ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

Institute of Lithuanian Culture Research

Research fields: ancient Baltic religion and mythology, source studies; comparative grammar and etymology of Baltic and other Indo-European languages.

ORIGIN OF BALTIC MYTHONYMS: WEST BALT. PARGRUBI(J)US (G[R]UBRIUM, PERGRUBRIUS, ETC.); LITH. MASELIS

Origin of the Baltic Mythonyms: West Balt. Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Perg rubrius, etc.), Lith. maselis

A B S T R A C T

The article presents a factual and etymological analysis of the mythologemes Pargrubij (A, B), Pargrubius (B, C), mentioned in the early sixteenth-century source on West Baltic religion and culture, The Sudovian Book, and their variants (Grubrium [A], Gubrium [C], Perg rubrius [D, ε], etc.), as well as the designation maselis (LKŽe) for a Lithuanian Shrovetide character.

The article briefly reviews the features of the factual account in the West Baltic cultural source The Sudovian Book and the phenomenon of Azazel (the meaning of the Shrovetide goat mask).

K E Y W O R D S: mythonym; theonym; Semitism; The Sudovian Book; Pargrubij, Pargrubius, Perg rubrius, Grubrium; maselis.

A N N O T A T I O N

The article deals with the etymological analysis of the West Baltic mythologeme Pargrubij (A, B) / Pargrubius (B, C), including its alternative forms Grubrium (A), Gubrium (C), Perg rubrius (D, ε), etc., and Lithuanian mythonym maselis ‘a man dressed in the clothes of Shrovetide mummers.’

It also presents a short review of the realia concerning “The Yatvigian book” and introduces the so called Phenomenon of Azazel (name of the place or the “power” to which one

Straipsniai / Articles

9

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

of the goats in the Temple service of the Day of Atonement has to be sent), i.e. a scapegoat icon reflected in the data collected in the Dictionary of Lithuanian Language, which is also traced in Shrovetide rites that lasted three day before the Lenten fast which begins on Ash Wednesday (Shrove Tuesday in Lithuania).

K E Y W O R D S: mythonym, theonym; Hebraism; “The Yatvigian book”; Pargrubij, Pargrubius, Pergrubrius, Grubrium; maselis.

0. INTRODUCTION. THE FACTOGRAPHIC FEATURES OF THE SŪDUVIŲ KNYGELĖ. THE AZAZEL PHENOMENON (THE MEANING OF THE SHROVE TUESDAY MUMMER’S MASK)

The information presented in the Sūduvių knygelė¹ (on this work and the literature, see Kregždys 2009 for a fuller discussion), one of the most significant sources on West Baltic culture (in terms of the authenticity of its factual material), is of particular² importance, since many later researchers of Baltic religion and mythology (and often creators, that is, representatives of armchair mythology) relied on retellings of this written monument, citing one another’s interpretations (for example, according to Ingė Lukšaitė, the information about the deity under discussion was provided by Matas Praetorius, “drawing on the knowledge of Johann Meletius [Malecki] and Martin Murinius” [MP I 645]). Thus, the only reliable source on which one can base a reconstruction of the authentic graphemic structure, or the etymological development, of the West Baltic Pargrubi(j)us, the meaning of the mythonym (for a fuller discussion of the importance of determining the semantic value of a reconstructed word, see Bréal 1964: 48–56; Mailhammer 2013: 5–6, 2013a: 20, 23, 25, 27), and its functions is the Sūduvių knygelė.

¹ Or, The sacrifice of a billy goat by the unbelieving Sudovians, together with all the rites they performed (Der ungläubigen Sudauen ihrer bockheiligung mit sambt andern Ceremonien, so sie tzu brauchen gepflegeth), was written around 1520–1530. The place where the anonymous work in German was written and its precise date of composition are also unknown (BRMŠ II 123).

² It is regrettable that even today there are still young researchers who treat the factual material in written sources with extreme carelessness; compare, for example, Vytautas Rinkevičius’s (2015: 21) naive claim that “Jerome Malecki arranged the publication of the Booklet and wrote its preface (though not necessarily the text of the booklet itself).” To avoid such anachronistic claims, it should be emphasized that already at the beginning of the twentieth century Wilhelm Mannhardt (1936: 306) demonstrated convincingly, and Ingė Lukšaitė (BRMŠ II 125) subsequently substantiated once again, drawing on the principles of textual analysis, the claim that Jerome Malecki merely published a work by an unknown author that had until then circulated in several copies (for more, see Kregždys 2009: 179–180).

10

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Baltų mitonimų kilmė: vak. bl. Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius ir kt.); lie. maselis

Attention should also be drawn to a particularly important factographic feature of this source—the criterion for assessing the reliability of its information, determined on the basis of a temporal perspective: among the 10 known (though unfortunately not all surviving) copies (designated by the capital letters A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K), the secondary variant ε of copy E, and 5 reprints (a, b, c, d, e), the oldest manuscript witnesses A, B, and C are considered reliable:

1) A, or fol. 736 of I K^a; the text runs from fol. 724^a to 738—the most valuable copy³, transcribed by a professional copyist (see also Kregždys 2009: 176);

2) B, or fol. 724 of I E 36^a, transcribed by a professional copyist⁴;

3) C, or Cod. Guelf. 14. 11 Aug. 4 (leaves: fols. 1–17)⁵, is of considerably poorer quality: it contains numerous lacunae, and some pages are missing altogether. According to Wilhelm Mannhardt (1936: 238–239), its value is three quarters lower than that of versions A and B (see also note 6).

The other copies, or those of a later recension—*R (D, E, F, G)⁶, J, and K, a hybrid variant of the oldest group and these groups—are in better physical condition (though not all have survived [see Kregždys 2009: 176–177]), but are less reliable in terms of their factual content, owing to possible innovations introduced by the mythology researchers who transcribed them and interpreted the material in their own way⁷ (for more, see Kregždys 2009: 176–183).

Thus, on the basis of the criterion of the reliability of the information provided by the copies, the most valuable, or authentic, factual material is that of copies A, B, and C. These should presumably be relied on when reconstructing the formal proto-form of the West Baltic Pargrubi(j)us (or determining the etymology of the theonym), as well as the deity’s functions and its possible hierarchical position within the West Baltic pantheon.

³ The folio was numbered by Kaspar Hennenberger. Its original title is Der ungläubigern/Sudauen ihrer bock/heiligung mit sambt/andern Ceremonien/so sie tzu brauchen gepflegen; [fol. 725^a]: Der Sudauenn/wourschaity, welcher/Ihren Bock heiliget. Until World War II, it was kept in the Gdańsk City Library, donated by the landowner Gralath. The most valuable copy A is currently held by LMAGBR (Ms. 1277; microfilm no. 716).

⁴ Der ungläubigen Su/dauen ihrer Bockheili/gung mit sampt an/dern Ceremonien so / sie tzu brauchen / Pflegenn; (fol. 725) Der Sndauen wöursch/kaity, welcher ihren Bock heiligett. This copy was kept in the Gdańsk City Library; it is now held by LMAGBR (Ms. 1271; microfilm no. 711).

⁵ Der Sudawen Bockheyligung und ander Ceremonien derselbenn, kept in the library of Duke Augustus of Wolfenbüttel, Germany, in the “manuscripta Augustea” collection.

⁶ *The designation R is used for manuscript variants from a later period. According to W. Mannhardt (1936: 239–240), these copies are editorially comparable to copy C, since, like the latter, they lack the introduction and some sections.

⁷ For example, in transcription K, or folio I E 20 (Pruische Chronica), now LMAGBR (Ms. 1279; no mkrf.), the author greatly expands some episodes, reinterpreting in his own way information that was already known. The enumeration of the gods’ names and functions in it is particularly complicated because of the comparison of several manuscripts and the attempt to present a single version.

Straipsniai / Articles

11

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

Another problem discussed in this article is the origin of the Lithuanian mythonym maselis ‘a person dressed up in the customs of Užgavėnės’ (LKŽe), which is connected with the phenomenon of Azazel (see below), since during this festival, as winter and its attendants were driven out of the homestead, people hoped to rid themselves of every possible evil, attributing its origin not to their own actions (i.e., to internal causation), but to external factors (i.e., the influence of foreigners); that is, manifestations of pharmakos (Greek φαρμακός), or scapegoat (also called Azazel⁸), rituals may be discerned⁹.

In analyzing the origin of the Lithuanian mythonym maselis, it must be emphasized that “Although dressing up is not mentioned in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century writings, some documents from that period contain a description of a demon (emphasis mine – R. K.) very close to the figure of the Užgavėnės masquerader” (Skrodenis 2009: 11). Thus, it may cautiously be surmised that the pharmakos phenomenon (see note 8) gave rise to pejorative connotations (and, apparently, functions) of Užgavėnės

⁸ The origin of the name Azazel (and its variants: Hazazel, Azael, Azozel), the leader of one of the 200 fallen angels, i.e. Biblical Hebrew עזאזל, mentioned in the First Book of Enoch, or the Ethiopian Book of Enoch (En I 12–36 [one of the most important works devoted to the exegesis of the Apocalypse, dated to the Second Temple period (see EJ VI 442–443, XIX 608 ff.)]), has not yet been established. The mythonym is therefore classified as an appellative; compare the proposed etymologies of the mythologeme: 1. ‘firm + strong’; 2. ‘the goat went out’; 3. ‘removal’; 4. ‘goat + God’ (for more detail see Klein 1987: 468; Штейнбергъ 1878: 346]). He desired the daughters of men (En I 6.4), taught men the art of war and women to adorn themselves (En I 8.1–2). The pharmakos function (for more detail see Harrison 1913: 45; Barton 1918: 186) is mentioned in rabbinic literature, the Bible in Aramaic, and the Book of Leviticus (16.8–10, 21 [see Davidson 1971: 63; EJ II 763]).

⁹ Such practices were also characteristic of Indo-Europeans; for example, the Hellenes observed this tradition (for more detail see Harrison 1913: 44–45; Burkert 1977: 64–66; Cameron 2004: 181; Dougherty 2006: 20; Graf 2009: 76, 88; see also EJ II 763), as did the Romans (Dunstan 2011: 540; Kuiper 2011: 162; Malitz 2005: 69; see also Adkins, Adkins 2004: 325), among others. Later, this phenomenon was invoked to justify the extermination of the Jewish people (compare, for example, their expulsion from Spain [1492 (Beker 2008: 90)], from Prague [1400], from Mainz [1420, 1438, 1462], and from other cities and states [see EJ VII 523]; pogroms in the Russian Empire and the Holocaust).

12

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Baltų mitonimų kilmė: vak. bl. Pargrub(i)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius ir kt.); lie. maselis

of the character – (?) a Jew¹⁰, an etiology¹¹ determined by the profanation of the beliefs held by adherents of this religion¹².

¹⁰ Stasio Skrodenio (2009: 37) ir Arūno Vaicekausko (2009: 92) teigimu, jie buvę vieni pagrindinių Užgavėnių persirengėlių, ypač Žemaitijoje. Plg. išskirtinį semitų tautybės žmonių demonizavimą Velykų šventės metu taip pat Žemaitijoje (plačiau žr. Skrodenis 2009: 11–12, 42), kuris, tenka apgailestauti, iki šiol puoselėjamas Pievėnuose (Mažeikių r.). Saugodami kryžių Nukryžiuotojo Jėzaus bažnyčioje, šio kaimo gyventojai, persirengę kariais ir „žydais“ / „velykžydžiais“, pastaruosius stengiasi nuvyti nuo sakraliojo objekto, kad jo nepagobtų ir nesutrūkdy­tų krikščionių dievo prisikėlimo. Patys to nesuvokdami, minėtos šventės dalyviai tęsia viduramžiais atsiradusią krikščionių kraujo difamacijos (judėjų religijos aspektu) antisemitinę tradiciją (žr. 12 išn.).

¹¹ Some researchers of the Užgavėnės festival and its masks, apparently seeking to justify the caricatured or denigrating image of foreign characters, put forward contradictory claims that imply clear fantasies; compare: “<...> the masks of ‘foreigners’ did not signify national affiliation, but were merely a means of highlighting the opposition between foreign and native. In their origins, the ‘Jewish’ <...> masks did not represent any national character; rather, their original semantics contained a mythical image associated with earthly or underworld deities—the spirits of ancestors, deities protecting homes or fields” (Skrodenis 2009: 39) // “<...> the characters of the Jew, the Gypsy, and the beggar were given appearances reflecting their ethnic or occupational characteristics” (Vaicekauskas 2009: 69). The weak basis of such claims can be argued from the conduct of participants in the Užgavėnės festival—driving winter and its attendants (the masqueraders) out, that is, wishing to rid themselves of evil (the Azazel phenomenon). There is no doubt that the introduction of foreign characters is a late development, apparently determined by the defamatory ideology concerning the religion and culture of the Jewish people that arose in the Middle Ages (see note 12); compare the feature of the Užgavėnės Jew mask associated with the Christian blood libel: a small nail or needle fitted into the nose, with which the masqueraders painfully pricked the hands of villagers as they kissed them (Vaicekauskas 2009: 92–93).

¹² In the Middle Ages, two principal criteria (with religious motivations) were formulated that fueled hatred of Jews: 1) the accusation of killing Jesus Christ (see Beker 2008: 90); 2) the blood libel, alleging that Christian blood was required for two kinds of ritual: 2a) it was claimed that before Pesach (the Jewish Passover, i.e. Biblical Hebrew pēsah, i.e. פֶּסַח ‘spring festival, celebrated on the 15th–21st of the month of Nisan [i.e. March 10–April 11], commemorating the Jews’ liberation from slavery in Egypt; the sacrificial animal for Pesach [usually a lamb, compare Biblical Hebrew pēsahim, i.e. פְּסָחִים ‘Pesach lambs; the third tractate of the Mishnah’ (Brown, Driver, Briggs 2000: 1980; see also EJ XVI 5–6), etc.’ (Brown, Driver, Briggs ibid.; see also EJ XV 678–683)]) they abducted and killed a Christian child (an obvious false allusion to the blood of the Pesach lamb sacrificed by Jews [compare Biblical Hebrew dām, i.e. דָּם ‘blood of the Pesach lamb’ (Brown, Driver, Briggs 2000: 535–538)], collected in a special vessel/cup during the sacrifice; compare Biblical Hebrew saf, i.e. סַף ‘bowl, cup’ [see Brown, Driver, Briggs 2000: 1705–1706]), whose blood they poured into the dough for ritual bread (compare Lithuanian noun mācas 2 [usually plural] ‘a thin, unleavened wafer made of wheat flour for Passover [in Jewish religious life]’ [LKŽė] < Yiddish mace, i.e. מַצָּה ‘a flatbread made from unleavened dough, baked from wheat, barley, spelt, rye, or oat flour; the only kind of bread eaten during Pesach’ ← Biblical Hebrew maccāh, i.e. מַצָּה ‘unleavened bread or cake’ [Weinreich 1977: 199; Brown, Driver, Briggs 2000: 1432; Klein 1987: 374; Wolf 1998: 62; see also Velikovsky 1952: 42; EJ XIII 689–690]); 2b) they were also accused of soaking the holy cross, the Communion host, and images of Christian saints in a liquid and stabbing them with nails until they began to bleed (see Anglickienė 2004: 45; see also note 10).

Straipsniai / Articles

13

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

1. EV. PRUSSIAN. PARGRUBI(J)US (G[R]UBRIUM, PERGRUBRIUS, ETC.) ETYMOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT

1A. FORMAL ANALYSIS OF THE MYTHONYM

On the basis of the criterion of reliability of the data presented in The Sudovian Book (see Section 0), it is necessary to conduct a formal (or, more precisely, graphemic) analysis of the variants of the theonym, i.e. to identify the oldest, or most authentic, structural form of the mythonym reflected in transcriptions A, B, and C. Discrepancies among the forms of the mythonym presented in later manuscript versions of the work are important for determining characteristic changes in the word and the sequences of their regular patterns. Altogether, 17 forms of the theonym are mentioned in this source (in the transcriptions and reprints), 3 of them being hypocoristics (see table)¹³.

Form of the mythonym

Transcription / reprint variant

Pagination of W. Mannhardt’s work / author(s) of the transcription(s)

Pargrubij

A, B

247 / professional copyist

Pargrubius

B, C

247 / professional copyist (A, B), unknown (C)

Grubrium

A¹³

249 / professional copyist

Gubrium

C

249 / unknown

Pergrubrius

D, ε

246 / Johannes Freiberg (D), unknown (ε)

Pergrubri

D, E, ε

247 / Johannes Freiberg (D), Christophas Janas von Weissenfelis (E), unknown (ε)

Pergrubrium

*R, E, J, a

247, 249 / Christophas Janas von Weissenfelis (E), Matthaejus Waisselis (J)

Pergrubriūs

E

246 / Christophas Janas von Weissenfelis

Pergrubij

F

247 / Hansas von Kreytzenas

Pergrubium

F

249 / Hansas von Kreytzenas

Pergrubius

F, G, a, b, c, d

246, 247 / Hansas von Kreytzenas (F), Lukas Davidas (G)

Pergubri

J

247 / Matthaejus Waisselis

¹³Vyacheslav Ivanov and Vladimir Toporov (MHM II 302), for some reason, instead of the form Grubrium, give a form of their own invention, ‡ Grubrius, claiming that it is attested in late written sources (without specifying which), although this form is mentioned neither in transcripts and reprints of the Sudovian Booklet nor in the works of later authors (see below).

14

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Baltų mitonimų kilmė: vak. bl. Pargrub(i)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius ir kt.); lie. maselis

Mythonym form | Transcript / reprint variant | Pagination in W. Mannhardt’s work / author(s) of transcript(s) Pergubrium J 247, 249 / Matthaejus Waisselis Pergribrius J 246 / Matthaejus Waisselis Pergubrius K 246 / unknown Guberium K 249 / unknown Pergrubrij a, b, c, d 247

Based on the obvious features of graphemic variation in the mythonym under discussion (comparing only structurally distinct forms in the same manuscript [see table]), one can distinguish exogenous and endogenous types of structural change (it should be emphasized that their etiology may be either natural, i.e. presumed by language users / adherents of the old religion, or late, attributable to the lapsus calami type, i.e. copying errors; their precise determination is apparently impossible [see Scheme 1]):

I. exogenous changes: I.1. aphesis (which gave rise to hypocoristics): a) Grubrium A (↔ Pargrubij A) ← *Par-grubius (for sonant epenthesis, see type II.3.1); b) Gubrium C (↔ Parogrubius C) ← *Grubium ← *Par-grubius (for sonant metathesis, see type II.1); c) Guberium K (↔ Pergubrius K [for sonant metathesis, see type II.1]) ← *Par-grubius (for epenthesis, see type II.3.1) ← *Pargrubi/īs (cf. Pargrubij A, B / Pargrubius B, C); II. endogenous changes: II.1. long-distance sonant metathesis: Gubrium C (← *Par-grubium [see type I.1]) ↔ Pargrubius C ← *Pargrubi/īs (cf. Pargrubij A, B / Pargrubius B, C); II.2. changes induced by long-distance assimilation: Pergribrius J (← *Pergr-u-br-i-us [regressive]) ↔ Pergubrium J; II.3. irregular changes: II.3.1. epenthesis of parasitic (i.e. non-etymological) sounds: a) Guberium K ↔ Pergubrius K; b) Grubrium A (↔ Pargrubij A) ← *Pargrubius ← *Pargrubi/īs; II.3.2. sound absorption: Pergubri / Pergubrium J (↔ Pergubrium J) ← *Pergru-brius (cf. Pergribrius J [for long-distance assimilation, see type II.2]) ← *Pargrubius (cf. Pargrubius B, C [for sonant epenthesis, see type II.3.1]) ← *Pargrubi/īs; II.3.3. changes induced by analogy: Pergubrius D, ε / Pergubriūs E / Pergrubri D, E, ε / Pergubrium *R, E, J, a / Pargrubij F / Pergubrium F / Pergubrius F, G, a, b, c, d / Pergubri J / Pergubrium J, Pergribrius J, Pergubrius K, Pergrubrij a, b, c, d ↔ Pargrubij A, B / Pargrubius B, C ← *Pargrubi/īs – with the first constituent

Straipsniai / Articles

15

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

¹ SCHEME. West Baltic Pargrubi(i)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius, etc.): systematic dissemination of graphemic variation

the root-vowel alternation –a- > –e- apparently by analogy with Old Prussian percunis ‘thunder’¹⁴ E 50 (for this lexeme, see PEŽ III 265–266).

On the basis of the established patterns of change in the mythonym, it can cautiously be stated that all the forms discussed presuppose the proto-form *Pargrubī/is:

Later authors (including the copyists of the *R variants of the Sudovian Book [see table]) give forms of the mythonym that they interpret in their own way (sometimes changing their morphology and adapting the words to the declensional system of the language they used): Jonas Maleckis-Sandeckis gives the form Pergrubrio (dat. sg. [BRMŠ II 203]), Jonas Bretkūnas – Pergrubrius (nom. sg. [BRMŠ II 307]), Aleksandras Guagninis – Pergrubiusa (gen. sg.), Pergrubi (nom. sg.), Pergrubios, Pergrubiusie (voc. sg. [BRMŠ II 482]), Motiejus Strijkovskis – Pergrubius (nom. sg.), Pergrubiusa (gen. sg.), Pergrubios, Pergrubiusie (voc. sg. [BRMŠ II 512, 515–516]), Jonas Lasickis Pergrubrio (dat. sg.), Pergrubrij (gen. sg.), Pergrubrium (acc. sg. [BRMŠ II 586]),

¹⁴ In the hybrid K copy of the Sudovian Book, it is emphasized that Pergrubrium was the greatest and most powerful god, cf. “den grosten vnd mechtigsten got” (BRMŠ II 129, 144; see also subsection 1c).

16

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Origins of Baltic mythonyms: West Baltic Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius, etc.); Lithuanian maselis

Wolfgang Christophor Nettelhorst – Pergubrio (abl. sg. [BRMŠ III 72]), Matas Pretorijus – Pergubrius (nom. sg.), Pergubrio (dat. sg.), Pergubrii (gen. sg.), Pergrubrius (nom. sg.), Pergubrio (dat. sg.), Pergubio (dat. sg.), Pergubrius (nom. sg.), Pergibrius, Pergubrii (gen. sg.), Perguberis (nom. sg. [name of a festival]) (BRMŠ III 104, 121, 134, 141, 142, 147, 179, 183, 197), Laurencijus Bojeris – Pergrubos (acc. pl. [BRMŠ III 456]), Gothardas Fridrichas Stenderis – Pergruhbis (nom. sg. [BRMŠ IV 199]). Teodoras Narbutas (1835: 58–61) records the names of female deities Grubite / Pergrubie.

1B. WEST BALTIC PARGRUBI(J)US (G[R]UBRIUM, PERGRUBRIUS, ETC.): ACCOUNT OF ITS ORIGIN

Rimantas Balsys (2006: 57–60) labai išsamiai išvardija visus ligšiolinius mėginimus atskleisti aptariamos vakarų baltų dievybės vardo kilmę:

a) M. Pretorijus derives the form Pergubrius from: a1) the verb Lithuanian ‡ paguberu¹⁵ (cf. “Wieszpatie, Dieve, pagu-/beru dabar lauka mana etc. pristok mus, i. e. Herr Gott, jetzt he-/be ich an oder wil {be}arbeiten meinen Acker” / “Lord God, I now begin or intend to work my field” [MP III 500–501; see also BRMŠ III 183, 289]); a2) the “desiderative verb” Per gū berū (cf. “perguberu dirwą” / “Ich will jetzo den Acker durcharbei-/ten lassen” – “I want to have the field thoroughly worked now”; “pergubyk tą žemę” i. e. “Arbeit mir die Erde gutt durch” – “work, cultivate that land well for me”; “pergubyk, iszgubyk / man gerrai”, “Knete ihn woll durch” – “knead it well” (MP III 264–265; see also BRMŠ III 141, 256);

b) Simonas Daukantas (1993: 78) mitonimą interpretuoja kaip verb. lie. perėti ir sub. lie. grūdas dūrinį;

c) T. Narbutas (1835: 58), priskyręs sūduvių dievą lietuvių dievėms (žr. 1a poskyrį), nurodo savo paties sukurtą prolytę ‡ Grubios „ogrod kwiatowy i owocowy“;

d) Algirdas Julius Greimas (1990: 454–455), besiremiantis Mikalojus Akelaičio spėjimu apie galimą mitonimo sąsają su verb. lie. grubtie ‘grubti’ (beje, pastarojo autoriaus kažkodėl nemini), teigia, kad dievybės vardą reikia kildinti iš sub. lie. grubas ‘paprasčiausias gruodas, nuo šalčio sukietėjusi žemės luoba, susidariusi sušalusio vandens – pašalo – dėka’;

¹⁵ According to I. Lukšaitė (MP I 645), M. Pretorijus did not provide a Lithuanian word that could have given rise to the mythonym Pergubrius.

Straipsniai / Articles

17

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

e) Simonas Stanevičius (1967: 257), bene vienintelis senosios kartos tyrėjų, pamėgino ieškoti žodžio kilmės prado, lygindamas prūsų sintagmą pergubuns wirst ‘turi ateiti, ateis’.

In addition to the descriptions of the origin of this mythonym listed by R. Balsys (ibid.), mention should also be made of the conjecture by V. Ivanov and V. Toporov (MC 428), who, employing principles of folk etymology (i.e., relying on word resemblance rather than linguistic analysis), suggest linking the mythonym under discussion with the supposedly underlying partitive homophones noun Lith. grùblas ‘a tangle; unevenness, roughness, coarseness; a knobby protuberance’ (LKŽe), adjective Lith. grubùs ‘stiffened, rigid; uneven, bumpy (usually of a road); coarse, rough; impolite, boorish, harsh’, grublùs ‘rough, uneven’ (LKŽe).

It should be emphasized that all these attempts to uncover the origin of the theonym Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius and others) are highly implausible (some of them—particularly the early ones—are fanciful, since they are argued on the basis of words invented by the authors themselves [M. Pretorius, T. Narbutas]), because the protoform is reconstructed on the basis not of West Baltic evidence (except for S. Stanevičius’s conjecture, which, unfortunately, is unsupported by work or etymological argument [see above]), but of supposedly cognate East Baltic forms (R. Balsys [2006: 58] also drew attention to this).

The latest attempt to determine the etymological development of the mythonym Pargrubij, whose origin has until now been entirely unclear (see Blažek, Bětáková 2012: 80, 2014: 345–356), is argued on the basis of Prussian-language evidence. Unfortunately, it is entirely unsuccessful, since the authors of the hypothesis incorrectly interpret dialectal features characteristic of the Sambian¹⁶, or Pogesanians’, dialect: “The root *grub- might come from the Baltic root *grāb- <...>“ (Blažek, Bětáková 2014: 346).

In this dialectal zone of Prussian, the change Baltic *ā > ū occurs only after labial and velar consonants (Būga III 106; Mažiulis 2004: 17–18), not after sonorants (i.e., r, l, m, n). Furthermore, the authors of the hypothesis (Blažek, Bětáková ibid.) misinterpret the structural features of the Prussian word on which they base their proposed new etymological sequence for the lexeme: they reconstruct a root with long vocalism, West Baltic *grāb- ‘hornbeam’, although Pr. wosigrabis ‘spindle tree’ E 611 reflects

¹⁶ In 1257 the Teutonic Knights subjugated Sambia, to which (its northwestern part), after suppressing the Great Prussian Uprising, they relocated 1,600 Sudovians in 1283 from Sudovia, which had been devastated with particular brutality. During the second stage of the Sudovians’ relocation, a further 1,500 people were transferred to the area that from then on came to be called the “Sudovian Corner” (Mažiulis 1966: 23; MP I 683; Dini 2000: 217), where the Yotvingians lived until the very end of the 16th century (Brückner 1904: 29) (Dusburbietis 2005: 275; see also Kregždys 2009: 184). It is thought that the creation of the Sudovian Book should be associated with the Christianization of pagan Sambia, renowned for its relics of the old faith (Stanevičius 1967: 604), since Erasmus Stella (2004: 58) already stated in his work On the Antiquities of Prussia (1518) that the Sudovians were exceptionally religious. It is supposed that representatives of this Baltic tribe still practiced the old Baltic religion at the beginning of the 16th century (BRMŠ II 33; Stanevičius 1967: 604; see also Kregždys 2009: 181, 183).

18

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Baltų mitonimų kilmė: vak. bl. Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius ir kt.); lie. maselis

short vowel in the root of the second component of the compound, –ā–, i.e., West Baltic *grābas ‘hornbeam’ (PEŽ IV 265). For these reasons, the further connection proposed by the authors of the hypothesis between the Prussian mythologeme and the Italic theonym *Grābobius is impossible.¹⁷

On the basis of the regularities of structural changes in the mythonym established in subsection 1a, the criteria for assessing the reliability of the factual material in manuscript variants of the Sudovian Book (see subsection 0), the etiological development of the deity’s function, and the possible mythological and religious congruence of Indo-European peoples (see subsection 1c), it may cautiously be conjectured that the reconstructed form West Baltic *Pargrubi/īs ‘a god who drives away winter, makes leaves and grass grow, and brings a good harvest’ (for the meaning, see subsection 1c) reflects a tatpurusa-type compound, presupposing an epithet of one of the principal Baltic gods—Perkūnas:

West Baltic *Pargrubi/īs ‘a god who drives away winter, makes leaves and grass grow, and brings a good harvest’ ← West Baltic *Gar-brubi/īs (with metathesis of the initial g- / b- of the first two components¹⁸, prompted by unstable¹⁹ phonetic realization; compare Prussian personal name Bogatini 1239 ‘a very influential Warmian family; generatio valde potens in Warmia’ → Prussian personal name

¹⁷ Otherwise, the Elbing Vocabulary would have recorded the form Pr. ‡ wosi-gr-o-bis / ‡ wosi-gr-oa-bis (see PEŽ I 411–412), since in this source of the Pomesanian dialect, Baltic *ā is represented by the grapheme o or oa (Mažiulis 2004: 17).

¹⁸ This kind of change (characteristic of East as well as West Balts; compare [a] theonym Lith. Atlaibos ← *lai-ta-bas [a type involving metathesis of the first two components] < noun Lith. laitas ‘a tamped barn or cottage floor, a base; the bottom of an oven, a base, etc.’ + noun Lith. lābas ‘well-being, benefit; goodness; wealth, treasure, good things, etc.’ ⇒ [a tatpurusa compound] *Laitalabas/īs ‘the wealth of the laitas ↔ a deity of grain poured onto a tamped floor [apparently, of a threshing barn] ↔ threshing-barn deity’ [see Kregždys 2011: 109–111 for further discussion]; [b] theonym Lith. Chaurirari ‘god of horses’ ← *Kauriraris ‘the same’ ← nomen proprium [theonym] Lith. Kaukarus 598₁₂ [Kaukarius] ‘god of mountains; Berg Gott’, mentioned by Jakob Brodowski [JBŽ II 175, III 364; see Kregždys 2010: 64–65 for further discussion], etc.), apparently may also have been caused by the phenomenon of taboo; compare theonym Lith. Jagaubis ‘Vulcanus; Ugnis szwęnta; Feuer-Gott’ (mentioned in Jakob Brodowski’s dictionary) ← *Jaugabis ‘the same’ ← Gabājūjis ‘god of the granary, household spirit, granary guardian’ (Mierzyński 1900: 51; Būga I 210–211; LKŽe; see also Kregždys 2012: 108 on this deity) // Old Celtic Tanaro ‘deity of lightning; Jupiter tonans’ ↔ Gaulish Taranis ‘the same’ (Delamarre 2003: 290; Matasović 2009: 384; see also Калыгин 2006: 143–144).

¹⁹ It may have been prompted by the structural features of the mythonym, i.e., individual sonorants and/or their clusters. Metathesis caused by them is characteristic not only of Baltic (compare Prussian personal names Perbande 1370 ↔ Prebande 1393 [Trautmann 1974: 76; for place-name examples of similar changes, see Gerullis 1922: 224; Przybytek 1993: 197, 255; Blažienė 2005: 17, 356]; see also SEJL 196, 206, 218, 223, 247, 360, 463, 501, 507, 517, 535, etc.), but also of other Indo-European languages (see Gamkrelidze, Ivanov I 96, 128, 207, 816), for example Italic (see Vaan de 2010: 63, 76, 139, 407, 497).

The possibility of sporadic change should not be ruled out either (compare dialectal Lith. limiņš ‘a stick for turning millstones’ [DvŽ I 363] ← Lith. mi-liņš ‘a small stick for turning a hand mill’ [LKŽe]); compare the Lithuanian hydronym Metelỹs (Seirijai–Lazdijai District), which to this day is presumably wrongly derived from the Lithuanian verb mėsti ‘to throw far, upward, downward; to throw something at a target; to throw something far in a competition; to remove, discard (something unnecessary or unsuitable); to lower, sink into water (a net, fishing line, anchor); to let fall from one’s hands; to unload, empty (a loaded cart), etc.’ (LKŽe), with the claim that “Metelys is ‘branched,’

Straipsniai / Articles

19

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

Gobatini ‘the same’ [SRP I 63, 680; Trautmann 1974: 19; see also Gerullis 1922: 21], further cf. Old Prussian perdwibugūsnan ‘distress’ III 55_20–21 ← Old Prussian verb *dvibugū- ‘to doubt’ ← Old Prussian *dvigubū- ‘the same’ [PEŽ III 261; see also Smoczyński 2005: 98]; 2. sporadic devoicing of *b- to > p-, cf. Old Prussian personal name Bandune → Old Prussian personal name Pandune, Old Prussian personal name Boysite 1383 → Old Prussian personal name Poysite, Old Prussian personal name Bvnse 1385 → Old Prussian personal name Pvnse, Old Prussian personal name Pandike ↔ Old Prussian personal name Bandike [Trautmann 1974: 17, 19, 21, 74], further cf. the Old Prussian of the Semba dialect poklusman ‘obediently’ III 41₁₆ ↔ Old Prussian boklusmans ‘obedient’ [PEŽ III 311–312], whose dominant status may have been determined by the mythonym’s association with Old Prussian percunis ‘thunder’ E 50 [see also note 14]) ← West Baltic *Gar-bruvi/is (with the [second] -b- changing to < -v- through regressive distant assimilation; cf. changes of different origin: Prussian place name Bawand 1283 ← Prussian place name Babant 1388, Prussian place name Curwin 1405 → Prussian place name Cur-ben [Gerullis 1922: 18, 77; for more examples, see Gerullis 1922: 220]²⁰) ← West Baltic *Gar-burvi/is (with metathesis of -ru- to < -ur-; cf. Old Prussian personal names Bruteno, Brutteno, Brude-no, Bruteni ‘brother of Videvut, chief priest of the Prussians [6th c.]’ [see BRMŠ II 47, 52–54, 56–59, 61, 64, 67, 68, 70, 75, 76; see also Kregždys 2012: 30; note 22]²¹)

¹⁹ iššimtes ežeras““ (Vanagas 1981: 212–213; dar žr. Tamulaitienė 2014: 289), nors tokį spėjimą paneigia ežero kartografinis vaizdas.

FIG. Metelys Lake cartographic projection (see https://www.google.lt/maps/place/Metelys/) A cautious hypothesis may be proposed that this hydronym is of metathetic type; cf. Lithuanian river name Temelys (Gudžiūnai – Kėdainiai district), reflecting the root of Lithuanian noun temà ‘4 ‘the dark part of the day, the state of evening or night’ (this sense of the form is used in the Šiauliai and Alytus districts [and elsewhere], i.e. near the locations of the hydronyms under discussion [LKŽė]) + suffix *-eli̯ō- (on which see Skardžius I 175–178), and presupposing the archisememe *‘dark river/lake ← a river flowing in a shady place, a lake lying in shade’, arose through alternation of the structural elements t-m- > m-t-.

²⁰ Dar plg. iki šiol neaiškios kilmės (Vanagas 1981: 55) hidr. lie. Babùlis up. (Alanta [Molėtų r.]) galimą raidą, suponuojant metatezę ir priebalsių asimiliaciją: *Ba-pu-lis ← hidr. / top. lie. Bālu-pis b., pv. (Saločiai [Pasvalio r.] – LVŽ I 351).

²¹ See also Šimėnas 1994: 18ff.; Stela 2004: 23, 87, 109, 111; Beresnevičius 1995: 77 ff., 2004: 66, 108–109, 181, 219–220, 253; Dini 2014: 280.

20

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Origins of Baltic mythonyms: West Baltic Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius and others); Lithuanian maselis

←²²? Old Prussian personal name *Burtenas/–is *one who divines, interprets mysterious signs or predicts = priest’ ← Old Prussian adjective *burtenas *‘intended for divination, of divination’ [with suffix -en- (for further discussion, see Trautmann 1974: 167–168; see also Mažiulis 2004: 27)], further cf. Old Prussian personal name Perbande 1370 ↔ Prebande 1393 [Trautmann 1974: 76; see also note 19]), cf. Prussian place names Burwitte 1292, Borowiten 1301, Borwite 1315 (~ Curonian personal name Burwe 1571 [ПЯ I 267]) (Gerullis 1922: 24) ←²³ Old Prussian garrin²⁴ ‘tree’ III 105₈ (~ Old Prussian garian ‘the same’ E 628 [PEŽ I 326–327]) + Old Prussian *bury- *‘divination, prediction; sign’ (ПЯ I 266, 267–268), which presuppose the protosememe of the form *Gar-burvi/īs *‘tree – diviner, divining tree’, reflecting one of the oldest customary and hierophoric (i.e. related to priestly activity) functions of the Indo-European thunder/lightning god: mantic practice based on the observation and interpretation of the structural elements (leaves) of the tree totem (oak [see diagram 2]) (see subsection 1c; diagram 2).

1C. FUNCTIONAL ATTRIBUTION OF WEST BALTIC PARGRUBI(J)US (G[R]UBRIUM, PERGRUBRIUS AND OTHERS) AND POSSIBLE MYTHOLOGICAL COUNTERPARTS AMONG OTHER INDO-EUROPEAN PEOPLES

The Sudovian Book mentions the principal function of the West Baltic god Pargrubi(j)us (an analysis of secondary, that is, later authors’ interpretations is hardly meaningful

²² The etymology of this mythonym (dated to the 6th century, i.e. 521 [see Beresnevičius 1995: 85]) has not yet been established, since Vytautas Mažiulis does not mention it in PEŽ, while Vladimir Toporov (ПЯ V 423) merely compares it with the name of the Prussian village Brutnino 1255, perhaps related in origin to the name of the chief priest of the Prussians. A very bold but wholly implausible account of the development of the word (ethnonym) is offered by Zenonas Ivinskis (LE XXIV 170). Marta Eva Běťáková and Václav Blažek later reinterpreted it (2012: 49), reconstructing *Prutenis / *Prutenas and the eponymous place name *Prutenia ‘Prussia’. This conjecture would merit consideration if its authors had relied not on the late Latin designation for the territory inhabited by the Prussians, Pruthenia (beginning with documents of the Teutonic Order [see Kuzavinis 1964: 5], i.e. from the 13th century; see Kabelka 1982: 42), but on the Prussian form (initially, apparently, only of Pomesania [Būga III 120]), that is, Old Prussian *Prūsā ‘Prussia, Prusa’ (PEŽ III 360), which could have given rise to the Old Prussian personal name *Prūsenis ‘Brutenis’; however, no such form is attested. Consequently, the hypothesis in question is fundamentally mistaken.

²³ Perhaps the proto-form of the Old Prussian personal name *Gar-burti/īs (with sporadic change of the [second] -b- to < -t-) < *Gar-burti/īs could cautiously be reconstructed as well; cf. Old Prussian personal name Burthe (Trautmann 1974: 21; see also ПЯ I 266–267) < Old Prussian *burt- *‘divination, prediction; sign’, but no traces of the alternation t > b have yet been identified in the Old Prussian written monuments or in the orthography of proper names.

²⁴ With the linking vowel lost, cf. Old Prussian kellaxde ‘spear shaft’ E 423 ← Old Prussian *kel’ā-lagzdē ‘the same’ (PEŽ II 160).

Straipsniai / Articles

21

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

because of the status of the phantasmagoria [for the arguments, see subsection 0; see also Vėlius 2012: 346, 349; Beresnevičius 2004: 184]:

der lest wachsen laub und gras (BRMŠ II 128), that is, “he makes leaves / foliage and grass grow”,

and not “he grows leaves and grass” (BRMŠ II 144), as Vytautas Balašaitis and Sigitas Plaušinaitis translate it, and

du treibest den winter hinweg und gibst In allen landen laub und gras (BRMŠ II 130), that is, “you drive winter away and grant leaves / foliage and grass throughout the land”,

cf. “you drive winter away and restore leaves and grass to the whole land” (BRMŠ II 145). Thus, the god’s function is to provide the impetus for growth (or, more precisely, to bring about the prelude to the life cycle), rather than to oversee the entire process of growth (A. Greimas [1990: 463] particularly emphasizes the importance of the duration of a deity’s function, regarding it as one of the grounds for dividing the gods into uranian and chthonic categories); in other words, there is no doubt that the deity described in the source should, at least formally, be uranian (apparently reflecting Perkūnas’s epithet as the one who awakens the earth with lightning), rather than chthonic (this function of the Baltic deity is apparently highly archaic and therefore can only be reconstructed; cf. the very ancient image of Perkūnas with horns [for more, see Kregždys 2012: 138]), as some researchers claim on the basis of an inaccurate translation in BRMŠ or their own interpretation (see Vėlius 1983: 58, 62; Laurinkienė 1990: 118, 120).

V. Toporovas (Топоров 1972: 303–304; Toporov 2000: 15–16, 24–30; Топоров II 235, 238, 253) itin daug dėmesio skyrė baltų dievų sąrašų lyginimui, lyg tai lemtų aptariamų dievybės funkcijų nustatymą. Dar kiti tyrėjai (žr. Greimas 1990: 454; Puhvel 2001: 226; Baldžius 2005: 459; Dini 2010: 105) apsiriboja abstrakčios pavasarinės augalų vegetacijos funkcijos konstatavimu (plg. „<...> Pergubris atrodo tik kaip specializuoto pavasarinio Perkūno epitetas“ [Greimas ibd.]; „Pergrubius, è il dio preposto in varie fonti alla vegetazione e connesso al rigoglio primaverile“ [Dini ibd.]), nors Sūduvių knygelėje nurodoma, kad šiai dievybei aukota ne tik pavasarį, t. y. „<...> prieš išeinant su plūgu į laukus.“ (BRMŠ II 144–145), bet ir rudenį, nuėmus derlių resp. „<...> po rugpjūčio.“ (BRMŠ II 145; dar žr. Balsys 2006: 60). Jonas Balys (JBR II 344), tiesa, abejodamas, nurodo derliaus ir vaisingumo funkciją (dar žr. Balsys 2006: 62), Gintaras Beresnevičius (2004: 196) – darbo dievo veiklos sritį. Kiti tyrėjai (žr. Kolczyński 1996: 83–84) konstatuoja, kad dievybės funkcinė apibrėžtis yra visiškai neaiški.

22

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

The origin of Baltic mythonyms: West Baltic Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius, etc.); Lithuanian maselis

On the basis of the etymological development of the mythonym presented in subsection 1b (if it is correct), it would apparently be mistaken to think that the relationship between the functions of the theonym Pargrubij mentioned in the Sudovian Book and its name is an occasional, reminiscence-based one rather than a genetic one. The distinction between two phytonyms (leaves and grass, rather than buds, flowers, or fruit) may also reflect relics of the particularly archaic worship of the Baltic god of thunder / lightning Perkūnas, associated with the totemic object—the oak (on the basis both of a newly established etymological link and of one known previously; cf. Baltic *perkūnas = *Perkúnas ‘god of thunder / lightning’ ← Baltic adjective *perkúnas ‘that which is associated with Perkūnas’s tree [the oak]’ < Baltic *perkus ‘Perkūnas’s tree = the oak’ [see Berneker 1896: 312; PEŽ III 265–266; see also Караповъ 1913: 92–93]).

Simonas Grunau (1876: 69) Kronikoje (dėl jo veikalo duomenų patikimumo žr. Beresnevičius 2004: 78–81; dar žr. Kregždys 2009a: 131–135) mini svarbų vakarų baltų sakralinių apeigų faktą: prūsai aukojo Perkūnui ožį, o jo mėsą kepė ant ąžuolo lapų: „Zum ersten nam der crywe kyrwaito einen bock und den vor der eichen todte vor allir sunde willen, und dis fleisch mit anderem zu Rickoyto vor der eichen britten mit den blettrn von der eichen <...>“ (dar žr. Mannhardt 1936: 225; Beresnevičius 2004: 78). Minėtina, jog keltai tikėjo, kad deginamų ąžuolo lapų dūmai apvalo vietą, kurioje vyksta šventosios apeigos (žr. Phythyon, Soesbee, Bennighof 2002: 92). Slavų kraštuose, norėdami apsaugoti ligonius nuo blogio, smilkydavo juos deginamų ąžuolo lapų ir šakų dūmais (СД II 145). Armenai sergančiajam duodavo ąžuolo pelenų antpilo (Ананикян 2010: 28–29).

Pasakodamas apie dievo Patulo (Patollo) galias ir aukas jam, S. Grunau (1876: 95) atskleidžia labai svarbų religinį apeiginį ypatumą – Romovės šešių uolekčių storumo žiemą ir vasarą žaliuojantis ąžuolas (apie jį dar žr. Kregždys 2009a: 133, 135, 137, 141, 156–157, 159, 168) buvo naudojamas baltų pamirštai toteminei mantikai resp. pranašavimui / b ū r i m u i: „Darumb mit namen nicht lange geharrret, man qwam ken Rickoiot und gab eim waidl otten ein gobe, und dieser im schnet eine wunden in den arm, domit das blut herausliff, noch welchem man horte ein b r u m m e n i n d e r e i c h e n, und dis war ein zechen, und es solt vorricht sein, und qwam dornoch nimmer wider und spuchte.“, t. y. „Tada žmogus ilgai nedelsęs eidavo į Rikojotą (Rickoiot), duodavo vaidilučiui (waidl otten) dovaną, o tasai rėždavo jam žaizdą į ranką, kad kraujas ištrykštų, po to pasigirsdavo m u r m e s y s ą ž u o l e, ir tai būdavo ž e n k l a s, kad susitaikyta, ir tasai dievas niekad nebeidavo vaid entis“ (BRMŠ II 112).

There is no doubt that the murmuring mentioned by S. Grunau is the rustling of oak leaves (see Scheme 2), whose great significance the Hellenes also recognized, believing in its mantic (or prophetic / divinatory) power. In Dodona, in the northern region of Epirus, the ancient Greeks worshipped the underworld Zeus, a deity with agrarian (Greek Ζεὺς χθόνιος [see Зайцев 2005: 78]) and mantic functions (Greek Ζεὺς καταχθόνιος [see Нильссон 1998:

Straipsniai / Articles

23

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

34, 143]), whose oracle—the sacred oak (ἡ παλαιὰ φηγός)—some scholars regard as the oldest sacred ritual site in Hellas (for more detail, see Harrison 1913: 22, 31, 34; Lhôte 2006: 49–56). Hellenes wishing to learn the future, earn the favor of the gods, and so on would travel to this place. Prophecies were delivered by priests and priestesses, identified in written sources by several hieronyms: 1) Gr. ἀνιππόπους ‘priest of Zeus’s oracle at Dodona ↔ one who does not wash his feet’; 2) Gr. Σελλοὶ ἀνιππόποδες ‘autochthonous inhabitants of Dodona who cared for Zeus’s oracle ↔ those who do not wash their feet’; 3) Gr. Τόμουροι ‘priests of Zeus at Dodona’ (←? *Τομάρουροι [Chantraine IV¹ 1124) [with absorption of root -άσ-] < top. Gr. Τόμαρος ‘Mount Tomaros at Dodona’ [Pape II 1540] [? < top. Gr. Τόμις / Τομεύς / Τομεύς / Τόμοι, etc. [see Pape ibid.] + Gr. ὄρος [Ionic οὖρος] ‘mountain’ [Hjalmar Frisk (II 909) explains it differently: τομάρ-ουροι ↔ οὖρος ‘guardian’] ~ Τομοῦροι ‘oracle of Zeus at Dodona’ [Pape ibid.]); 4) Gr. πέλειαι ‘priestesses—soothsayers (? at Dodona)’ ← πέλεια ‘dark-colored wild dove (Columba oenas)’ (see Il. 16. 234 – LS 131, 1171, 1380, 1563; for more detail, see Kregždys 2012: 117, 161, 221, 495–496; Крэгждис 2011: 284). They divined the will of chthonic ²⁵ Zeus ²⁶, that is, Ζεὺς καταχθόνιος (Pape I 441; see also Лосев 1957: 46, 123; Иванов 1994: 19, 332; see also Kregždys 2012: 92, 138, 487–488), based on the rustling of the leaves of Dodona’s oak (Кагаровъ 1913: 104). In much the same way, the Celts interpreted the will of the gods—that is, foretold the future—by relying on the rustling of the leaves of the oak ²⁷ – deus rōbus (~ Lat. Jū[p]piter) (Phythyon, Soesbee, Bennighof 2002: 91; see also Филип 1961: 43, 75). Such divinatory rites (divination from tree leaves) were also practiced in areas inhabited by Italic peoples, but Roman writings record only an account of foretelling the future by the different shades of poplar leaves, rather than oak leaves (Штаерман 1987: 271). The North Germanic peoples believed that their sacred ash (arbor vitae ↔ axis mundi = Old Icelandic Yggdrasill) would announce the end of the world by the trembling and rustling of its leaves (see Davidson 1990: 191; see also Kregždys 2012: 266, 327, 430, 470).

Incidentally, like the sacrificial rites of the Old Prussians, those of the Hellenes were also characterized by blood sacrifices (including human sacrifices), intended to avert attacks by spirits (cf. the myth

²⁵ That is, lunar rather than solar deities; compare the epithets of Zeus in the uranistic sphere: Ζεὺς νεφεληγερέτα ‘Zeus, gatherer of clouds’, Ζεὺς οὐράνιος ‘heavenly Zeus’ (see Il. IV 30; Od. I 63; Pape I 442).

²⁶ Italic peoples also worshipped deities of similar etiology, for example, Dis (Lat. Dīs / Dīs pater) ‘Pluto, that is, the god of the underworld’ ↔ Lat. Di(ē)spiter ‘Jupiter; Pluto’ (for more detail, see Kregždys 2012: 373).

²⁷ Cf. Old Breton / [Old] Cornish dar ‘oak’, Irish daur ‘same’, Gaulish *derua, *d(e)rullia ‘same’ (see Pedersen 1909: 144; Matasović 2009: 91; IEW 214–217; Buck 1988: 48–49; Gamkrelidze, Ivanov II 525–526; Lucht 2007: 401–402, 404).

24

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

The origin of Baltic mythonyms: West Baltic Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius and others); Lithuanian maselis

SCHEME 2. West Baltic *Garburū̄/īs: etiology of functions

apie piktąjį demoną Forbantą [gr. Φόρβας (žr. Pape II 1643)], gyvenusį ąžuole ir kabinusį nužudytų žmonių galvas ant jo šakų [Караговъ 1913: 107]).

The mention of grass as a mythological referent could also be associated with the sphere of Perkūnas’s activity, since the etiology of chthonic Zeus (that is, a deity of the chthonic sphere) (see Kregždys 2012: 92, 138) presupposes a Proto-Hellenic lunar deity whose functions were close to those of the Lithuanian Moon, which “<...> promotes the growth of plant parts above the ground, namely stems and ears” (JBR II 26; see also Kregždys 2012: 233). The Eastern Balts (Lithuanians) sowed and planted vegetables during the waning moon so that their roots (that is, root crops) would be strong; that is, the functional attribution of the new moon

Straipsniai / Articles

25

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

good vegetation of the above-ground parts of plants was attributed to it, while the waning moon was associated with the underground parts (see JBR II 177). On the basis of the arguments mentioned above, a cautious hypothesis may be formulated concerning the dualistic congruent genesis of the Baltic god of thunder (cf. the association between the Lithuanian thunder god Perkūnas and the horned Perkūnas / horned old man [↔? Prussian Patulo], based on the genetic congruence of the identical Italic Jū(p)piter ‘sky god’ ↔ Jū(p)piter Stygius ‘Jupiter of the underworld = Lat. Pluto’); cf. the kingdom of Perkūnas, rather than God, mentioned in old Lithuanian prayers to the new moon (see Kregždys 2012: 138, 373).

Over time, the functional motivation of the mythonym may have been forgotten (like Perkūnas’s dualistic genesis, dendronymic referent, and the tradition of lunar worship), owing to the name’s exceptionally numerous phonotactic changes, which presupposed the loss of the semantic connection between its structural elements, as well as the religious Prussian reform (on this, see Beresnevičius 1995: 103–118). The theonym therefore came to be understood both as a deity of the beginning of vegetation (the stimulus being Perkūnas’s spring lightning) and as a harvest deity (a reminiscence of lunar worship).

In conclusion, a cautious hypothesis may be proposed that West Baltic *Garburvī/īs (→ *Pargrubī/īs) ‘a god who drives away winter, makes leaves and grass grow, and brings about a good harvest’ (< *‘tree-diviner, magic tree’) is one of Perkūnas’s many epithets (see also Greimas 1990: 454), presupposing as its sacred referent an exceptionally archaic mantical function—that of a dendronymic totem worshipped by the Hellenes, Celts, and North Germanic peoples (perhaps also by the Italic peoples). Thus, this mythonym could be assigned to the isomythologemes shared by the Balts and the Indo-European peoples listed above.

2. LITHUANIAN MASELIS ‘A PERSON DRESSED UP ACCORDING TO SHROVETIDE CUSTOMS’

The LKŽe indicates that in the area of the Northeastern Highlanders’ Panevėžys subdialect—around Šeduva—the term maselis is (or was once) used to designate a participant in the Shrovetide festival—a costumed reveler. On the basis of the lexicographic description of this form provided (which does not indicate that the word is a loan), the dictionary’s compilers classify it as inherited Lithuanian vocabulary. It is difficult to agree with this decision for several reasons: 1) it is impossible to posit a case of use in the Northeastern Highland area of the assimilated suffix Lithuanian -ala- > -ela- (see Skardžius I 175–176), i.e. to derive this word from the noun Lithuanian māsalas³b (m.) ‘something used to entice; bait; carrion used to lure game’ DŽ; LL 272; ‘food attached to a hook to lure fish when angling’ rš (LKŽe), because there is no record of such a functional connotation for a Shrovetide character; 2) it is also impossible to identify it as a dialectal variant of the noun Lithuanian masėnis, -ė 2 (collective noun) ‘one who entices’ Als, J (LKŽe), or of the verb Lithuanian māsinti (-yti), -ina, -ino K, masinti, -ina, -ino 1. (transitive)

26

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

The origin of Baltic mythonyms: West Baltic Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius, etc.); Lithuanian maselis

‘to draw toward oneself, lure, charm, entice’ Ims, Kv, etc.; 2. (reflexive) ‘to desire something, be tempted’; 3. (transitive) ‘to address, call, invite to oneself by offering an enticement’ Brs, Slnt, J, M. Valanč, S. Dauk, etc.; 4. (transitive) ‘to try to lure out, extract’ Grdm; 5. (transitive) ‘to awaken a desire for something by letting someone try it’ Kal; 6. (transitive, intransitive) ‘to lie, deceive’ D. Pošk, Skd, Dr, Pln, Kam, J, (transitive) ‘to tease, mock’ G 20 (LKŽė). A derivative with the suffix -eliō- (for further discussion, see Skardžius I 176–177, 235) is likewise untenable, not only because of the semantic differentiation of the noun Lithuanian masėnis, -ė with respect to the aspect of the rites performed, but also because the functional hyperonym ‘enticer, liar, deceiver, or teaser’ mentioned above is uncharacteristic of the characters at this festival (see Vaicekauskas 2009: 67–68).

In addressing the origin of the Lithuanian lexeme maselis, attention should be drawn to the use, in the same dialectal zone—that is, in the area of the Northeastern Highlanders’ Panevėžys subdialect, in Pumpėnai (Pasvalys District), Panevėžys, Raguva (Panevėžys District), and Žeimelis (Pakruojis District)—of the surname Lithuanian Masėlis, which has an identical morphological structure (LPŽ II 171). According to the authors of the Dictionary of Lithuanian Surnames (LPŽ II 172), this name may be derived from hypocoristics: Polish Maś (← personal name Polish Mateusz), German Мааф, Maas (← personal name German Thomas). Of these two proposed explanations for the surname’s origin, the second would be more credible, since the authors of the hypothesis do not explain (or illustrate with alternative examples) the alleged Slavic change of the fricative ш → s. Nevertheless, it is also very difficult to accept the proposed use of a Germanism, since the possible etymological basis of this surname, Lithuanian maselis ‘a person dressed up according to Shrovetide customs’ (for some reason, this hypothesis is not considered at all), does not presuppose a character of German ethnicity—no ethnologist mentions such a participant in this festival.

Given the status of a Jewish character as virtually the principal Shrovetide costumed reveler—and the fact that masks imitating members of this people were also worn during the festival (for example, that of a merchant [Beresnevičius 2005: 397; for more detail, see subsection 0, note 10])—a cautious hypothesis may be advanced that the word reflects the use of a Semitism, rather than a Germanism (and apparently not a Slavicism either [see above]); that is, a case of regressive antonomasia may be posited: Jewish personal name Massel (cf. personal name Sam Massell, Jr. [EJ XIII 667] < Western Yiddish massel / maššel ‘luck, good fortune; constellation’ [cf. Lötzsch 1992: 115–116] / Eastern Yiddish mazal, or מזל, ‘same’ [סאלרמאטאן 2011: 354, 569] < Biblical Hebrew mazzāl, or מזל, ‘planet; constellation; good fortune; wealth’ [Stern 2000: 129; Jastrow II 755]) → Lithuanian maselis ‘a person dressed up according to Shrovetide customs’.

3. SUMMARY

Following the principles of research in consequentialist, or structural, etymology (for more on these, see Mailhammer 2013: 4, 2013a: 9, 11]), before presenting

Straipsniai / Articles

27

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

the origins of a particular lexeme, it is necessary to take into account: (1) the formal features of the source in which the word is mentioned, or to assess it according to the principles of verification methodology; (2) structural differences among variants of the same word, in an effort to determine the original form; (3) the importance of the predisposing factor of formal grammar, so as to avoid asserting facts or formulating claims that are not characteristic of the language system.

The compilation of lexicographic collections, based on a dispositional system of structural lexical nests (see Corseriu 1967: 297; Mailhammer 2013: 3; see also Bussmann 2006: 673–674), and selectively marking and/or indicating the basis of words of foreign origin (from an etiological perspective), is partly flawed, as it may entail word assessments grounded in possible mystification and the introduction of loanwords into the inherited lexical base.

4. CONCLUSIONS

1. The mythologeme of West Baltic Sūduvių knygelėje Pargrubi(j)us (and its variants G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius, etc.), mentioned in the Sudovian Book, presumably implies the following etymological development: West Baltic *Pargrubi/īs ‘god who drives away winter, makes leaves and grass grow, and ensures a good harvest’ ← *Gar-brubi/īs ‘ditto’ ← *Gar-bruvi/īs ‘ditto’ ← *Gar-burvi/īs ‘*tree—the diviner, the tree of divination’ ← Prussian garian ‘tree’ E 628 + Prussian *buru- *‘divination, prediction; sign’.

2. West Baltic *Garburvi/īs (→ *Pargrubi/īs) ‘god who drives away winter, makes leaves and grass grow, and ensures a good harvest’ (< *‘tree—the diviner, the tree of divination’) is one of many epithets of Perkūnas.

3. The sememe *‘tree—the diviner, the tree of divination’ presupposes a sacred referent of mantic function—a dendronymic totem worshipped by the Hellenes, Celts, and North Germanic peoples (perhaps also by Italic peoples).

4. Lithuanian maselis ‘a person dressed up in a costume for Užgavėnės customs’ is a Semitism, derived from the Jewish personal name Massel.

LITERATŪRA

Adkins Lesley, Adkins Roy A. 2004: Handbook to Life in Ancient Rome. New York: Facts On File, Inc.

Anglickienė Laima 2004: Judėjų įvaizdis lietuvių folklore: viduramžiškų prietarų atspindžiai. – Tautosakos darbai 21(28), 41–53.

Baldžius Juozas 2005: Rinktiniai raštai. Etnologijos ir tautosakos baruose. Vilnius: Lietuvių literatūros ir tautosakos institutas.

28

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Baltų mitonimų kilmė: vak. bl. Pargrub(i)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius ir kt.); lie. maselis

Balsys Rimantas 2006: Lietuvių ir prūsų dievai, deivės, dvasios: nuo apeigos iki prietaro. Klaipėda: Klaipėdos universiteto leidykla.

Barton George A. 1918: The Religion of Israel. New York: The Macmillan Company.

Beker Avi 2008: Chosen: the history of an idea, the anatomy of an obsession. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Beresnevičius Gintaras 1995: Baltų religinės reformos. Vilnius: Taura.

Beresnevičius Gintaras 2004: Lietuvių religija ir mitologija. Sisteminė studija. Vilnius: Tyto alba.

Beresnevičius Gintaras 2005: Meditacija, kontempliacija, ekstremalios būklės: Lietuva ir Rytai. – Kultūrologija 12, 397–416.

Berneker Erich 1896: Die preussische Sprache. Texte, Grammatik, etymologisches Wörterbuch. Strassburg: Verlag von Karl J. Trübner.

Běťáková Marta Eva, Blažek Václav 2012: Encyklopedie baltské mytologie. Praha: Libri.

Blažek Václav, Běťáková Marta Eva 2014: Prussian *Grubrius ‘god of spring and vegetation’ in perspective of the Italic pantheon. – Baltistica 49(2), 345–356.

Blažienė Grasil da 2005: Baltische Ortsnamen in Ostpreußen. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.

Bréal Michael 1964: Semantics: Studies in the Science of Meaning. New York: Dover Publications.

BRMŠ I–IV – Baltų religijos ir mitologijos šaltiniai, sud. Norbertas Vėlius. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla (t. 1–2), Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas (t. 3–4), 1996–2005.

Brown Francis, Driver R. S., Briggs Charles 2000: Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, with an appendix containing the Biblical Aramaic, based on the lexicon of William Gesenius as translated by Edward Robinson, by Francis Brown, with the cooperation of S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs. Based on the 1906 edition originally published by Clarendon Press: Oxford. Washington (electronic edition).

Brückner Alexander 1904: Starożytna Litwa. Warszawa: Druk K. Kowalewskiego.

Buck Carl Darling 1988: A Dictionary of selected Synonyms in the principal Indo-European Languages. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.

Būga I–III – Kazimieras Būga. Rinktiniai raštai 1–3, sud. Zigmas Zinkevičius. Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla, 1958–1961.

Straipsniai / Articles

29

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

Burkert Walter 1977: Griechische Religion der archaischen und klassischen Epoche. Stuttgart & Mainz: Verlag W. Kohlhammer.

Bussmann Hadumod 2006: Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. London and New York: Routledge.

Cameron Alan 2004: Greek Mythography in the Roman World. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.

Chantraine I–IV^1–2 – Pierre Chantraine. Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. Histoire des mots. Paris: Éditions Klincksieck (1 (A–Δ) – 1968, 2 (E–K) – 1970, 3 (Λ–Π) – 1974, 4(1) (P–Γ) – 1977, 4(2) (Φ–Ω et index) – 1980).

Coseriu Eugenio 1967: Lexikalische Solidaritäten. – Poetica 1, 293–303.

Daukantas Simonas 1993: Būdas senovės lietuvių, kalnėnų ir žemaičių. Vilnius: Ethnos.

Davidson Gustav 1971: A Dictionary of Angels: Including the Fallen Angels. New York: Free Press.

Davidson H. R. Ellis 1990: Gods and Myths of Northern Europe. London: Penguin Books.

Delamarre Xavier 2003: Dictionnaire de la langue Gauloise. Une approche linguistique du vieux-celtique continental. Paris: Editions Errance.

Dini Pietro Umberto 2000: Baltų kalbos. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.

Dini Pietro Umberto 2010: Elementi di mitologia baltica. – Polifemo 10, 101–126.

Dini Pietro Umberto 2014: Foundations of Baltic Languages. Vilnius: Vilnius University.

Dougherty Carol 2006: Prometheus. London & New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

Dunstan William E. 2011: Ancient Rome. Lanham & Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Dusburgietis Petras 2005: Prūsijos žemės kronika. Vilnius: Versus aureus.

DvŽ I–II – Dieveniškių šnektos žodynas 1–2. Autoriai: Laima Grumadienė, Danguolė Mikulėnienė, Kazys Morkūnas, Aloyzas Vidugiris. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2005–2010.

30

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Baltų mitonimų kilmė: vak. bl. Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius ir kt.); lie. maselis

EJ I–XXII – Encyclopaedia Judaica 1–22. Fred Skolnik, Editor in Chief. Michael Berenbaum, Executive Editor. Detroit & London: Thomson & Gale, USA; Keter Publishing House LtD., Jerusalem, 2007.

Frisk I–III – Hjalmar Frisk. Griechisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch 1–3. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag, 1960.

Gamkrelidze, Ivanov I–II – Thomas V. Gamkrelidze, Vjačeslav V. Ivanov. Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans. A Reconstruction and Historical Analysis of a Proto-Language and a Proto-Culture 1–2. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1995.

Gerullis Georg 1922: Die altpreußischen Orstnamen. Berlin und Leipzig: Vereinigung wissenschaftlicher Verleger.

Graf Fritz 2009: Apollo. London and New York: Routledge.

Greimas Algirdas Julius 1990: Tautos atminties beieškant. Vilnius & Chicago: Mokslas.

Grunau Simon 1876: Preussishe Chronik. Die preussischen Geschichtschreiber des XVI und XVII Jahrhunderts. Bd. 1, herausg. von M. Perl bach. Leipzig: Verlag von Duncker & Humblot.

Harrison Jane Ellen 1913: The Religion of Ancient Greece. London: Constable & Company LTD.

IEW – Julius Pokorny. Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch 1–2. Bern und München: A. Francke AG-Verlag, 1959–1969.

Il. – Ὁμήρου ‘Ἰλιάς’

Jastrow I–II – Marcus Jastrow. A Dictionary of the Targumim, The Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature. London & New York: Luzac & Co., G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1903.

JBR I–V – Jonas Balys. Raštai 1–5, par. Rita Repšienė. Vilnius: Lietuvių literatūros ir tautosakos institutas, 1998–2004.

JBŽ I–III – Jokūbas Brodovskis. Lexicon Germanico=Lithvanicum et Lithvanico=Germanicum. Rankraštinis XVIII amžiaus žodynas, 1–3, par. Vincentas Drotvinas. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2009.

Kabelka Jonas 1982: Baltų filologijos įvadas. Vilnius: Mokslas.

Klein Ernest 1987: A comprehensive etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for Readers of English. Jerusalem & Tel Aviv: Eisenbrauns.

Kolczyński Jarosław 1996: Trójnożna koza. Uwagi o symbolice trójnożności. – Etnografia Polska 40(1–2), 81–107.

Straipsniai / Articles

31

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

Kregždys Rolandas 2009: Sūduvių knygelė – vakarų baltų religijos ir kultūros šaltinis. I dalis: formalioji analizė. – Lituanistica 55 (3–4 [79–80]), 174–187.

Kregždys Rolandas 2009a: Pr. Romow pagal Petro Dusburgiečio „Prūsijos žemės kroniką“ ir kitos istorinės interpretacijos iki mūsų laikų (toponimo etimologinė analizė, lokalizacija). – Senovės baltų kultūra 8. Vilnius: Kronta, 122–187.

Kregždys Rolandas 2010: M. Stryjkowskio veikal(o) Kronika Polska, Litewska, Żmódzka i wszystkiej Rusi teonimai: Chaurirari. – Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 62–63, 50–81.

Kregždys Rolandas 2011: Baltiškųjų teonimų perteikimo ir dievų funkcijų nustatymo problematika Jano Łasickio veikale „De diis Samagitarvm cæterorvmqve Sarmatarum, & falforum Chriſtianorum. Item de religione Armeniorum“: Salaus, Klamals, Atlaibos, Tawals. – Perspectives of Baltic Philology II. Poznań: Wydawnictwo „Rys“, 101–121.

Kregždys Rolandas 2012: Baltų mitologemų etimologijos žodynas I: Kristburgo sutartis. Vilnius: Lietuvos kultūros tyrimų institutas.

Kuiper Kathleen 2011: Ancient Rome: from Romulus and Remus to the Visigoth invasion. New York: Rosen Educational Services, LLC.

Kuzavinis Kazys 1964: Prūsų kalba. Vilnius: Vilniaus valstybinis pedagoginis institutas.

Laurinkienė Nijolė 1990: Mito atšvaitai lietuvių kalendorinėse dainose. Vilnius: Vaga.

LE I–XXXVII – Lietuvių enciklopedija 1–37. Bostonas: Lietuvių enciklopedijos leidykla, 1953–1985.

Lhôte Éric 2006: Les lamelles oraculaires de Dodone. Genève: Droz.

LKŽe – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas (t. 1–20, 1941–2002) elektroninis variantas. Antrasis elektroninis leidimas. Red. kolegija: G. Naktinienė ir kt. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2013.

LMAGBR – Lenkijos mokslų akademijos Gdansko bibliotekos Rankraščių skyrius.

Lötzsch Ronald 1992: Duden Jiddisches Wörterbuch (2., durchgesehene Auflage). Mannheim & Zürich: Dudenverlag.

LPŽ I–II – Lietuvių pavardžių žodynas 1–2. Vilnius: Mokslas, 1985–1989.

Lucht Martina 2007: Der Grundwortschatz des Altirischen. Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde der Philosophischen Fakultät der Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität zu Bonn. Bonn: Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität.

LVŽ I–II... – Lietuvių vietovardžių žodynas 1–2. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2014...

32

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Baltų mitonimų kilmė: vak. bl. Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergubrius ir kt.); lie. maselis

Mailhammer Robert 2013: Introduction: Etymology beyond word histories. – Lexical and Structural Etymology. Beyond Word Histories. Ed. Robert Mailhammer, Boston & Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, Inc., 1–7.

Mailhammer Robert 2013a: Towards a framework of contact etymology. – Lexical and Structural Etymology. Beyond Word Histories. Ed. Robert Mailhammer, Boston & Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, Inc., 9–31.

Malitz Jürgen 2005: Nero. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Mannhardt Wilhelm 1936: Letto-Preussische Götterlehre. Riga: Herausgegeben von der Lettisch-Literärischen Gesellschaft.

Matasović Ranko 2009: Etymological dictionary of proto-Celtic. Leiden & Boston: Brill.

Mažiulis Vytautas 1966: Prūsų kalbos paminklai. Vilnius: Mintis.

Mažiulis Vytautas 2004: Prūsų kalbos istorinė gramatika. Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla.

Mierzyński Antoni 1900: Romowe. Poznań: Drukarnia dziennika poznańskiego.

MP I–IV – Matas Pretorijus. Prūsijos įdomybės, arba Prūsijos regykla 1–4. Parengė Ingė Lukšaitė. Vilnius: Pradai (t. 1 – 1999), Lietuvos istorijos instituto leidykla (t. 2 – 2004, t. 3 – 2006, t. 4 – 2011).

Narbutt Teodor 1835: Dzieje starożytne narodu litewskiego. Tom 1. Mitologia litewska. Wilno: A. Marcinowski.

Od. – Ὁμήρου Ὀδύσσειή

Pape I–II – Dr. W. Pape’s Wörterbuch der griechischen Eigennamen 1–2 (I: α–κ; II: λ–ω). Braunschweig: Druck und Verlag von Fried. Bieweg & Sohn, 1911.

Pedersen Holger 1909: Vergleichende Grammatik der keltischen Sprachen. Erster Band. Einleitung und Lautlehre. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.

PEŽ I–IV – Vytautas Mažiulis. Prūsų kalbos etimologijos žodynas 1–4. Vilnius: Mokslas (t. 1), Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla (t. 2, 3), Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas (t. 4), 1988–1997.

Phython John R., Soesbee Ree, Bennighof Mike 2002: Celtic Age. Role-playing the Myths, Heroes and Monsters of the Celts. Virginia Beach: Avalanche Press LTD.

Przybytek Rozalia 1993: Ortsnamen baltischer Herkunft im südlichen Teil Ostpreußens. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.

Straipsniai / Articles

33

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

Puhvel Jaan 2001: Lyginamoji mitologija. Vilnius: Lietuvių literatūros ir tautosakos institutas.

Rinkevičius Vytautas 2015: Prūsistikos pagrindai. Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas.

SEJL – LEŽ – Wojciech Smoczyński. Słownik etymologiczny języka litewskiego. Wilno: Printer Polyglott, 2007.

Skardžius I–VII – Pranas Skardžius. Rinktiniai raštai 1–7, par. Albertas Rosinas. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidykla, 1996–2013.

Skrodenis Stasys 2009: Užgavėnių kaukė mūsų kultūroje. – Užgavėnių kaukės, sud. A. Vaicekauskas. Vilnius: Vilniaus etninės kultūros centras, 9–46.

Smoczyński Wojciech 2005: Lexikon der altpreussischen Verben. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachen und Literaturen der Universität Innsbruck.

מאַסקעו גרוס ייִדישרוסיש ווערטערבוך: 2011 אלכסנדר סאַלאַרטאָוו

SRP I–V – Scriptores rerum Prussicarum: Die Geschichtsquellen der Preussischen Vorzeit bis zum Untergange der Ordensherrschaft 1–5, hrsg. von Theodor Hirsch, Max Töppen und Ernst Strehlke. Leipzig: Verlag von S. Hirzel, 1861–1874.

Stanevičius Simonas 1967: Raštai. Vilnius: Vaga.

Stela Erazmas 2004: Apie Prūsijos senybes. Vilnius: Aidai.

Stern Heidi 2000: Wörterbuch zum jiddischen Lehnwortschatz in den deutschen Dialekten. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.

Šimėnas Valdemaras 1994: Legenda apie Videvučių ir Brutenį (legendos šaltinių klausimu). – Prūsijos kultūra. Vilnius: Academia, 18–63.

Tamulaitienė Dovilė 2014: Dėl lietuvių priesaginių hidronimų kirčiavimo variantų. – Baltistica 49(2), 279–300.

Toporov Vladimir 2000: Baltų mitologijos ir ritualo tyrimai. Vilnius: Aidai.

Trautmann Reinhold 1974: Die altpreußischen Personennamen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Vaan de Michiel 2008: Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic Languages. Leiden & Boston: Brill.

Vaicekauskas Arūnas 2009: Užgavėnių kaukės ir personažai. – Užgavėnių kaukės. Sud. A. Vaicekauskas. Vilnius: Vilniaus etninės kultūros centras, 65–115.

Vanagas Aleksandras 1981: Lietuvių hidronimų etimologinis žodynas. Vilnius: Mokslas.

34

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Baltų mitonimų kilmė: vak. bl. Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius ir kt.); lie. maselis

Velikovsky Immanuel 1952: Ages in Chaos. Volume I: from the Exodus to King Akhnaton. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc.

Vėlius Norbertas 2012: Baltų mitologija iš sakalo skrydžio. Vilnius: Aidai.

Weinreich Uriel 1977: English-Yiddish, Yiddish-English Dictionary. New York: Schocken Books; Yivo Institute for Jewish Research.

Wolf Moshe 1998: Hebrew and Aramaic Words in the Yiddish Language. Portland: Jewish Federation of Portland.

Ананикян Мартирос А. 2010: Мифы Армении. Москва: Центрополиграф.

Зайцев Александр Иосифович 2005: Греческая религия и мифология: Курс лекций. Санкт-Петербург: Филологический факультет СПбГУ, Москва: Издательский центр «Академия».

Иванов Вячеслав 1994: Дионис и прадионисийство. Санкт-Петербург: Алетейя.

Кагаров Евгений 1913: Культ фетишей, растений, животных в Древней Греции. С.-Петербург: Сенатская Типография.

Калыгин Виктор Павлович 2006: Этимологический словарь кельтских теонимов. Москва: Наука.

Кречдис Роландас 2011: К этимологии греч. ἐοσήν. – Индоевропейское языкознание и классическая филология 15. Санкт-Петербург: Наука, 282–289.

Лосев Алексей Федорович 1957: Античная мифология в ее историческом развитии. Москва: Государственное учебно-педагогическое издательство министерства просвещения РСФСР.

МНМ I–II – Мифы народов мира. Энциклопедия в двух томах, глав. ред. С. А. Токарев. Москва: Советская энциклопедия, 1991.

МС – Мифологический словарь. Москва: Советская энциклопедия, 1990.

Нильссон Мартин 1998: Греческая народная религия. Санкт-Петербург: Алетейя.

ПЯ I–V – Владимир Николаевич Топоров. Прусский язык: Словарь 1–5. Москва: Наука, 1975–1990.

СД I–V – Славянские древности. Этнолингвистический словарь 1–5, ред. Н. И. Толстой. Москва: Международные отношения, 1995–2012.

Топоров I–III – Владимир Николаевич Топоров. Исследования по этимологии и семантике 1–3. Москва: Языки славянских культур, 2004–2009.

Straipsniai / Articles

35

ROLANDAS KREGŽDYS

Топоров Владимир Николаевич 1972: Заметки по балтийской мифологии. – Балто-славянский сборник, отв. ред. В. Н. Топоров. Москва: Наука, 289–314.

Филип Ян 1961: Кельтская цивилизация и ее наследие. Прага: Издательство Чехословацкой Академии Наук.

Штаерман Елена Михайловна 1987: Социальные основы религии Древнего Рима. Москва: Наука.

Штейнбергъ Иошуа 1878: Еврейскій и халдейскій этимологическій словарь къ книгамъ Ветхаго Завѣта 1. Еврейско-русскій. Вильна: В типографіи Л. Л. Маца.

Origin of the Baltic Mythonyms: West Balt.

Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius, etc.),

Lith. maselis

SUMMARY

The article deals with the etymology and developmental peculiarities of the West Baltic mythologeme Pargrubij (A, B) / Pargrubius (B, C), including its alternative forms Grubrium (A), Gubrium (C), Pergrubrius (D, ε), etc., and mythonym Lith. maselis ‘a man dressed in the clothes of Shrovetide mummers.’

In accordance with the results received in the analysis of the data, which partly reflect the most ancient mythological images and concepts of I–E tribes, the following conclusions are proposed:

1. West Balt. mythologeme Pargrubi(j)us (and its variants G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius, etc.), mentioned in “The Yatvigian book” for the first time, presupposes reconstruction of the protoform with a few types of metathesis: West Balt. *Pargrubī/is ‘God who makes winter gone, causes leaves and grass to grow and also stands under fecundity’ ← *Gar-brubī/is ‘ditto’ ← *Gar-bruvī/is ‘ditto’ ← *Gar-burvī/is *‘tree – oracle, sorcery tree’ ← Pruss. gar-ian ‘tree’ E 628 + Pruss. *buru- *‘sortilege, guess; sign.’

2. West Balt. *Garburvī/is (→ *Pargrubī/is) ‘God who makes winter gone, causes leaves and grass to grow and also stands under fecundity’ (< *‘tree – oracle, sorcery tree’) is one of the multitude of epithets of the thunder god of Western Balts.

36

Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXIII

Baltų mitonimų kilmė: vak. bl. Pargrubi(j)us (G[r]ubrium, Pergrubrius ir kt.); lie. maselis

3. Sememe *‘tree – oracle, sorcery tree’ presupposes reconstruction of the sacral referent with a sortilege function – dendritic totem, also worshiped by Greeks, Celts, northern Germans (and probably Italic peoples).

4. Lith. maselis ‘a man dressed in the clothes of Shrovetide mummers’ should be attributed to Hebraisms borrowed in Lithuanian, related to proper name Y Massel ← WY massel / maššel ‘luck, success; constellation’, which originated from MH mazl ‘planet; constellation; success; fortune.’

Įteikta 2015 m. birželio 22 d.

R O L A N D A S K R E G Ž D Y S

Lietuvos kultūros tyrimų institutas

Saltoniškių g. 58, Vilnius Lt-08105, Lietuva

[email protected]

Straipsniai / Articles

37