Nepabeigtā dienasgrāmata


Reply To:

(bez virsraksta) @ 11:38

[info]po commented on [info]dienasgramata's post:

Tā arī ir.
1532, pertaining to the doctrines of Arius, priest in Alexandria early 4c., who posed the question of Christ's nature in terms which appeared to debase the Savior's relation to God (denial of consubstantiation). Besides taking an abstract view of Christ's nature, he reaffirmed man's capacity for perfection. The dissention was widespread and split the Church for about a century during a crucial time.

Aryan
1601, as a term in classical history, from L. Ariana, from Gk. Aria name applied to various parts of western Asia, ult. from Skt. Arya-s "noble, honorable, respectable," the name Sanskrit-speaking invaders of India gave themselves in the ancient texts, originally "belonging to the hospitable," from arya-s "lord, hospitable lord," originally "protecting the stranger," from ari-s "stranger." Ancient Persians gave themselves the same name (O.Pers. Ariya-), hence Iran (from Iranian eran, from Avestan gen. pl. airyanam). Aryan also was used (1861) by Ger. philologist Max M?ller (1823-1900) to refer to "worshippers of the gods of the Brahmans," which he took to be the original sense. In comparative philology, Aryan was applied (by Pritchard, Whitney, etc.) to "the original Aryan language" (1847; Arian was used in this sense from 1839, but this spelling caused confusion with Arian, q.v., the term in ecclesiastical history), the presumed ancestor of a group of related, inflected languages mostly found in Europe but also including Sanskrit and Persian. In this sense it gradually was replaced by Indo-European (q.v.) or Indo-Germanic, except when used to distinguish I.E. languages of India from non-I.E. ones. It came to be applied, however, to the speakers of this group of languages (1851), on the presumption that a race corresponded to the language, especially in racist writings of French diplomat and man of letters J.A. de Gobineau (1816?82), e.g. "Essai sur li¡íin?galit? des races humaines," 1853?55, and thence it was taken up in Nazi ideology to mean "member of a Caucasian Gentile race of Nordic type." As an ethnic designation, however, it is properly limited to Indo-Iranians, and most justly to the latter.
 

Your Reply:

No:
( )Anonīms- ehh.. šitajam cibiņam netīk anonīmie, nesanāks.
Lietotājvārds:
Parole:
Temats:
Tematā HTML ir aizliegts
  
Ziņa:

Esi modrs! Lietotājs ir ieslēdzis anonīmo komentētāju IP adrešu noglabāšanu..

Nepabeigtā dienasgrāmata