|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
"Modern peoples in the area are mainly Muslim, meaning that the Nart sagas are not remembered as well as they used to be." What's that supposed to mean? I presume it's saying that the native people have been replaced with muslims (or have turned to Islam), but it almost sounds like the author's implying that Muslims have bad memories. -- Darac Marjal 11:05, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- I wrote this article, and I think you're reading too much into what I wrote. What I meant was simply that most native peoples of the area are now Muslim, so they're not going to believe in Sosruko and Satanaya, and those old myths will eventually be forgotten. This is already the case among the Ubykh people, few of whom can remember more than fragments of their Nart stories. It wouldn't have mattered if they had taken up Christianity, Islam, or Shinto. Why would I imply that Muslims have bad memories? That would be a stupid and biased fiction that doesn't deserve to be on Wikipedia. thefamouseccles 01:53, 02 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I am from North Ossetia-Alania. Every family has at least one book about the Narts at home. Children also study them in schools as part of literature classes. They won't be forgotten. Timur.
- I'm glad to hear that. Unfortunately, among the Ubykh people and most other Northwest Caucasian people the Nart sagas are not known very well at all any more; I'm glad that they survive at least in the Ossetic regions. Thefamouseccles 12:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Narts have no relations or conection to ossetian people, it is caucasian nation mythology, the ossetians embraced it after years of living in the caucasus and their origin is not caucasian so their language, i am circassian and i know that every name in nart sagas has a meaning in circassian language, and we have songs about nart heroes. ossetians are indo-europinas, the ancient narts were not indo-europians, they were pure caucasian tribes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andynapso (talk • contribs) 12:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't make much sense
"(Implicit in this argument is the assumption that this aspect of the Nart sagas was derived from the Ossetians, as the other peoples among whom the sagas are shared are non-Indo-European.)"
Why is that? The most widely-accepted Proto Indo-European homeland is in the Ukranian and Southern Russian Steppes, just a few miles away from the ancient Adyghe lands, for example. These similarities could derive from early contacts and cultural diffusion, and clearly have nothing to do with a shared linguistic history. Therefore, if this sentence is a mere assumption and not a direct quote from Dumézil, it shouldn't be there, as it seems a rather faulty assumption.KelilanK 00:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- A simple check shows that it is not a mere assumption, and that that was precisely what Dumézil's position was. I've added some details with a source (which is not very enthusiastic about the IE origin in any case). --126.96.36.199 03:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- And BTW, that PIE homeland reasoning was very far-fetched in any case.--188.8.131.52 03:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Name of the land of the Narts
As I know there is no such "Land of Narts" every where belonged to them. They were some kind of Titans or Elves.. There are some lands belong to Nart-Orstkhoi Teip in Chechnya. But this doesnt mean that Orstkhoi are Narts or Nart is Chechen Mythology. Nart is common Caucasian Myth roots of that unknown. Sincerely Nakh 11:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
This article uses the terms saga, epic, legend, etc as though they were mutually interchangeable. They are not. Each word has a specific connotation in folklore and to use them otherwise is incorrect.--King ravana (talk) 18:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Reason for my last edits
Reason for this edit: 1
- User with following IP 184.108.40.206 introduced the word "probably" with exactly following reason: "precisely the etymology of the word is debated, actually". (see: old revision, as edited by 220.127.116.11 at 14:08, 16 December 2009). --Alpargon (talk) 16:59, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Reason for this edit: 2
Reason for this edit: 3
- Completing John Colarusso's point of view based on his research in:
Except that you keep removing: "The name Nart is of Indo-Iranian origin r-, Greek anè-r, Lincoln 1981, 97 and n. 4); S". Stop it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 00:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
The problem in here is that you change/changed the sourced content with your personal claims. There is nothing such "probably" in the source. That's your personal claim and POV/POV-pushing. I reverted your edits with clear and obvious edit summaries. Don't you read/check/verify the source? Don't you attend to my edit summaries? Where is the word "probably"?
The name Nart is of Iranian origin from an Indo-European root that is the source of words meaning 'man,' 'hero,' etc, in Sanskrit, Old Irish, Italic (e.g., the Sabine proper name Nero means 'strong'), and Greek (the source of the English prefix andro- and the suffix -andry). As the most archaic of the Nart corpora, the Northwest Caucasian Nart sagas preserve an ancient Iranian core, but also contain Northwest Caucasian accretions of such antiquity that they serve as a window into a more archaic past. Some of the tales are uniquely Northwest Caucasian in their thematics, others have recognizable parallels with traditions and literatures such as Greek and Sanskrit mythology, Homer and the Bible, Norse, Old Irish, and Slavic as well as ancient Hittite and Hurrian myths, Kartvelian culture, and also Russian magic tales.1
- He means that the word "probably" was introduced by an earlier concensus due to the fact that there are many theories. --Riversides (talk) 13:35, 24 December 2012 (UTC)