*Manu and *Yemo were a duo in Proto-Indo-European mythology.[1] In the creation myth, Manu kills Yemo as a foundational part of the origin of the universe.[2][3][4][5] Yemo is sometimes also interpreted as a primordial hermaphrodite.[6][7]

The comparative analysis of different Indo-European tales has led scholars to reconstruct an original Proto-Indo-European creation myth involving twin brothers, *Mónus ('Man') and *YémHos ('Twin'), as the progenitors of the world and mankind, and a hero named *Trito ('Third') who ensured the continuity of the original sacrifice.

Although some thematic parallels can be made with Ancient Near East (the primordial couple Adam and Eve), and even Polynesian or South American legends, the linguistic correspondences found in descendant cognates of *Manu and *Yemo make it very likely that the myth discussed here has a Proto-Indo-European (PIE) origin.[1]

Following a first paper on the cosmogonical legend of Manu and Yemo, published simultaneously with Jaan Puhvel in 1975 (who pointed out the Roman reflex of the story), Bruce Lincoln assembled the initial part of the myth with the legend of the third man Trito in a single ancestral motif.[8][2][9]

Since the 1970s, the reconstructed motifs of Manu and Yemo, and to a lesser extent that of Trito, have been generally accepted among scholars.[10]

Overview

Reconstruction

There is no scholarly consensus as to which of the variants is the most accurate reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-European cosmogonic myth.[11] Bruce Lincoln's reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-European motif known as "Twin and Man" is supported by a number of scholars such as Jaan Puhvel, J. P. Mallory, Douglas Q. Adams, David W. Anthony, and, in part, Martin L. West.[12] Although some thematic parallels can be made with traditions of the Ancient Near East (the twins Abel and Cain and their brother Seth), and even Polynesian or South American legends, Lincoln argues that the linguistic correspondences found in descendant cognates of *Manu and *Yemo make it very likely that the myth has a Proto-Indo-European origin.[1] According to Edgar C. Polomé, "some elements of the [Scandinavian myth of Ymir] are distinctively Indo-European", but the reconstruction proposed by Lincoln "makes too [many] unprovable assumptions to account for the fundamental changes implied by the Scandinavian version".[11]

Creation myth

Lincoln reconstructs a creation myth involving twin brothers, *Manu- ("Man") and *Yemo- ("Twin"), as the progenitors of the world and humankind, and a hero named *Trito ("Third") who ensured the continuity of the original sacrifice.[8] Regarding the primordial state that may have preceded the creation process, West notes that the Vedic, Norse and, at least partially, the Greek traditions give evidence of an era when the cosmological elements were absent, with similar formula insisting on their non-existence: "neither non-being was nor being was at that time; there was not the air, nor the heaven beyond it..." (Rigveda), "...there was not sand nor sea nor the cool waves; earth was nowhere nor heaven above; Ginnunga Gap there was, but grass nowhere..." (Völuspá), "...there was Chasm and Night and dark Erebos at first, and broad Tartarus, but earth nor air nor heaven there was..." (The Birds).[13]

Yama, an Indic reflex of *Yemo, sitting on a water buffalo.

First Warrior

To the third man Trito, the celestial gods offer cattle as a divine gift, which is stolen by a three-headed serpent named *Ngwhi ('serpent'; and the Indo-European root for negation).[14][2]

Trito first suffers at his hands, but fortified by an intoxicating drink and aided by a helper-god (the Storm-God or *H₂ner, 'Man'),[2][15] together they go to a cave or a mountain, and the hero finally manages to overcome the monster. Trito then gives the recovered cattle back to a priest for it to be properly sacrificed.[16][2][17] He is now the first warrior, maintaining through his heroic deeds the cycle of mutual giving between gods and mortals.[18][2]

Three Functions

According to Lincoln, Manu and Yemo seem to be the protagonists of "a myth of the sovereign function, establishing the model for later priests and kings", while the legend of Trito should be seen as "a myth of the warrior function, establishing the model for all later men of arms".[18] He has thus interpreted the narrative as an expression of the priests's and kings's attempt to justify their role as indispensable for the preservation of the cosmos, and therefore as essential for the organization of society.[19] The motif indeed recalls the Dumézilian tripartition of the cosmos between the priest (in both his magical and legal aspects), the warrior (the Third Man), and the herder (the cow).[2]

Primeval hermaphrodite

Ymir sucking the milk of the primeval cow Auðumbla. 1790.

Hermann Güntert, stressing philological parallels between the Germanic and Indo-Iranian texts, argued in 1923 for an inherited Indo-European motif of the creation of the world from the sacrifice and dismemberment of a primordial androgyne.[20]

Some scholars have proposed that the primeval being Yemo was depicted as a two-folded hermaphrodite rather than a twin brother of Manu, both forming indeed a pair of complementary beings entwined together.[6][21] The Germanic names Ymir and Tuisto were understood as twin, bisexual or hermaphrodite, and some myths give a sister to the Vedic Yama, also called Yamī ('Twin').[22][23][24] The primordial being may therefore have self-sacrificed,[21] or have been divided in two, a male half and a female half, embodying a prototypal separation of the sexes that continued the primordial union of the Sky Father (Dyēus) with the Mother Earth (Dʰéǵʰōm).[6]

Interpretations

According to Lincoln, Manu and Yemo seem to be the protagonists of "a myth of the sovereign function, establishing the model for later priests and kings", while the legend of Trito should be interpreted as "a myth of the warrior function, establishing the model for all later men of arms".[18] The myth indeed recalls the Dumézilian tripartition of the cosmos between the priest (in both his magical and legal aspects), the warrior (the Third Man), and the herder (the cow).[2]

The story of Trito served as a model for later cattle raiding epic myths and most likely as a moral justification for the practice of raiding among Indo-European peoples. In the original legend, Trito is only taking back what rightfully belongs to his people, those who sacrifice properly to the gods.[18] The myth has been interpreted either as a cosmic conflict between the heavenly hero and the earthly serpent, or as an Indo-European victory over non-Indo-European people, the monster symbolizing the aboriginal thief or usurper.[25]

Legacy

Ancient Roman relief from the Cathedral of Maria Saal showing the infant twins Romulus and Remus being suckled by a she-wolf.

Cognates deriving from the Proto-Indo-European First Priest *Manu ("Man", "ancestor of mankind") include the Indic Manu, legendary first man in Hinduism, and Manāvī, his sacrificed wife; the Germanic Mannus (PGmc *Mannaz), mythical ancestor of the West Germanic tribes; and the Persian Manūščihr (from Aves. Manūš.čiθra), a Zoroastrian high priest of the 9th century AD.[26] From the name of the sacrificed First King *Yemo ("Twin") derive the Indic Yama, god of death and the underworld; the Avestan Yima, king of the golden age and guardian of hell; the Norse Ymir (from PGmc *Jumijaz), ancestor of the giants (jötnar); and most likely Remus (from Proto-Latin *Yemos or *Yemonos, with the initial y- shifting to r- under the influence of Rōmulus), killed in the Roman foundation myth by his twin brother Romulus.[3] Cognates stemming from the First Warrior *Trito ("Third") include the Vedic Trita, the Avestan Thrita, and the Norse þriði.[27]

Many Indo-European beliefs explain the origin of natural elements as the result of the original dismemberment of Yemo: his flesh usually becomes the earth, his hair grass, his bone yields stone, his blood water, his eyes the sun, his mind the moon, his brain the clouds, his breath the wind, and his head the heavens.[9] The traditions of sacrificing an animal to disperse its parts according to socially established patterns, a custom found in Ancient Rome and India, has been interpreted as an attempt to restore the balance of the cosmos ruled by the original sacrifice.[9]

The motif of Manu and Yemo has been influential throughout Eurasia following the Indo-European migrations. The Greek, Old Russian (Poem on the Dove King) and Jewish versions depend on the Iranian, and a Chinese version of the myth has been introduced from Ancient India.[28] The Armenian version of the myth of the First Warrior Trito depends on the Iranian, and the Roman reflexes were influenced by earlier Greek versions.[29]

Linguistic evidence

Manu and Yemo

Cognates deriving from the Proto-Indo-European First Priest *Manu ('Man', 'ancestor of humankind') include the Indic Mánu, legendary first man in Hinduism, and Manāvī, his sacrificed wife; the Germanic Mannus (from Germ. *Manwaz), mythical ancestor of the West Germanic tribes; and the Persian Manūščihr (from Av. Manūš.čiθra, 'son of Manuš'), Zoroastrian high priest of the 9th century AD.[26][30]

From the name of the sacrificed First King *Yemo ('Twin') derive the Indic Yama, god of death and the underworld; the Avestan Yima, king of the golden age and guardian of hell; the Norse Ymir (from Germ. *Yumiyáz), ancestor of the giants (jötnar); and most likely Remus (from Proto-Latin *Yemos), killed in the Roman foundation myth by his twin brother Rōmulus.[3][4][5][2] Latvian jumis ('double fruit'), Latin geminus ('twin') and Middle Irish emuin ('twin') are also linguistically related.[3][31]

Indo-European linguistic descendants (in bold) and thematic echoes (in italic) of the creation myth.[32]
Tradition First Priest First King First mammal Heavenly gods
Proto-Indo-European *Manu ('Man') *Yemo ('Twin') Primordial Cow Sky-Father, Storm-God, Divine Twins
Indian Mánu, Puruṣa Yama, (Manāvī) Manu's bull The Vedic gods
Iranian Spityura, Manūščihr Yima, Gayōmart Primordial Ox (Gōšūrvan) –
Germanic Mannus Ymir, Tuisto Primordial Cow (Auðhumla) Óðinn and his brothers
Roman Rōmulus *Yemos (Remus) She-wolf The senators

Trito and Ngwhi

Cognates stemming from the First Warrior *Trito ('Third') include the Vedic Trita, the hero who recovered the stolen cattle from the serpent Vṛtrá; the Avestan Thraētona ('son of Thrita'), who won back the abducted women from the serpent Aži Dahāka; and the Norse þriði ('Third'), one of the names of Óðinn.[33][34][17] Other cognates may appear in the Greek expressions trítos sōtḗr (τρίτος σωτήρ; 'Third Saviour'), an epithet of Zeus, and tritogḗneia (τριτογήνεια; 'Third born' or 'born of Zeus'), an epithet of Athena; and perhaps in the Slavic mythical hero Troyan, found in Russian and Serbian legends alike.[34][lower-alpha 1]

*Ngwhi, a term meaning 'serpent', is also related to the Indo-European root for negation (*ne-).[14][2] Descendent cognates can be found in the Iranian Aži, the name of the inimical serpent, and in the Indic áhi ('serpent'), a term used to designate the monstrous serpent Vṛtrá,[34] both descending from Proto-Indo-Iranian *aj'hi.[36]

Indo-European linguistic descendants (in bold) and thematic echoes (in italic) of the myth of the First Warrior.[37]
Tradition First Warrior Three-headed Serpent Helper God Stolen present
Proto-Indo-European *Trito ('Third') *Ngwhi The Storm-god or Hanēr ('Man') Cattle
Indian Trita Vṛtrá ('áhi') Indra Cows
Iranian Thraētona ('son of Thrita') Aži Dahāka *Vr̥traghna Women
Germanic þriði, Hymir Three serpents Þórr Goats (?)
Graeco-Roman Herakles Geryon, Cācus Helios Cattle

Comparative mythology

Many Indo-European beliefs explain aspects of human anatomy from the results of the original dismemberment of Yemo: his flesh usually becomes the earth, his hair grass, his bone yields stone, his blood water, his eyes the sun, his mind the moon, his brain the clouds, his breath the wind, and his head the heavens.[9] The traditions of sacrificing an animal before dispersing its parts following socially established patterns, a custom found in Ancient Rome and India, has been interpreted as an attempt to restore the balance of the cosmos ruled by the original sacrifice.[9]

In the Indo-Iranian version of the myth, his brother Manu also sacrifices the cow, and from the parts of the dead animal are born the other living species and vegetables. In the European reflexes, however, the cow (represented by a she-wolf in the Roman myth) serves only as a provider of milk and care for the twins before the creation.[38] This divergence may be explained by the cultural differences between the Indo-Iranian and European branches of the Indo-European family, with the former still strongly influenced by pastoralism, and the latter much more agricultural, perceiving the cow mainly as a source of milk.[39] According to Lincoln, the Indo-Iranian version best preserves the ancestral motif, since they lived closer to the original Proto-Indo-European pastoral way of life.[40]

Indo-Iranian

Creation myth

Mánu ('Man, human') appears in the Rigveda as the first sacrificer and the founder of religious law, the Law of Mánu.[41][42] He is the brother (or half-brother) of Yama ('Twin'), both presented as the sons of the solar deity Vivasvat. The association of Mánu with the ritual of sacrifice is so strong that those who do not sacrifice are named amanuṣāḥ, which means 'not belonging to Mánu', 'unlike Mánu', or 'inhuman'.[43] The Song of Puruṣa (another word meaning 'man') tells how the body parts of the sacrificed primeval man led to the creation of the cosmos (the heaven from his head, the air from his navel, the earth from his legs) and the Hindu castes (the upper parts becoming the upper castes and the lower parts the commoners).[44][42][45] In the later Śatapatha Brāhmana, both a primordial bull and Mánu's wife Manāvī are sacrificed by the Asuras (demi-gods). According to Lincoln, this could represent an independent variant of the original myth, with the figure of Yama laying behind that of Manāvī.[46]

The Iranian mythical king Yima. c. 1522.

After a religious transformation led by Zarathustra around the 7th–6th centuries BC that degraded the status of prior myths and deities, *Manuš was replaced in the Iranian tradition with three different figures: Ahriman, who took his role as first sacrificer; Manūščihr ('son' or 'seed of Manuš'), who replaced him as ancestor of the priestly line; and Zarathustra himself, who took his role as priest par excellence. Manūščihr is described in the Greater Bun-dahišnīh as the ancestor of all Mōpats ('High Priests') of Pars, and it has been proposed that *Manuš was originally regarded as the First Priest instead of Zarathustra by pre-Zoroastrian tribes.[47]

The Indo-Iranian tradition portrays the first mortal man or king, *YamHa, as the son of the solar deity, *Hui-(H)uas-uant.[45][48] Invoked in funeral hymns of the Rigveda, Yama is depicted as the first man to die, the one who established the path towards death after he freely chose his own departure from life.[49] Although his realm was originally associated with feasting, beauty and happiness, Yama was gradually portrayed as a horrific being and the ruler of the Otherworld in the epic and puranic traditions.[49] Some scholars have equated this abandonment (or transcendence) of his own body with the sacrifice of Puruṣa.[50][44] In a motif shared with the Iranian tradition, which is touched in the Rigveda and told in later traditions, Yama and his twin sister Yamī are presented as the children of the sun-god Vivasvat. Discussing the advisability of incest in a primordial context, Yamī insists on having sexual intercourse with her brother Yama, who rejects it, thus forgoing his role as the creator of humankind.[22]

In pre-Zoroastrian Iran, Yima was seen as the first king and first mortal. The original myth of creation was indeed condemned by Zarathustra, who makes mention of it in the Avesta when talking about the two spirits that "appeared in the beginning as two twins in a dream ... (and) who first met and instituted life and non-life".[51] Yima in particular is depicted as the first to distribute portions of the cow for consumption,[52] and is explicitly condemned for having introduced the eating of meat.[53] After a brief reign on earth, the king Yima was said in a later tradition to be deprived of his triple royal nimbus, which embodied the three social classes in Iranian myths. Mithra receives the part of the Priest, Thraētona that of the Warrior, and Kərəsāspa that of the Commoner. The saga ends with the real dismemberment of Yima by his own brother, the daiwic figure Spityura.[54][44][52] In another myth of the Younger Avesta, the primal man Gayōmart (Gaya marətan; 'Mortal Life') and the primeval world ox Gōšūrvan are sacrificed by the destructive spirit Ahriman (Aŋra Mainyu, 'Evil Spirit').[47] From the ox's parts came all the plants and animals, and from Gayōmart's body the minerals and humankind.[51][52] In the Vīdēvdāt, Yima is presented as the builder of an underworld, a sub-terrestrial paradise eventually ruled by Zarathustra and his son. The story, giving a central position to the new religious leader, is once again probably the result of a Zoroastrian reformation of the original myth, and Yima might have been seen as the ruler of the realm of the dead in the early Iranian tradition.[53] Norbert Oettinger argues that the story of Yima and the Vara was originally a flood myth, and the harsh winter was added in due to the dry nature of Eastern Iran, as flood myths didn't have as much of an effect as harsh winters. He has argued that the Videvdad 2.24's mention of melted water flowing is a remnant of the flood myth, and mentions that the Indian Flood Myths originally had their protagonist as Yama, but it was changed to Manu later.[55]

Legacy

The motif of Manu and Yemo has been influential throughout Eurasia following the Indo-European migrations. The Greek, Old Russian (Poem on the Dove King) and Jewish versions depend on the Iranian, and a Chinese version of the myth has been introduced from Ancient India.[28] The Armenian version of the myth of the First Warrior Trito depends on the Iranian, and the Roman reflexes were influenced by earlier Greek versions.[29]

Baltic mythology records a fertility deity Jumis,[56] whose name means 'pair, double (of fruits)'.[57] His name is also considered a cognate to Indo-Iranian Yama, and related to Sanskrit yamala 'in pairs, twice' and Prakrit yamala 'twins'.[58] Ranko Matasović cites the existence of Jumala as a female counterpart and sister of Jumis in Latvian dainas (folksongs), as another fertility deity,[59][60] and in the same vein, Zmago Smitek mentioned the pair as having "pronounced vegetational characteristics".[61] Jumis, whose name can also mean 'double ear of wheat', is also considered a Latvian chthonic deity that lived "beneath the plowed field".[62]

Later Iranian tradition (Pahlavi) attests a brother-sister pair named Jima (Yima) and Jimak (Yimak).[63][64] Yimak, or Jamag, is described as Yima's twin sister in the Bundahishn from Central Iran.[61][65] Yima consorts with his sister Yimak to produce humankind, but is later killed by Azi Dahaka.[66]

The name Yama is attested as a compound in personal names of the historical Persepolis Administrative Archives, such as Yamakka and Yamakšedda (from Old Persian *Yama-xšaita- 'majestic Yama', modern Jamshid).[67]

Nuristani deity Imra is also considered a reflex of Indo-Iranian Yama. The name Imra is thought to derive from *Yama-raja "King Yama",[68][69] a name possibly cognate to the Bangani title Jim Raza 'god of the dead'.[70] He is also known as Mara "Killer, Death".[71][72] This name may have left traces in other Nuristani languages: Waigali Yamrai,[73] Kalash (Urtsun) imbro,[74] Ashkun im'ra, Prasun yumr'a and Kati im'ro - all referring to a "creator god".[75][76] This deity also acts as the guardian to the gates of hell (located in a subterranean realm), preventing the return to the world of the living - a motif that echoes the role of Yama as the king of the underworld.[77]

Linguist and comparativist Jaan Puhvel proposed that the characters of "Man" and "Twin" are present in Proto-Latin under the names of Romulus and Remus (from *Yemo(no)s). The former was deified as god Quirinus, a name he considered to be ultimately derived from *wihₓrós ('man').[78][79][lower-alpha 2]

Following Puhvel's line of argument, Belarusian scholar Siarhiej Sanko attempted to find a Proto-Baltic related pair, possibly named Jumis ("twin") and Viras ("male, hero"). He saw a connection with (quasi-pseudo-)historical Prussian king Widewuto and his brother Bruteno. Related to them is a pair of figures named Wirschaitos and Szwaybrutto (Iszwambrato, Schneybrato, Schnejbrato, Snejbrato) which he interprets as "Elder" and "His Brother", respectively.[81] These latter two would, in turn, be connected to the worship, by the Prussians, of stone statues erected during their expansion in the 12th and 13th centuries.[82]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Troyan has been tentatively connected to numeral "try" 'three', Ukrainian troian 'father of triplets/three sons', or considered a possible guardian deity of Russia in pre-Christian times.[35]
  2. ↑ On a related note, academic John T. Koch suggests that a figure named Euron, attested in the poem Cad Goddeu in relation to Welsh goddess Modron, may ultimately derive from *u̯ironos 'the divine man, hero'.[80]

Bibliography

References

  1. 1 2 3 Lincoln 1975, p. 124.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Anthony 2007, pp. 134–135.
  3. 1 2 3 4 Lincoln 1975, p. 129.
  4. 1 2 Puhvel 1987, pp. 285–289.
  5. 1 2 Mallory & Adams 1997, pp. 129–130.
  6. 1 2 3 West 2007, p. 358.
  7. ↑ Dandekar, Ramchandra N. (1979). Vedic mythological tracts. Delhi: Ajanta Publications. OCLC 6917651.
  8. 1 2 Lincoln 1976, pp. 42–43.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 Mallory & Adams 2006, pp. 435–436.
  10. ↑ See: Puhvel 1987, pp. 285–287; Mallory & Adams 2006, pp. 435–436; Anthony 2007, pp. 134–135. West 2007 agrees with the reconstructed motif of Manu and Yemo, although he notes that interpretations of the myths of Trita and Thraētona are debated. According to Polomé 1986, "some elements of the [Scandinavian myth of Ymir] are distinctively Indo-Europeans", but the reconstruction of the creation myth of the first Man and his Twin proposed by Lincoln 1975 "makes too unprovable assumptions to account for the fundamental changes implied by the Scandinavian version".
  11. 1 2 Polomé 1986.
  12. ↑ See: Puhvel 1987, pp. 285–287; Mallory & Adams 2006, pp. 435–436; Anthony 2007, pp. 134–135. West 2007 agrees with the reconstructed motif of Manu and Yemo, although he notes that interpretations of the myths of Trita and Thraētona are debated.
  13. ↑ Polomé 1986, p. 473.
  14. 1 2 Lincoln 1976, p. 51.
  15. ↑ Mallory & Adams 2006, p. 437.
  16. ↑ Lincoln 1976, p. 58.
  17. 1 2 Mallory & Adams 1997, p. 138.
  18. 1 2 3 4 Lincoln 1976, pp. 63–64.
  19. ↑ Arvidsson 2006, p. 302.
  20. ↑ Lincoln 1975, p. 122.
  21. 1 2 Dandekar 1979.
  22. 1 2 Puhvel 1987, p. 63.
  23. ↑ Mallory & Adams 1997, p. 129.
  24. ↑ West 2007, pp. 356–357.
  25. ↑ Lincoln 1976, pp. 58, 62.
  26. 1 2 Mallory & Adams 1997, p. 367.
  27. ↑ Lincoln 1976, p. 47.
  28. 1 2 Lincoln 1975, p. 125.
  29. 1 2 Lincoln 1976, p. 46.
  30. ↑ Lincoln 1975, pp. 134–136.
  31. ↑ Puhvel 1987, p. 289.
  32. ↑ See: Lincoln 1975; Puhvel 1987; Mallory & Adams 2006; West 2007; Anthony 2007.
  33. ↑ Lincoln 1976, pp. 47–48.
  34. 1 2 3 West 2007, p. 260.
  35. ↑ Bilaniuk, Petro B. T. (December 1988). "The Ultimate Reality and Meaning in the Pre-Christian Religion of the Eastern Slavs". Ultimate Reality and Meaning. 11 (4): 254, 258–259. doi:10.3138/uram.11.4.247.
  36. ↑ Witzel, Michael (2008). "Slaying the Dragon across Eurasia". In Bengtson, John D. (ed.). In Hot Pursuit of Language in Prehistory, Essays in the Four Fields of Anthropology. John Benjamins Publishing. p. 269. ISBN 9789027232526.
  37. ↑ See: Lincoln 1976; Mallory & Adams 2006; West 2007; Anthony 2007.
  38. ↑ Lincoln 1975, p. 139.
  39. ↑ Lincoln 1975, pp. 142–143.
  40. ↑ Lincoln 1975, p. 144.
  41. ↑ Lincoln 1975, p. 134.
  42. 1 2 Fortson 2004, p. 27.
  43. ↑ Lincoln 1975, pp. 134–135.
  44. 1 2 3 Puhvel 1987, p. 286.
  45. 1 2 West 2007, p. 357.
  46. ↑ Lincoln 1975, pp. 133–134.
  47. 1 2 Lincoln 1975, p. 136.
  48. ↑ Lubotsky, Alexander. "Indo-Aryan Inherited Lexicon". Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Project. Leiden University.. See entries vivásvant- and yamá- [2] (online database).
  49. 1 2 Lincoln 1991, pp. 32–33.
  50. ↑ Lincoln 1975, p. 133.
  51. 1 2 Lincoln 1975, pp. 129–130.
  52. 1 2 3 West 2007, pp. 357–358.
  53. 1 2 Lincoln 1991, p. 38.
  54. ↑ Lincoln 1975, pp. 131–132.
  55. ↑ N. Oettinger, Before Noah: Possible Relics of the Flood myth in Proto-Indo-Iranian and Earlier, [in:] Proceedings of the 24th Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, ed. S.W. Jamison, H.C. Melchert, B. Vine, Bremen 2013, p. 169–183
  56. ↑ Lurker, Manfred (2004). The Routledge Dictionary Of Gods Goddesses Devils And Demons. Routledge. p. 95. ISBN 978-04-15340-18-2.
  57. ↑ Oinas, Felix J. (1980). "A Balto-Finnic and Baltic fertility spirit". In: Journal of Baltic Studies, 11:3, pp. 207-211. DOI: 10.1080/01629778000000231
  58. ↑ Vainik, Ene. (2014). "Jumala jälgi ajamas" [Tracing back the word jumal 'god']. Mäetagused 58: 21. 10.7592/MT2014.58.vainik.
  59. ↑ Matasović, Ranko (2018). A Reader in Comparative Indo-European Religion. Zagreb: University of Zagreb.
  60. ↑ Balode, Laimute (2015). "Criteria for Identifying Possible Finnicisms in Latvian Toponymy". In Junttila, Santeri (ed.). Contacts between the Baltic and Finnic languages. Uralica Helsingiensia. Vol. 7. Helsinki: University of Helsinki. pp. 59–60. ISBN 978-952-5667-67-7.
  61. 1 2 Šmitek, Zmago (1998). "Kresnik: An Attempt at Mythological Reconstruction". Studia Mythologica Slavica. 1: 109.
  62. ↑ Mottz, Lotte (1997). The Faces of the Goddess. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 72. ISBN 0-19-508967-7.
  63. ↑ Limerov, Pavel (2019). "Some Motifs in Komi Legends about the Creation of the World". Electronic Journal of Folklore. 76: 34. doi:10.7592/FEJF2019.76.limerov.
  64. ↑ Boyce, Mary (1996). A History of Zoroastrianism. Vol. One: The Early Period. Leiden; New York; Köln: Brill. p. 96. ISBN 978-90-04043-19-0.
  65. ↑ Akbarzadeh, Daryoosh (Spring–Summer 2014). "China and the Myth of Jam". Journal of Indo-European Studies. 42 (1 & 2): 4.
  66. ↑ Bhattacharji, Sukumari (1970). The Indian Theogony: A Comparative Study of Indian Mythology from the Vedas to the Puranas. Cambridge University Press. p. 93. ISBN 978-0-521-05382-2.
  67. ↑ Hallock, Richard T. (1969). Persepolis Fortification Tablets (PDF). Oriental Institute Publications. Vol. 92. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press. pp. 771–772.
  68. ↑ Allen, Nicholas Justin (1991). "Some gods of Pre-Islamic Nuristan". Revue de l'histoire des religions. 208 (2): 141–168. doi:10.3406/rhr.1991.1679.
  69. ↑ Cacopardo, A.S. (2016). "A World In-between. The Pre-Islamic Cultures of the Hindu Kush". In: Pellò, S.(ed.). Borders. Itineraries on the Edges of Iran. Venezia, Eurasiatica Quaderni di studi su Balcani, Anatolia, Iran, Caucaso e Asia Centrale. Edizioni Ca' Foscari. p. 250. ISBN 978-88-6969-100-3 [DOI: 10.14277/6969-100-3/EUR-5-10]
  70. ↑ Zoller, Claus Peter. "Review Article: "Pagan Christmas: Winter feast of the Kalasha of the Hindu Kush" and the true frontiers of 'Greater Peristan'.". In: Acta Orientalia 2018, n. 79. 2018. pp. 217 and 232 (footnote nr. 174). ISSN 0001-6438
  71. ↑ Parpola, Asko. The Roots of Hinduism: The Early Aryans and the Indus Civilization. Oxford University Press. 2015. pp. 143 and 264. ISBN 978-0-19-022690-9
  72. ↑ Cacopardo, A.S. (2016). "A World In-between. The Pre-Islamic Cultures of the Hindu Kush". In: Pellò, S.(ed.). Borders. Itineraries on the Edges of Iran. Venezia, Eurasiatica Quaderni di studi su Balcani, Anatolia, Iran, Caucaso e Asia Centrale. Edizioni Ca' Foscari. pp. 251 and 253. ISBN 978-88-6969-100-3 [DOI: 10.14277/6969-100-3/EUR-5-10]
  73. ↑ Klimburg, Max. "The Arts and Culture of Parun, Kafiristan's «Sacred Valley»". In: Arts asiatiques, tome 57, 2002. pp. 51-68. [DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/arasi.2002.1480]; www.persee.fr/doc/arasi_0004-3958_2002_num_57_1_1480
  74. ↑ Parkes, Peter. "Temple of Imra, Temple of Mahandeu: A Kafir Sanctuary in Kalasha Cosmology". Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. University of London 54, no. 1 (1991): 85. http://www.jstor.org/stable/617315.
  75. ↑ Zoller, Claus Peter. "Review Article: "Pagan Christmas: Winter feast of the Kalasha of the Hindu Kush" and the true frontiers of 'Greater Peristan'.". In: Acta Orientalia 2018, n. 79. 2018. p. 232 (footnote nr. 174). ISSN 0001-6438
  76. ↑ Minahan, James B. (10 February 2014). Ethnic Groups of North, East, and Central Asia: An Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. p. 205. ISBN 9781610690188. Retrieved 7 January 2021. Living in the high mountain valleys, the Nuristani retained their ancient culture and their religion, a form of ancient Hinduism with many customs and rituals developed locally. Certain deities were revered only by one tribe or community, but one deity was universally worshipped by all Nuristani as the Creator, the Hindu god Yama Raja, called imr'o or imra by the Nuristani tribes.
  77. ↑ Boyce, Mary. "The Pre-Zoroastrian Religion of the Medes and the Persians". In: A History of Zoroastrianism, Zoroastrianism under the Achaemenians. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1982. pp. 18-19. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004293908_003
  78. ↑ Puhvel, Jaan. "Devata-Dvandva in Hittite, Greek, and Latin". In: The American Journal of Philology 98, no. 4 (1977): 404-405. Accessed March 3, 2021. doi:10.2307/293802.
  79. ↑ Puhvel, Jaan. "Remus Et Frater". In: History of Religions 15, no. 2 (1975): 156-157. Accessed March 4, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1061928.
  80. ↑ Koch, John T. "Some Suggestions and Etymologies Reflecting upon the Mythology of the Four Branches". In: Proceedings of the Harvard Celtic Colloquium 9 (1989): 6-8. Accessed March 4, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20557203.
  81. ↑ SAŃKO, Siarhiej, and Aliaksej Shota. "PODSTAWOWE SKŁADNIKI BIAŁORUSKIEJ NARRACJI SAKRALNEJ W PERSPEKTYWIE PORÓWNAWCZEJ." Politeja, no. 22 (2012): 167-68. Accessed March 3, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24920134.
  82. ↑ Кулаков Владимир Иванович (2017). Каменные изваяния пруссов. Исторический формат, (1-2), 151-169. URL: (дата обращения: 03.03.2021).
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.