Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tied] Re: Unicode (was: Romanized Bastarnians)

Expand Messages
  • george knysh
    I am on unicode and received your advice message OK. But In was on unicode before when Torsten came in garbled. Anyway since I deciphered you fine and double
    Message 1 of 29 , Dec 31, 2011
    • 0 Attachment

      I am on unicode and received your advice message OK. But In was on unicode before when Torsten came in garbled. Anyway since I deciphered you fine and double checked that I indeed was on unicode I 'll stick with what's working and we'll see.
      --- On Sat, 12/31/11, guestu5er <guestuser.0x9357@...> wrote:

      From: guestu5er <guestuser.0x9357@...>
      Subject: [tied] Re: Unicode (was: Romanized Bastarnians)
      To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Saturday, December 31, 2011, 11:48 AM

       
      >>*****GK: Your Google translator has let you down. "в середине I в.
      >>н.э." means "in the middle of the 1rst c. CE" (=50 AD), NOT "in the
      >>middle of the I cent. BC"....****

      [snip]

      >P.P.S. But I see tht the cybalist version is still scrambled, though
      >my machine had perfect cyrillic script in your post...

      Try switching from Western (ISO-8859-1) to Unicode (UTF-8) - under
      "View" in the menu of your browser. (Thus, the Kyrillitsa'll be 100%
      OK.)

      George

      PS: A happy New Year to everybody!

    • Torsten
      ... So it has. Some asshat user must have chosen to tell it that н.э. translates to BC . Next time I ll check the translation better. I looked through
      Message 2 of 29 , Jan 2, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        > >
        > > (GK)
        > > > you can proceed to read Shchukin in his original: cf.
        > > > krotov.info/history/09/3/schukin.html
        > >
        > > > (This is) the classic article on Slavic beginnings
        > > > written eight years after your citation from the
        > > > 1989 Shchukin volume. It has a lot on Bastarnia,
        > > > none of which supports you.
        > >
        > > None of which contradicts me.
        > >
        > >
        > > GK: So you've read the piece? Point out the passages
        > > where he supports your views about events in the
        > > 90-50 BCE period. Esp. your notion that the population
        > > shifts both Shchukin and Nosevych date as of 50 CE ->
        > > actually occurred more than one hundred years earlier,
        > > and affected different areas of Przeworsk than per
        > > their analysis.
        > >
        > http://krotov.info/history/09/3/schukin.html
        > 'П.Н.Третьяков предполагал: когда во II веке н.э.
        > возникла черняховская общность, носители зарубинецкой
        > культуры Среднего Поднепровья были вынуждены отступить на
        > север и северо-восток, а после гуннского нашествия и
        > крушения Черняхова вернулись уже в виде раннеисторических
        > славян. Идея оказалась в общем плодотворной, хотя и
        > выявился затем ряд неточностей. Черняховская культура
        > возникла не во II в. н.э., а не ранее 20-60-х годов III
        > века (Щукин 1976; Szczukin 1981; �"ороховский 1989;
        > Шаров 1992), и не черняховцы, а сарматы в середине I
        > в. н.э. заставили носителей зарубинецкой культуры
        > сдвинуться на север (Щукин 1972; Щукин 1994: 232-239).'
        >
        > "P.N. Tretyakov suggested that when the Cherniakhov
        > community emerged in the II century AD, the bearers of
        > the Zarubintsy culture of Middle Dnieper were forced to
        > retreat to the north and northeast, and after the
        > invasion of the Huns and the collapse of Chernyakhov
        > already returned in the form of early-history Slavs.
        > The idea proved generally fruitful, although it later
        > revealed a number of inaccuracies. The Chernyakhovsk
        > culture did not emerge in the II cent. CE, but not
        > earlier than 20-60s of III century (Shchukin 1976;
        > Szczukin 1981 Gorokhovskiy 1989, Sharov 1992), and it
        > was not the Chernyakhov people, but Sarmatians in the
        > middle of the I cent. BC who forced carriers of the
        > Zarubintsy culture to move to the north (Shchukin 1972,
        > Shchukin 1994: 232-239)."
        >
        > I don't understand the way you think, George.
        >
        >
        > *****GK: Your Google translator has let you down.
        > "в середине I в. н.э." means "in the middle of the 1rst c. CE"
        > (=50 AD), NOT "in the middle of the I cent. BC"....****

        So it has. Some asshat user must have chosen to tell it that 'н.э.' translates to 'BC'. Next time I'll check the translation better.

        I looked through Shchukin's text. He doesn't state explicitly how he has dated the Atmoni and Sidoni's last stand and flight from Sarmatians. My suspicion is that dating has been done by a coupling to Farzoy as the sole purveyor of violence around that time.

        ibd.
        '“Славянская” зарубинецкая культура спокойно существовала до середины I в. н.э., когда она была разрушена нашествием сарматов. Часть населения отошла на северо-восток и восток, часть â€" на запад, образовав на Ð'олыни, вместе с обитавшими уже здесь пшеворцами, зубрецкую группу памятников, исследованную за последние годы Ð".Н.Козаком (Козак 1991).'

        "The 'Slavic' Zarubintsy culture quietly existed until the middle of I century CE, when it was destroyed by the invasion of the Sarmatians. One part of the population moved away to the north-east and east, one part to the west, having formed in Volhynia, together with the settled already here Przeworskers, the Zubretskaya group of monuments, explored in recent years by D.N. Kozak (Kozak, 1991)."

        This sounds to me like a temporal lacuna being filled out. I better take a look at Kozak (1991)


        > P.S. If need be I can verify other passages. You've found a way to
        > descramble the cyrillic so that it can be read. Good.
        >

        I post directly on the site, after switching tools -> code to UTF-8. It still screws up some of capital Cyrillic and Greek letters.


        It seems to me none of those researchers Shchukin mentions have considered multilingual slaver-slaves societies (pre-feudal?), with a warring aristocracy at the top and a farming population at the bottom speaking different languages and little linguistic contact between them. Think East and central Europe Middle Ages.

        Here's a scenario from me:

        Jastorf: Celtic top, Germanic bottom

        ->
        Przeworsk:
        Celtic dies out;
        Proto - Low German top;
        Venetic trader layer,
        Venetic influences Proto - Low German (as Schrijver's language of geminates),
        Venetic dies out;
        Western Slavic bottom

        ->
        Zarubintsy:
        Proto - High German top (from Przeworsk),
        Eastern Slavic bottom

        ->
        Zubretskaya:
        Proto - High German top (from Zarubintsy),
        Proto - Low German middle,
        West Slavic bottom



        Torsten
      • Torsten
        ... One obstacle I will have to get out of the way if I want to place the flight of the Atmoni and Sidones in 88 BCE is the fact that Strabo mentions them as
        Message 3 of 29 , Jan 2, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          > I looked through Shchukin's text. He doesn't state explicitly how he has dated the Atmoni and Sidoni's last stand and flight from Sarmatians. My suspicion is that dating has been done by a coupling to Farzoy as the sole purveyor of violence around that time.
          >
          > ibd.
          > '“Славянская” зарубинецкая культура спокойно существовала до середины I в. н.э., когда она была разрушена нашествием сарматов. Часть населения отошла на северо-восток и восток, часть - на запад, образовав на �'олыни, вместе с обитавшими уже здесь пшеворцами, зубрецкую группу памятников, исследованную за последние годы �".Н.Козаком (Козак 1991).'
          >
          > "The 'Slavic' Zarubintsy culture quietly existed until the middle of I century CE, when it was destroyed by the invasion of the Sarmatians. One part of the population moved away to the north-east and east, one part to the west, having formed in Volhynia, together with the settled already here Przeworskers, the Zubretskaya group of monuments, explored in recent years by D.N. Kozak (Kozak, 1991)."
          >
          > This sounds to me like a temporal lacuna being filled out. I better take a look at Kozak (1991)


          One obstacle I will have to get out of the way if I want to place the flight of the Atmoni and Sidones in 88 BCE is the fact that Strabo mentions them as still existing in his
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographica
          written not before 20 BCE.
          However, Strabo himself mentions (7, 2, 4)
          http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/67813
          that information about the Bastarnae is hard to come by, and confusing/inconsistent. I suspect that the main source for
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strabo 's
          information on the Bastarnae was his teacher
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannion_of_Amisus
          a native of Amisus in Pontus, who was taken prisoner by Lucullus in 72 BCE and brought to Rome, where he worked as a teacher and librarian. His information about the Bastarnae would then be just 16 years younger than where I want to place the flight of the Atmoni and Sidones, a time not sufficiently long to convince an antiquarian-minded scholar like Tyrannion to write them off from history.


          Torsten
        • george knysh
          ... From: Torsten Subject: [tied] Re: Romanized Bastarnians To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, January 2, 2012, 4:04 PM   ...
          Message 4 of 29 , Jan 2, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            --- On Mon, 1/2/12, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:


            From: Torsten <tgpedersen@...>
            Subject: [tied] Re: Romanized Bastarnians
            To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Monday, January 2, 2012, 4:04 PM



             





            > I looked through Shchukin's text. He doesn't state explicitly how he has dated the Atmoni and Sidoni's last stand and flight from Sarmatians. My suspicion is that dating has been done by a coupling to Farzoy as the sole purveyor of violence around that time.
            >
            > ibd.
            > '“Славянская” зарубинецкая культура спокойно существовала до середины I в. н.э., когда она была разрушена нашествием сарматов. Часть населения отошла на северо-восток и восток, часть - на запад, образовав на �'олыни, вместе с обитавшими уже здесь пшеворцами, зубрецкую группу памятников, исследованную за последние годы �".Н.Козаком (Козак 1991).'
            >
            > "The 'Slavic' Zarubintsy culture quietly existed until the middle of I century CE, when it was destroyed by the invasion of the Sarmatians. One part of the population moved away to the north-east and east, one part to the west, having formed in Volhynia, together with the settled already here Przeworskers, the Zubretskaya group of monuments, explored in recent years by D.N. Kozak (Kozak, 1991)."
            >
            > This sounds to me like a temporal lacuna being filled out. I better take a look at Kozak (1991)

            One obstacle I will have to get out of the way if I want to place the flight of the Atmoni and Sidones in 88 BCE is the fact that Strabo mentions them as still existing in his
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographica
            written not before 20 BCE.
            However, Strabo himself mentions (7, 2, 4)
            http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/67813
            that information about the Bastarnae is hard to come by, and confusing/inconsistent. I suspect that the main source for
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strabo 's
            information on the Bastarnae was his teacher
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannion_of_Amisus
            a native of Amisus in Pontus, who was taken prisoner by Lucullus in 72 BCE and brought to Rome, where he worked as a teacher and librarian. His information about the Bastarnae would then be just 16 years younger than where I want to place the flight of the Atmoni and Sidones, a time not sufficiently long to convince an antiquarian-minded scholar like Tyrannion to write them off from history.

            Torsten


            *****GK: If the Atmones and Sidoni fled in 88 BCE then how does one explain the fact that there is no archaeological evidence of any major departure from ANY "Bastarnian" area at thst time? I think you'll have to go to war no only with all archaeologists but with practically all historians and textologists. ******
          • Torsten
            ... Archaeological evidence shows presence, not departures. The army of archaeologists and historians and textologists would have to show presence of the
            Message 5 of 29 , Jan 2, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              >
              > *****GK: If the Atmones and Sidoni fled in 88 BCE then how does one explain the fact that there is no archaeological evidence of any major departure from ANY "Bastarnian" area at thst time? I think you'll have to go to war no only with all archaeologists but with practically all historians and textologists. ******

              Archaeological evidence shows presence, not departures. The army of archaeologists and historians and 'textologists' would have to show presence of the Atmoni and Sidoni and the absence of the Rachny and Pochep post-Zarubintsy groups
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rome_and_the_Barbarians_in_Eastern_and_Central_Europe_around_100_AD_by_Shchukin.png
              for the period 88 BCE - ca. 70 CE.

              How was this Zarubintsy 'crisis' in 40 - 70 CE fixed temporally?


              Torsten
            • george knysh
              ... Archaeological evidence shows presence, not departures. *****GK: Non-presence is accounted as departure, for instance in the case of the earlier Peucini of
              Message 6 of 29 , Jan 2, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                --- On Mon, 1/2/12, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

                > GK: If the Atmones and Sidoni fled in 88 BCE then how does one explain the fact that there is no archaeological evidence of any major departure from ANY "Bastarnian" area at thst time? I think you'll have to go to war no only with all archaeologists but with practically all historians and textologists.

                Archaeological evidence shows presence, not departures.

                *****GK: Non-presence is accounted as departure, for instance in the case of the earlier Peucini of the Poeneshti-Lukashovka culture. Archaeologists can also measure the "intensity" of a presence by micro-dating their finds. No archaeologist has noted any decrease in the "intensity" of the occupation of the sites of Bastarnia (except for P/L) prior to the mid-1rst c. CE. BTW archaeological evidence also shows arrivals as well as departures. For instance, it indicates "arrivals" of people from "Bastarnia" all over territory to their northeast and north, plus south. No evidence for any "Bastarnian" movement towards the lands of classical Przeworsk at any time. But certainly evidence of Przeworsk arrivals in today's west Ukraine in the last half of the 1rst c. BC. And then again even further east in the post-50 CE period (where they co-existed with the Late Zarubinians)*****



                The army of archaeologists and historians and 'textologists' would have to show presence of the Atmoni and Sidoni and the absence of the Rachny and Pochep post-Zarubintsy groups
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rome_and_the_Barbarians_in_Eastern_and_Central_Europe_around_100_AD_by_Shchukin.png
                for the period 88 BCE - ca. 70 CE.

                *****GK: That's been done. At least wirh respect to the archaeological groups accounted as "Bastarnians" (or fellow-travellers). No one really knows who Strabo's "Atmoni" and "Sidoni" were in these groups.*****

                How was this Zarubintsy 'crisis' in 40 - 70 CE fixed temporally?

                *****GK: Read about it in Nosevych and Shchukin. They give references.****
              • Torsten
                ... No, non-presence is inferred, and departure is inferred from presence and non-presence. ... Yes, in principle. ... The issue here is the dating of the
                Message 7 of 29 , Jan 4, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > --- On Mon, 1/2/12, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > > GK: If the Atmones and Sidoni fled in 88 BCE then how does one explain the fact that there is no archaeological evidence of any major departure from ANY "Bastarnian" area at thst time? I think you'll have to go to war no only with all archaeologists but with practically all historians and textologists.
                  >
                  > Archaeological evidence shows presence, not departures.
                  >
                  > *****GK: Non-presence is accounted as departure, for instance in the case of the earlier Peucini of the Poeneshti-Lukashovka culture.

                  No, non-presence is inferred, and departure is inferred from presence and non-presence.

                  > Archaeologists can also measure the "intensity" of a presence by micro-dating their finds.

                  Yes, in principle.

                  >No archaeologist has noted any decrease in the "intensity" of the occupation of the sites of Bastarnia (except for P/L) prior to the mid-1rst c. CE.

                  The issue here is the dating of the Atmoni - Sidones flight to 50 - 70 CE, not what happened before that event.

                  >BTW archaeological evidence also shows arrivals as well as departures. For instance, it indicates "arrivals" of people from "Bastarnia" all over territory to their northeast and north, plus south.

                  Arrivals, like departures, do not show in the evidence, they are inferred from presence and non-presence.

                  > No evidence for any "Bastarnian" movement towards the lands of classical Przeworsk at any time.

                  Not true.
                  http://krotov.info/history/09/3/schukin.html
                  'Спасения от сарматских набегов носители зарубинецкой культуры â€" бастарны ищут не только в Поднепровских поймах, защищавших, вероятно, не слишком надежно, но и разбегаясь в более отдаленные районы. Часть населения Полесской группы ушла, возможно, на запад, на Ð'олынь, где, в смеси с подходящими постепенно сюда же носителями пшеворской культуры, они образовали зубрецкую постзарубинецкую группу горизонта Рахны-Почеп (Козак 1991).'

                  "Escaping from the Sarmatian raids thyearers of the Zarubintsy culture, the Bastarnae seek not only to the floodplains of the Dnieper, protecting, probably not too reliably, but also fleeing into more remote areas. Part of the population of the Polesie group is gone, perhaps, to the west, into Volhynia, where, mixed with the gradually arriving here carriers of the Przeworsk culture, they formed the Zubretskaya post-Zarubinetsy group of the Rakhno-Pochep horizon (Kozak, 1991)."

                  >But certainly evidence of Przeworsk arrivals in today's west Ukraine in the last half of the 1rst c. BC. And then again even further east in the post-50 CE period (where they co-existed with the Late Zarubinians)*****

                  Irrelevant to the discussion.


                  > The army of archaeologists and historians and 'textologists' would have to show presence of the Atmoni and Sidoni and the absence of the Rachny and Pochep post-Zarubintsy groups
                  > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rome_and_the_Barbarians_in_Eastern_and_Central_Europe_around_100_AD_by_Shchukin.png
                  > for the period 88 BCE - ca. 70 CE.
                  >
                  > *****GK: That's been done. At least wirh respect to the archaeological groups accounted as "Bastarnians" (or fellow-travellers). No one really knows who Strabo's "Atmoni" and "Sidoni" were in these groups.*****

                  You're not making sense. If we can't identify the Atmoni and Sidoni archaeologically, then we can't show their presence or absence.


                  > How was this Zarubintsy 'crisis' in 40 - 70 CE fixed temporally?
                  >
                  > *****GK: Read about it in Nosevych and Shchukin. They give references.****
                  >

                  I'm trying to get them thru my library. But it seems to me that since the Zvenigorod group had Roman influence, the flight of the Atmoni - Sidones into the Przeworsk area has been dated to some time after the border LaTène D - Roman A.
                  'Ð' Ð'ерхнем Поднестровье в 40-70-е годы уже существовала особая пшеворско-дакийско-сарматская Звенигородская группа (иногда ее, как кажется, без особых оснований, относят к липицкой культуре): сильно вооруженная, имеющая, судя по находкам бронзовой импортной посуды, контакты с римлянами. Не исключено, что именно люди из Колоколина-Звенигорода-Чижикова представляли тех бастарнов, с которыми имел дело Плавтий Сильван, когда в 62 г. “подавил, начавшиеся было, волнения сарматов” (сарматов Фарзоя?) и вернул бастарнам заложников. Под прикрытие щитов своих родственников и бежали, возможно, бастарны-зарубинцы, сохранявшие затем в зубрецкой группе свой язык и самосознание вплоть до конца III века.'

                  "In the Upper Dniester in 40-70s there was already a special Przeworsk-Dacian-Sarmatian Zvenigorod group (sometimes it, as it seems for no particular reason, is referred to as Lipitskiy culture): heavily armed, having, according to the findings of imported bronze vessels, contacts with the Romans. It is not to be ruled out that the people of Kolokolina-Zvenigorod-Chizhikova were those Bastarnae, whom
                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plautius_Silvanus
                  http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Velleius_Paterculus/2D*.html
                  had to deal with, when in 62 CE 'he suppressed, the already begun(?), rebellion(?) of the Sarmatians "(Farzoy's Sarmatians?) and returned hostages to the Bastarnae. Under the cover sheets of their relatives also fled, possibly, the Bastarnae-Zarubintsy, retaining in the Zubretskaya group their language and identity until the end of the III century."
                  (There must be some mistake here; Sivanus Plautus was consul in 2 BCE)
                  http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/55*.html


                  Torsten
                • george knysh
                  ... No, non-presence is inferred, and departure is inferred from presence and non-presence. *****GK: Nitpicking won t help you. /similar points cut for
                  Message 8 of 29 , Jan 4, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- On Wed, 1/4/12, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

                    >
                    >
                    > --- On Mon, 1/2/12, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > > GK: If the Atmones and Sidoni fled in 88 BCE then how does one explain the fact that there is no archaeological evidence of any major departure from ANY "Bastarnian" area at thst time? I think you'll have to go to war no only with all archaeologists but with practically all historians and textologists.
                    >
                    > Archaeological evidence shows presence, not departures.
                    >
                    > GK: Non-presence is accounted as departure, for instance in the case of the earlier Peucini of the Poeneshti-Lukashovka culture.

                    No, non-presence is inferred, and departure is inferred from presence and non-presence.

                    *****GK: Nitpicking won't help you. /similar points cut for economy***

                    (GK)> No evidence for any "Bastarnian" movement towards the lands of classical Przeworsk at any time.

                    (TP)Not true.

                    *****GK: Absolutely true. Recently coonized Volynia was not part of clssical Przeworsk.*****
                    http://krotov.info/history/09/3/schukin.html
                    'СпаÑ�ениÑ� от Ñ�арматÑ�ких набегов ноÑ�ители зарубинецкой культуры â€" баÑ�тарны ищут не только в ПоднепровÑ�ких поймах, защищавших, вероÑ�тно, не Ñ�лишком надежно, но и разбегаÑ�Ñ�ÑŒ в более отдаленные районы. ЧаÑ�Ñ‚ÑŒ наÑ�елениÑ� ПолеÑ�Ñ�кой группы ушла, возможно, на запад, на
                    Ð'олынь, где, в Ñ�меÑ�и Ñ� подходÑ�щими поÑ�тепенно Ñ�юда же ноÑ�ителÑ�ми пшеворÑ�кой культуры, они образовали зубрецкую поÑ�тзарубинецкую группу горизонта Рахны-Почеп (Козак 1991).'

                    "Escaping from the Sarmatian raids thyearers of the Zarubintsy culture, the Bastarnae seek not only to the floodplains of the Dnieper, protecting, probably not too reliably, but also fleeing into more remote areas. Part of the population of the Polesie group is gone, perhaps, to the west, into Volhynia, where, mixed with the gradually arriving here carriers of the Przeworsk culture, they formed the Zubretskaya post-Zarubinetsy group of the Rakhno-Pochep horizon (Kozak, 1991)."

                    *****GK: "gradually arriving" yes. And no Zarubinians further west have been noted, i.e. in the territory of classical Przeworsk. Note that most recently archaeologists have been reassessing these "arriving Przeworskers" as a possibly closely related but distinct Chernychenska culture.*****
                      > The army of archaeologists and historians and 'textologists' would have to show presence of the Atmoni and Sidoni and the absence of the Rachny and Pochep post-Zarubintsy groups
                    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rome_and_the_Barbarians_in_Eastern_and_Central_Europe_around_100_AD_by_Shchukin.png
                    > for the period 88 BCE - ca. 70 CE.
                    >
                    > *****GK: That's been done. At least wirh respect to the archaeological groups accounted as "Bastarnians" (or fellow-travellers). No one really knows who Strabo's "Atmoni" and "Sidoni" were in these groups.*****

                    You're not making sense. If we can't identify the Atmoni and Sidoni archaeologically, then we can't show their presence or absence.

                    *****GK: Don't be sillier than usual Torsten. If we can't identify ANY Zarubinian sites or objects somewhere then by inference this applies to the A. and S. since they were Zarubinian.*****


                    > How was this Zarubintsy 'crisis' in 40 - 70 CE fixed temporally?
                    >
                    > GK: Read about it in Nosevych and Shchukin. They give references.
                    >

                    I'm trying to get them thru my library. But it seems to me that since the Zvenigorod group had Roman influence, the flight of the Atmoni - Sidones into the Przeworsk area has been dated to some time after the border LaTène D - Roman A.
                    'Ð' Ð'ерхнем ПоднеÑ�тровье в 40-70-е годы уже Ñ�ущеÑ�твовала оÑ�обаÑ� пшеворÑ�ко-дакийÑ�ко-Ñ�арматÑ�каÑ� ЗвенигородÑ�каÑ� группа (иногда ее, как кажетÑ�Ñ�, без оÑ�обых оÑ�нований, отноÑ�Ñ�Ñ‚ к липицкой культуре): Ñ�ильно вооруженнаÑ�, имеющаÑ�, Ñ�удÑ� по находкам бронзовой импортной поÑ�уды,
                    контакты � римл�нами. �е и�ключено, что именно люди из Колоколина-Звенигорода-Чижикова пред�тавл�ли тех ба�тарнов, � которыми имел дело Плавтий Сильван, когда в 62 г. “подавил, начавшие�� было, волнени� �арматов� (�арматов Фарзо�?) и вернул ба�тарнам заложников.
                    Под прикрытие щитов �воих род�твенников и бежали, возможно, ба�тарны-зарубинцы, �охран�вшие затем в зубрецкой группе �вой �зык и �амо�ознание вплоть до конца III века.'

                    "In the Upper Dniester in 40-70s there was already a special Przeworsk-Dacian-Sarmatian Zvenigorod group (sometimes it, as it seems for no particular reason, is referred to as Lipitskiy culture): heavily armed, having, according to the findings of imported bronze vessels, contacts with the Romans. It is not to be ruled out that the people of Kolokolina-Zvenigorod-Chizhikova were those Bastarnae, whom
                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plautius_Silvanus
                    http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Velleius_Paterculus/2D*.html
                    had to deal with, when in 62 CE 'he suppressed, the already begun(?), rebellion(?) of the Sarmatians "(Farzoy's Sarmatians?)

                    *****GK: No, the Iazigi allies of F.******

                    and returned hostages to the Bastarnae. Under the cover sheets of their relatives also fled, possibly, the Bastarnae-Zarubintsy, retaining in the Zubretskaya group their language and identity until the end of the III century."
                    (There must be some mistake here; Sivanus Plautus was consul in 2 BCE)
                    http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/55*.html


                    *****GK: We're talking about the Silvanus who was the Roman governor of Moesia under Nero.*****
                  • Torsten
                    ... So? Who s nitpicking now? ... Of course not, Atmoni and Sidones ceased to exist as independent ethnic groups. ... Okay. ... I repeat: The army of
                    Message 9 of 29 , Jan 4, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > --- On Wed, 1/4/12, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > --- On Mon, 1/2/12, Torsten <tgpedersen@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > > GK: If the Atmones and Sidoni fled in 88 BCE then how does one explain the fact that there is no archaeological evidence of any major departure from ANY "Bastarnian" area at thst time? I think you'll have to go to war no only with all archaeologists but with practically all historians and textologists.
                      > >
                      > > Archaeological evidence shows presence, not departures.
                      > >
                      > > GK: Non-presence is accounted as departure, for instance in the case of the earlier Peucini of the Poeneshti-Lukashovka culture.
                      >
                      > No, non-presence is inferred, and departure is inferred from presence and non-presence.
                      >
                      > *****GK: Nitpicking won't help you. /similar points cut for economy***
                      >
                      > (GK)> No evidence for any "Bastarnian" movement towards the lands of classical Przeworsk at any time.
                      >
                      > (TP)Not true.
                      >
                      > *****GK: Absolutely true. Recently coonized Volynia was not part of clssical Przeworsk.*****

                      So? Who's nitpicking now?

                      > http://krotov.info/history/09/3/schukin.html
                      > 'Спасения от сарматских набегов носители зарубинецкой культуры - бастарны ищут не только в Поднепровских поймах, защищавших, вероятно, не слишком надежно, но и разбегаясь в более отдаленные районы. Часть населения Полесской группы ушла, возможно, на запад, на волынь, где, в смеси с подходящими постепенно сюда же носителями пшеворской культуры, они образовали зубрецкую постзарубинецкую группу горизонта Рахны-Почеп (Козак 1991).'
                      >
                      > "Escape from the Sarmatian raids the bearers of the Zarubintsy culture, the Bastarnae seek not only in the floodplains of the Dnieper, protecting, probably not too reliably, but also fleeing into more remote areas. Part of the population of the Polesie group fled, perhaps, to the west, into Volhynia, where, mixed with the gradually arriving here carriers of the Przeworsk culture, they formed the Zubretskaya post-Zarubinetsy group of the Rakhno-Pochep horizon (Kozak, 1991)."
                      >
                      > *****GK: "gradually arriving" yes. And no Zarubinians further west have been noted, i.e. in the territory of classical Przeworsk.

                      Of course not, Atmoni and Sidones ceased to exist as independent ethnic groups.

                      > Note that most recently archaeologists have been reassessing these "arriving Przeworskers" as a possibly closely related but distinct Chernychenska culture.*****

                      Okay.

                      > The army of archaeologists and historians and 'textologists' would have to show presence of the Atmoni and Sidoni and the absence of the Rachny and Pochep post-Zarubintsy groups
                      > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rome_and_the_Barbarians_in_Eastern_and_Central_Europe_around_100_AD_by_Shchukin.png
                      > > for the period 88 BCE - ca. 70 CE.
                      > >
                      > > *****GK: That's been done. At least wirh respect to the archaeological groups accounted as "Bastarnians" (or fellow-travellers). No one really knows who Strabo's "Atmoni" and "Sidoni" were in these groups.*****
                      >
                      > You're not making sense. If we can't identify the Atmoni and Sidoni archaeologically, then we can't show their presence or absence.
                      >
                      > *****GK: Don't be sillier than usual Torsten. If we can't identify ANY Zarubinian sites or objects somewhere then by inference this applies to the A. and S. since they were Zarubinian.*****

                      I repeat:
                      'The army of archaeologists and historians and 'textologists' would have to show presence of the Atmoni and Sidones and the absence of the Rachny and Pochep post-Zarubintsy groups'

                      The *presence* of Atmoni and Sidones and no other Bastarnae, since we know already that the Peucini survived some centuries longer. Thus from the presence of Bastarnae we can not infer the presence of Atmoni and Sidones

                      > > How was this Zarubintsy 'crisis' in 40 - 70 CE fixed temporally?
                      > >
                      > > GK: Read about it in Nosevych and Shchukin. They give references.
                      > >
                      >
                      > I'm trying to get them thru my library. But it seems to me that since the Zvenigorod group had Roman influence, the flight of the Atmoni - Sidones into the Przeworsk area has been dated to some time after the border LaTène D - Roman A.
                      > 'в верхнем Поднестровье в 40-70-е годы уже существовала особая пшеворско-дакийско-сарматская Звенигородская группа (иногда ее, как кажется, без особых оснований, относят к липицкой культуре): сильно вооруженная, имеющая, судя по находкам бронзовой импортной посуды, контакты с римлянами. Не исключено, что именно люди из Колоколина-Звенигорода-Чижикова представляли тех бастарнов, с которыми имел дело Плавтий Сильван, когда в 62 г. “подавил, начавшиеся было, волнения сарматов” (сарматов Фарзоя?) и вернул бастарнам заложников. Под прикрытие щитов своих родственников и бежали, возможно, бастарны-зарубинцы, сохранявшие затем в зубрецкой группе свой язык и самосознание вплоть до конца III века.'
                      >
                      > "In the Upper Dniester in 40-70s there was already a special Przeworsk-Dacian-Sarmatian Zvenigorod group (sometimes it, as it seems for no particular reason, is referred to as Lipitskiy culture): heavily armed, having, according to the findings of imported bronze vessels, contacts with the Romans. It can't be ruled out that the people of Kolokolina-Zvenigorod-Chizhikova were those Bastarnae, whom
                      > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plautius_Silvanus
                      > http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Velleius_Paterculus/2D*.html
                      > had to deal with, when in 62 CE 'he suppressed, the already begun(?), rebellion(?) of the Sarmatians "(Farzoy's Sarmatians?)
                      >
                      > *****GK: No, the Iazigi allies of F.******
                      >
                      > and returned hostages to the Bastarnae. Under the cover sheets of their relatives also fled, possibly, the Bastarnae-Zarubintsy, retaining in the Zubretskaya group their language and identity until the end of the III century."
                      > (There must be some mistake here; Sivanus Plautus was consul in 2 BCE)
                      > http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/55*.html
                      >
                      >
                      > *****GK: We're talking about the Silvanus who was the Roman governor of Moesia under Nero.*****

                      Okay.


                      Torsten
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.