Simargl (alsoSěmargl,Semargl) orSěm andRgel is anEast Slavic god or gods often depicted as a winged dog,[1] mentioned in two sources. The origin and etymology of this/these figure(s) is the subject of considerable debate. The dominant view is to interpret Simargl as a single deity who was borrowed from the IranianSimurgh. However, this view is criticized, and some researchers propose that the existence of two deities, Sěm and Rgel, should be recognized.
| Simargl Симарьглъ | |
|---|---|
| Member ofVladimir's pantheon |
The first source that mentions Simargl isPrimary Chronicle, which describes howVladimir the Great erected statues to Slavic gods in 980:
And Vladimir began to reign alone inKyiv. And he placed idols on the hill outside the palace: aPerun in wood with a silver head and a gold moustache, andKhors andDazhbog andStribog and Simargl andMokosh. And they offered sacrifices and called them gods, and they took their sons and daughters to them and sacrificed them to the devils. And they profaned the earth with their sacrifices, and Rus’ and that hill were profaned by blood. But God the merciful, who does not wish the death of sinners, on that hill stands today the church ofSaint Vasilij, as we will relate later.[2]
—Primary Chronicle
In a later text from the second half of the 12th century,Sermon by One Who Loves Christ, Simargl is mentioned as two separate deities, Sěm and Rgel:
TheSermon further states: „Therefore, Christians must not hold demonic festivities, meaning dancing, music and profane songs, and offerings to the idols, who with fire under the fields of sheaves pray to the Vily, to Mokosh, and Sim and Rgl, to Perun,Rod, theRozhanitsy and all the like.”[4]
In copies ofPrimary Chronicle, the theonym is written (in thegenitive) asSimarĭgla (Laurentian Codex),Sěmarĭgla (Hypatian Codex) andSemarĭgla (Radziwiłł Chronicle).[5] In theSermon as two separate theonyms:Sima,Rĭgla (genitive) andSim(o)u,Rĭgl(o)u (dative).[6]
In 1841,Potr Preys [ru] proposed that Sim and Rgel be considered characters corresponding, respectively, to the Old TestamentAsima andNergal.[7] This view was supported byViljo Mansikka.[8]Alexander Famitsin, on the other hand, concluded that Simargl was a corrupted notation that was originally intended to readSimYaryl.[9]Vyacheslav Ivanov andVladimir Toporov originally concluded that the theonym originally sounded*Sedmor(o)-golvъ and meant "seven-headed".[10]
%2c_Berlin.jpg)
Since 1933, Simargl has been considered an Iranian loanword. It was first proposed[11] byKamilla Trever, a Russian historian andorientalist, according to whom the source word forSimargl was supposed to beSimurgh – a winged creature with a dog's head that was a protector of plants.[12] The derivation ofSimargl fromSimurgh is now the dominant view in scholarship.[13][6] The source of the borrowing was to bePersianSimurg,Middle PersianSēnmurw,Avestansaēna-marga orScythian-SarmatianSēnmary.[6]
Boris Rybakov was an ardent supporter of the Trever theory; he rejected the division of Simargl into two deities or the possibility of typos.[15] Based on the relationship between Simargl and Simgur, he concluded that Simargl was the god of seeds, sprouts and roots of plants, the protector of shoots and greens, the intermediary between the highest gods of heaven and earth.[16] Simargl was supposed to be a deity of a lower order. He was depicted as a winged dog with fangs and claws,[15] and his images were to be found on various objects, such as bracelets.[17] According to Rybakov, Simargl was identical toPereplut (often referring to them asSimargl-Pereplut[18]) and was later replaced by him.[19] The view is supported by a number of scholars includingAlexander Gieysztor[20] eventually also Ivanov and Toporov and many others.[13]
Mikhail Vasilyev admits that there are some linguistic difficulties in derivingSimargl fromSimurgh, but states that it is plausible and accepts the theory, at least until a better one is discovered. However, he questioned Rybakov's interpretation seeing Simargl as a plant god: there are noIranian orIndian sources confirming that Simurgh was the protector of plants, so Simargl could not have inherited this competence. However, he points out that the common Indo-Iranian characteristic of Simurgh was to mediate between worlds, and that at a later stage, in Eastern Iranian mythology, he was the protector of humans, especially human clusters, and that this may have determined his introduction into the Vladimir's pantheon. He also points out that Simurgh in the form of a dog-bird originated in(post)SasanianIran and from there spread to the space between theAtlantic andSiberia. However, after theIslamization of Iran, Simurgh lost its religious significance and became an ornamental motif. According to him, there is no evidence that among the eastern Iranians, from whom the Slavs were supposed to have taken him over, Simurgh was depicted with a dog's head, and this means that he must have had an original appearance, i.e. be depicted as a large, predatory bird, and consequently, Simargl could not have been a dog-bird. As a result, he also accuses Rybakov of arbitrarily concluding that winged dogs in East Slavic art are depictions of Simargl, while an analysis of the oldest depictions of this type (from the 10th century onward) suggests that they may be Old Russian reflections of Western European dragons of theromanesqe type.[13]
The relationship between Simargl and Simurgh has also been criticized on linguistic grounds: the vowels[6] and the last consonant ([l]) do not fit.[6][21] This has led to at least a dozen other proposals.[6] Martin Pukanec proposed to read the second part of the theonym as Proto-Slavic*orьlъ "eagle". Here he mentions theLatviancognateērglis, containing-g-. According to him, this is to prove that-g- was originally in theBalto-Slavic words for eagle, but fell out due totaboo. The Slavs were thus supposed to have borrowed Simurgh as*Sim-orьglъ "eagle Sim" and evolved into*Simo-orьglъ >*Simōrьglъ >*Simarьglъ.[22] This etymology, however, cannot be accepted because Latvianērglis is a late form and derives from the earlier*ereľis <*erlis and does not correspond to the original forms.[6]
Due to the above mentioned problems, some scholars concluded that Simargl were two separate deities: Sim/Sem/Sěm and Rgel/Rgěl, and it was for them that etymology was sought.Alexander Brückner stated that in thePrimary Chronicle theconjunction is also not found betweenKhors andDazhbog, and these are still separate theonyms, therefore Simargl should also be divided into two words.[23] According to Martin Pitro and Petr Vokáč, if one considers the existence of two deities instead of one, it is possible that Sěm and Rgel weredivine twins, the Slavic counterparts of theDioskuri.[24]
According to Brückner,Sim's etymology was not problematic. He stated that since there were such words asšeima,šaima,keimas,kaimas inLithuanian, there could have been a feminine wordsima or a masculinesim in Slavic alongsidesěmia "family". In doing so, he uncertainly pointed to such place names asSimoradz andSiemiradz.[25]
Krzysztof T. Witczak and Idaliana Kaczor assumed that the basic Old Russian form of the theonym wasSěmъ and that it was etymologically related to LithuanianSeme-pates, RomanSēmūnes "deities of sowing",SabineSimoSancusDius Fidius "some deity compared toHercules",Old IrishSemon "hero or demigod" andGaulish Σημόνη. ήρωίς "heroine". All these names are supposed to derive ultimately fromProto-Indo-European*Sēmos /*Sēmōn "god of sowing" or*Sēmonā "goddess of sowing".[26] Witczak and Kaczor refer to the PIE root*seh₁- "to sow" > Proto-Slavic*sěti. Michał Łuczyński, however, points out the errors of this etymology: theLatin notationSemepates should be read as the Lithuanian*Žemepatys (fromžemė "earth"), while for the rest of the names it is possible to reconstruct the protoform, but it would be*seVmōn-, from the PIEdial. (Italo-Celtic)*seĝʰ-mōn-, from PIE *seĝʰ- "to maintain, care for" and they are not related to Sěm.[27]
Łuczyński, however, agrees with Witczak and Kaczor that the theonym Sěm is etymologically related to the Slavic word forsowing. He reconstructs the Proto-Slavic noun*sêmъ, which consists of the verb*sěti "to sow" and the suffix*-mъ, which literally meant "sowing", secondarily "that what one sows", "that which is sown", etc., from which the theonym is derived.[27]
Brücker proposed two etymologies for Rgel. First one connects Rgel with the alleged Lithuanian godRuglis orRugulis; he connected them to, respectively,Old Polishreż and Lithuanianrugys "rye" (Old Polish from PS *rъžь[28]), thus Rgel would be a god of rye, field, economy. The other linksRgel to the Lithuanian godRuguczis "god of sour things". The Lithuanian theonym is supposed to derive fromrugti "to sour", this root in the formrug- also occurs in Slavic languages. Rgel would thus a god associated with the souring. The name of the Polish village ofRgielsko is supposed to derive from the god's name.[29]
Witczak and Kaczor reconstructed the PIE theonym*Rudlós "God of the wild nature" to be attested by theVedicRudra and the Old RussianRgel (from the earlier*Rъdlъ).[30]
Łuczyński notes, however, that none of these etymologies can be accepted because their authors use erroneous notation of the deity when creating the etymology: Brücker gives notations ofRъglъ andRъgъlъ,[29] and Witczak and Kaczor giveRъglъ[30] (all withъ – ahard sign), while in the sources it is written asRьglъ (withь – asoft sign).[31] Consequently, he also rejects derivingRgielsko from the name of a god, since then the expected form would be*Rzgielsko (in Polish, the theonym would be*Rzgieł (Slavicrъ > Polishrz)).[32]
According to Łuczyński, theь in the name may be the result ofapophony ofe :ь and the only word that fits the theonym is the Proto-Slavic verb*regti "to cut" (cf.Slovenerégati "to crack", Polishdial.rzega "streak, weal, welt"),[31] which he derives from the PIE root*h₁regʷ- "to be dark" (cf.Greekérevos "darkness").[33] The semantic shift from "dark, black" > "empty" is typical (cf.Sanskritrájas "dark; empty" from the same stem), then the meaning may have shifted to "to make something empty", "to make empty places" > "to make holes, cuts; to cut".[33] The theonym would thus consist of*rьgǫ /*regǫ "I cut" (1st person singular present tense of*regti) and the suffix*-lъ.[34] The resulting participial noun*rьglъ, which later became a theonym, may have meant "that which is cut out" > "cut" > perhaps "chink, fissure", or "hole", "cavity".[32] If this etymology is correct, the name of the Czech municipalityŘehlovice may derive from god (from the personal name*Řehl-).[32] According to Łuczyński, Sěm and Rgel were agricultural gods (from the names of agricultural work).[35]
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)