by Lulzim Osmanaj. Translation Petrit Latifi

Abstract

The persistence of major river names across successive ethnic and linguistic layers provides crucial evidence for reconstructing early Indo-European settlement in Europe. This study examines the hydronym Danube within the broader Indo-European tradition derived from the root dānu- (“river, stream”), widely attested in Iranian languages and Eastern European hydronymy. By reviewing linguistic, historical, and geographical evidence, the paper reassesses the long-standing debate over whether the transmission of the Danube’s name should be attributed primarily to Celtic or Illyrian populations. While Celtic mediation is supported by formal parallels in Western Europe, Illyrian continuity along the Danubian basin suggests a decisive role in preserving and transmitting this ancient hydronym. The Danube thus emerges as a shared Indo-European onomastic inheritance shaped by multiple populations.

Danube

The tendency of the names of large rivers to survive beyond the ethnic and linguistic changes of the surrounding populations constitutes one of the most important tools of historical onomastics for reconstructing the earliest ethnic stratifications of Europe. In this context, the Danube river occupies a central place, not only because of its geographical and historical role, but also because of its etymology, which testifies to a very ancient Indo-European tradition.

The basic meaning of the name Danube is broadly related to the Indo-European root *dānu-, clearly documented in the Avestan language with the meaning “river, stream”. This root also appears in the Eastern Iranian languages, as evidenced by the Ossetian word don, meaning “water” or “river”, while its presence is also confirmed by the hydronymy of Eastern Europe with rivers such as the Don, Dnieper and Dniester, which are convincingly explained through the Scythian forms *Dānu apara (“back river”) and *Dānu nazdya (“front river”).

These data indicate that we are dealing with a very early Indo-European layer, associated with prehistoric populations that have left a lasting mark on toponymy, despite later ethnic displacements.

The ancient form of the name Danube, attested in Latin sources as Danuvius and in ancient Greek as Δάνουβις, represents an adaptation of this ancient base to the linguistic tradition of the classical world. Before this adaptation, the Germanic populations, according to linguistic reconstructions, took the name in the form *Dānuvioz, which in their languages ​​has developed into forms such as Dônoviaz and Donavia.

This shows that the name of the river was already consolidated before contact with the Germanics, which shifts its origin to a much earlier chronological horizon, before the first century BC. It is here that the scientific debate arises on the ethnicity of the populations that transmitted this name: Illyrians or Celts.

At the First International Congress of Onomastics Researchers, held in Paris in 1933, this issue was addressed directly. J. Schnetz argued for a Celtic origin of the name Danube, relying on the presence of hydronyms Don in Celtic Britain and on the use of the suffix -vios, which is preserved in the Latin form Danuvius. An important argument in favor of this thesis is the existence of the Donwy River in North Wales, where the suffix -wy corresponds to the Proto-British -ovio-, an element widely attested in Celtic hydronymy, with dozens of examples in the Welsh territory.

From this perspective, the Danube would represent a hydronymy formed or at least elaborated within the Western Celtic tradition. However, W. Steinhauser’s argument for an Illyrian origin is based on a broader geographical and historical analysis of Balkan and Danubian hydronymy. According to him, in the territories that were known in antiquity as Illyrian, the main rivers bear names of the older layer, which can be associated with the Illyrians, while the smaller rivers often display names of the Celtic layer, which suggests a later cultural overlap.

Given that the Illyrians reached the peak of their reach and importance around the first millennium BC and that their presence extended to areas of Central Europe, including southern Germany, in an already Indo-European and proto-Celtic environment, it is reasonable to think that they played an essential role in the preservation and transmission of the name of the Danube.

In this context, the Danube appears not as a creation of a single people, but as an Indo-European hydronymic heritage, appropriated, adapted and transmitted by different populations, among which the Illyrians occupy an important place due to their territorial continuity along the middle and lower reaches of the river.

Their role in this process does not necessarily lie in the initial invention of the name, but in its preservation in a space where the river constituted the main economic, cultural and strategic axis. Thus, the etymology of the Danube and its connection with the Illyrians should not be seen as an exclusive issue, but as evidence of the interweaving of early Indo-European layers with the historical realities of prehistoric and protohistoric Europe, where the Illyrians represent one of the most important bearers of this ancient heritage.

References
Schmid, J. Die Gründungsurkunden des Kollegiatstifts Unserer Lieben Frau in Regensburg. Regensburg, 1911–1912.
Thomas, R. Die Ortsnamen der Umgebung von Regensburg. Verhandlungen des Historischen Vereins für Oberpfalz und Regensburg, Bd. 71, 1921, p. 3–29.
Widemann, J. (ed.). Das Regensburger Urkundenbuch. Monumenta Boica, Bd. LIII. Munich, 1912.
Schnetz, J. Fluss- und Ortsnamenforschung. Zeitschrift für Namenforschung (ZNF), Munich, 1925–1943.
Steinhauser, W. “Illyrische und keltische Hydronymie im Donauraum.” In: Verhandlungen des Ersten Internationalen Kongresses für Namenforschung, Paris, 1933.
Förster, M. Der Flussname Donau and its Western European equivalents. Munich, 1924.

Krahe, H. Our Oldest River Names. Wiesbaden, 1964.

Pokorny, J. Indo-European Etymological Dictionary. Bern–Munich, 1959.