Týr, the god
→ Old English Tīw
→ Tīwesdæg (“Tiw's day”)
→ Tuesday PIE dyew- (“bright sky; daylight”)
→ deywós (“celestial one; god”)
→ Proto-Germanic Tīwaz
→ Old English Tīw
→ Tīwesdæg
→ Tuesday The reconstruction exists for the remaining days too, but is more uncertain when tracing it to PIE: PIE weh₂t- / related roots concerning excitement or inspiration
→ Proto-Germanic *Wōðanaz
→ Old English Wōden
→ Wōdnesdæg (“Woden's day”)
→ Wednesday PIE (s)tenh₂- (“thunder”) (reconstruction/derivation has some uncertainty)
→ Proto-Germanic þunraz (“thunder”; the god Thunder/Thor)
→ Old English Þunor
→ Þunresdæg (“Þunor's day”)
→ Thursday PIE prih₁- / preyH- (“to love; be dear”)
→ Proto-Germanic Frijjō (the goddess Frigg, approximately “beloved/dear one”)
→ Old English Frīg
→ Old English Frīgedæg (“Frīg's day”)
→ Middle English Fridai / Friday
→ Friday Saturday is not known to trace to PIE: Latin Saturnus
→ Old English Sætern(es)dæg (“Saturn's day”)
→ Saturday |
|
|