After the last update of Schleicher’s fable in Proto-Indo-European and its main dialects, we wanted to offer an alternative short text for comparison, and have thus added another page to the old one, including “The King and the god” in Proto-Indo-European and its dialects, apart from applying some minor corrections to the Schleicher’s fable.
Following the Wikipedia article, «The king and the god (rÄ“á¸±s deiwos-kÊ·e, Latin rex deusque) is the title of a short dialogue composed in the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European language. It is loosely based on the “king Harishcandra” episode of Aitareya Brahmana (7.14 = 33.2). S. K. Sen asked a number of Indo-Europeanists (Y. E. Arbeitman, E. P. Hamp, M. Mayerhofer, J. Puhvel, W. Winter) to reconstruct the PIE “parent” of the text.»
This short tale is different from its Sanskrit original:
Varuá¹‡aá¹ƒ rÄjÄnam upadhÄva:
putro me jÄyatÄá¹ƒ, tena tvÄ yajÄ iti
tatheti. sa Varuá¹‡aá¹ƒ rÄjÄnam upasasÄra:
putro me jÄyatÄá¹ƒ, tena tvÄ yajÄ iti. tatheti.
tasya ha putro jajñe Rohito nÄma.
Then he said to him:
Have recourse to Varuna, the king, (saying):
“Let a son be born to me; with him let me sacrifice to thee”
“Be it so” (he replied). He went up to Varuna, the king (saying)
“Let a son be born to me; with him let me sacrifice to thee.” “Be it so” (he replied)
To him a son was born, Rohita by name.
Your Indo-EuropeanÂ Language Team.
1 thought on ““The king and the god”, translated into Proto-Indo-European and its different attested proto-languages”
The Polish term ‘krol’ is a version of the proper name Karl, or Charles, adopted from the name of Charlemagne ; not unlike the Roman Caesar serving as the archetypal Tsaesar (Tsar) in the Muscovy (later called Russia) — and the Kaiser in the German-speaking parts.
The first broadly known Polish ‘krol’ was Mieczyslaw (Mieszko I), incidentally, a grandfarther of Knut (Canute the Great of the Danes). Mieszko was not internationally recognised as ‘regis’, this became the lot of his son Boleslaw. (arguably the maker of Poland “as we know it”, more or less).
Mieszko was apparently preceded by other ruling princes, whater appelation might apply to heads of certain clans or lines who became prominent and could wield some degree of power over the local populations. Much of it remains a matter of more or less plausible conjecture (this writer does not pretend broad expertise).
Whoever exactly was the first ‘krol’ could not be asserted by this writer, then. What may be worthy of distinction was that Mieszko was the first broadly recognised ‘krol’, while his son Boleslaw was then the second noted ‘krol’ — but the first ‘regis’.
W. Paul Tabaka
Los Angeles, California, USA
Comments are closed.