# Proto-Germanic Mēkijaz "sword"



## CyrusSH

Please first look at the file I have attached: The Nordic Languages, by Oskar Bandle, Lennart Elmevik, Gun Widmark, page 687

Is it a valid source? What do you think about it?

I wonder what was the Iranian word, in Persian _mix_ mean "spike", it also means "shepherd's crook": معنی میخ | لغت‌نامه دهخدا but not "sword".


----------



## Ben Jamin

Greek has  *Μαχαίρι* which means "knife" today, but reportedely in the classical Greek meant "sword" too. I wonder if there is a relation with *Mekijaz*.


----------



## berndf

Ben Jamin said:


> Greek has  *Μαχαίρι* which means "knife" today, but reportedely in the classical Greek meant "sword" too. I wonder if there is a relation with *Mekijaz*.


It has been suggested but nothing conclusive to my knowledge.


----------



## CyrusSH

I think a loanword from Ancient Greek makes it a more difficult issue, the point is that Goths migrated from the north to the south or vice versa. For this reason it says a single word may write history.


----------



## berndf

A possible Greek loan into early migration period Germanic or shortly before (Tacitus' time) would not need any assumptions about Gothic migration. There were enough contact points.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> A possible Greek loan into early migration period Germanic or shortly before (Tacitus' time) would not need any assumptions about Gothic migration. There were enough contact points.



Those contact points can't be reason that we find words in Old Norse, for example there were contact points between Iranian and Slavic peoples too but you can't find Slavic words in Balochi language.


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> Those contact points can't be reason that we find words in Old Norse, for example there were contact points between Iranian and Slavic peoples too but you can't find Slavic words in Balochi language.


Many words of origin in the Roman Empire travelled throughout the entire Germanic language very early (e.g _wine_, ON _vin_). There would be nothing conspicuous about this one.

Note that I always write "would". The argument is hypothetical. I am not saying it is of Greek origin.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> Many words of origin in the Roman Empire travelled throughout the entire Germanic language very early (e.g _wine_, ON _vin_). There would be nothing conspicuous about this one.



Words can't travel but those are people who travel, for example ancient Romans conquered part of Sarmatia but there are not many Latin words in other Iranian languages.


----------



## Ben Jamin

What about a common PIE ancestor? Is it possible?


----------



## Treaty

CyrusSH said:


> Words can't travel but those are people who travel


Words can be transfered by trade, especially in case of objects. You don't need migration or invasion for that.


----------



## CyrusSH

Treaty said:


> Words can be transfered by trade, especially in case of objects. You don't need migration or invasion for that.



Of course but when we say *many* words, especially cultural words, like Old Norse dreki, we can't relate them to just trade.


----------



## berndf

Ben Jamin said:


> What about a common PIE ancestor? Is it possible?


Much is possible. That is the problem with this word. There seems to be no theory that sticks out as superior to others. The only thing we really know about this word is that it is was _predominantly_ East Germanic. This make a loan into Gothic an attractive idea. But that's about all.


----------



## Ben Jamin

berndf said:


> Much is possible. That is the problem with this word. There seems to be no theory that sticks out as superior to others. The only thing we really know about this word is that it is was _predominantly_ East Germanic. This make a loan into Gothic an attractive idea. But that's about all.


So, no PIE root identified?


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> Of course but when we say *many* words, especially cultural words, like Old Norse dreki, we can't relate them to just trade.


He said "objects". What he meant is that words for artefacts and other merchandise travel together with the things themselves. 

Scandinavian metalworking was much less advanced than in the South. Still during the Viking era a Frankish sword was what every Viking warrior would want to have and for the Franks it was important to stop the illegal weapons trade.


----------



## berndf

Ben Jamin said:


> So, no PIE root identified?


No, all explanation attempts I have seen have something to do with loans.


----------



## fdb

CyrusSH said:


> I wonder what was the Iranian word, in Persian _mix_ means "spike"



Middle and New Persian mēx means “peg, nail”. It continues Old Persian <m-y-u-x>, probably /mayūxa-/, cognate with Sanskrit mayūkha- (some part of the spindle), also Sogdian <myγk>, Ossetic /mex/.

Greek μάχαιρα is well attested in classical authors for “large knife, sword, dagger”. I do not see how it could be connected (phonetically or semantically) with the mentioned Indo-Iranian words. The current view is that μάχαιρα is pre-Greek, that is: non-Indo-European.


----------



## CyrusSH

fdb said:


> Middle and New Persian mēx means “peg, nail”. It continues Old Persian <m-y-u-x>, probably /mayūxa-/, cognate with Sanskrit mayūkha- (some part of the spindle), also Sogdian <myγk>, Ossetic /mex/.
> 
> Greek μάχαιρα is well attested in classical authors for “large knife, sword, dagger”. I do not see how it could be connected (phonetically or semantically) with the mentioned Indo-Iranian words. The current view is that μάχαιρα is pre-Greek, that is: non-Indo-European.



According to Gothic Etymological Dictionary - Page 250, it is from proto-Iranian *_madyaka_ something attached to the waist, middle; cf _madya_- middle (Lat _médius_).


----------



## fdb

CyrusSH said:


> it is from proto-Iranian *_madyaka_ something attached to the waist, middle; cf _madya_- middle (Lat _médius_).



Which word is "it"?


----------



## CyrusSH

fdb said:


> Which word is "it"?



Gothic _meki_.


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> According to Gothic Etymological Dictionary - Page 250, it is from proto-Iranian *_madyaka_ something attached to the waist, middle; cf _madya_- middle (Lat _médius_).


The dictionary is very vague on that. It says it is a "cross-cultural term" (i.e. a Wanderwort) that is "possibly" from Iranian *_madyaka._


----------



## Ben Jamin

berndf said:


> The dictionary is very vague on that. It says it is a "cross-cultural term" (i.e. a Wanderwort) that is "possibly" from Iranian *_madyaka._


What is more plausible phonetically: madyaka or maxeri, Persian or Greek loan?


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> He said "objects". What he meant is that words for artefacts and other merchandise travel together with the things themselves.
> 
> Scandinavian metalworking was much less advanced than in the South. Still during the Viking era a Frankish sword was what every Viking warrior would want to have and for the Franks it was important to stop the illegal weapons trade.



Talking about "Iron Age" and a word for sword are two very different things, the transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age is a very important event in all cultures which couldn't be related to trade.


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> Talking about "Iron Age" and a word for sword are two very different things, the transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age is a very important event in all cultures which couldn't be related to trade.


I don't understand what you mean. Who said anything about "Iron Age"? Obviouly the time we are talking of is iron age but that doesn't matter.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> I don't understand what you mean. Who said anything about "Iron Age"? Obviouly the time we are talking of is iron age but that doesn't matter.



It seems I didn't understand what you meant, several types of bronze swords from the 2nd millennium BC have been discovered in Scandinavia.


----------



## berndf

What I tried to explain is that words of imported goods travel with the goods themselves. Of course, there was local metallurgy and local metalworking also in Scandinavia but there has already very early on establish trade routes. As you mentioned bronze swords: local bonze production is not possible in Scandinavia. At least some of the raw materials must have been imported. But that is really beside the point.

By the way, I suspect you have misunderstood the explanation on the page you posted on #1: Green's argument, which the author found convincing, was that the word could not have entered Gothic around the year 200AD but one or maximum two centuries earlier ("when they were still in Poland"), i.e. in the first century AD.


----------



## ahvalj

Old English _mēċe_ (mece - Wiktionary), unless it is a non-West Saxon form, implies _*mōkijaz: 
*ƀlōþijanan>blēdan _— Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/blōþijaną - Wiktionary
_*ƀrōđijanan>brēdan_ — Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/brōdijaną - Wiktionary
_*đōmijanan>dēman_ — Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/dōmijaną - Wiktionary
_*fōlijanan>fēlan_ — Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/fōlijaną - Wiktionary
_*fōrijanan>fēran_ — Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/fōrijaną - Wiktionary
_*fōđijanan>fēdan_ — Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/fōdijaną - Wiktionary

vs.
_*lēkijaz>lǣċe_ — Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/lēkijaz - Wiktionary
_*ƀlētijanan>blǣtan_ — Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/blētijaną - Wiktionary
_*lēwijanan>lǣwan _— Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/lēwijaną - Wiktionary
_*mēlijanan>mǣlan _— Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/mēlijaną - Wiktionary
_*mērijanan>mǣran _— Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/mērijaną - Wiktionary

Slavic has _mečь_ and _*mьčь,_ both with short vowels, whereas the expected reflex of the Gothic _e_ is the long _ě_ (_mьčь_ can be compared with the Latin _ē_ : Slavic _ь_ in _acētum>ocьtъ, Caesar>cьsaŗь _and_ graecus>grьkъ_).


----------



## berndf

ahvalj said:


> Old English mēċe (mece - Wiktionary), unless it is a non-West Saxon form, implies *mōkijaz:


It should be "would imply". There is no convincing reason to assume it had a PGm stage.


----------



## ahvalj

I just wanted to draw attention to that the attested forms in Germanic and Slavic do not uniformly point at _*mēk-._


----------



## berndf

ahvalj said:


> I just wanted to draw attention to that the attested forms in Germanic and Slavic do not uniformly point at _*mēk-._


I have no doubt. I just wanted to make sure you weren't misunderstood.


----------

