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

Re: The Scandinavian Origin of the Goths and Other Germanic Peoples

Expand Messages
  • dirk@smra.co.uk
    Hi Keth, these are very interesting points. You said that a kind of Scandinavian (I suppose you mean Proto-Germanic) language was spoken around 2000 BC in
    Message 1 of 28 , Nov 1, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Keth,
      these are very interesting points. You said that 'a kind of
      Scandinavian (I suppose you mean Proto-Germanic) language was spoken
      around 2000 BC in Sweden. That may well be the case. A Swedish
      linguist (Prof. Elert) wrote the following:


      "According to models proposed by M. Nuñez and P. Dolukhanov
      speakers of a Proto-Uralic language populated the land that was laid
      bare along the periglacial line after the Ice Age, from the Rhine and
      eastward (eventually also Scandinavia),. See Figure 1. As a result of
      conquest or demographic efficiency the Proto-Uralic language and
      possibly population were replaced by speakers of a (Proto-) Germanic
      language.

      Common features in the word prosody of the languages in the Baltic
      area have been explained as substrate or contact phenomena (Wiik
      1995). As for the Saamis, recent DNA research confirms that
      genetically they differ sharply from the other population in
      Scandinavia and Finland (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994; Sajantila et al.
      1995). The coincidence of genetic distance between the Saami and
      Finnish populations and a comparatively close relationship between
      their languages leads up to the traditional thought of a language
      replacement. This does not contradict (nor support) a later rise of
      Saami ethnicity among hunters/gatherers.

      On archeological, genetic and linguistic grounds the late Bronze Age
      language in Scandinavia could have been a Finnic or Baltic language
      (or both). However, from what can be inferred from parallels in
      history or ethnolinguistics a more complicated and varied language
      situation is the most likely one in subglacial Europe at the end of
      the Ice Age. "



      Thus Prof. Elert proposes that Finnic or Baltic (or both) as the
      late Bronze Age languages in Scandinavia. But he admits that the
      picture was more complex. I suppose it is possible that
      Proto-Germanic speakers had already appeard as well.


      Keth, you also write that Gotland is the ideal place for the
      development of the Germanic language. Personally I think that would
      be to narrow, and is not really reconcileable with the overall
      movement of Proto-Germanic People as I understand it.


      Your point that language change does not necessarily mean
      population change is of course very valid and the above citation
      supports this argument with respect to the Saamis and Finns.

      Personally I think that any claim of origin for the Germanic people
      is inevitably incorrect. The whole procesess took place dynamically
      over time and space and my comment was targeted against claims that
      the Germanic people originated in Scandinavia which is just as wrong
      as the claim the the Germanic people originated in today's Germany.

      Dirk






      --- In gothic-l@egroups.com, keth@o... wrote:
      > Dirk wrote:
      >
      > >Hi Bertil,
      > >
      > >Denmark is strictly speaking not Scandinavia. There can be no doubt
      > >that
      > >Jutland was settled by Germanic people much earlier, before they
      > >spread
      > >out across the sea to the Danish islands and than Sweden. As for
      > >quotes,
      > >there are so many that I don't know were to begin. For a linguistic
      > >approach Cleas Elert said: " The absence of any great dialect
      split
      in
      > >the Germanic language spoken in Scandinavia and northern Germany at
      > >the
      > >time of the earliest written sources (ca. 200-500 A.D.) indicates
      > >strongly that a Germanic language has been spoken over such a large
      > >area
      > >for only a short time. The late Bronze Age (ca. 700 B.C.) was a
      time
      > >of
      > >cultural change { in Scandinavia} when the language(s) spoken
      earlier
      > >may have been replaced by the Germanic language." Reference op.
      cit..
      > >
      > >Findeisens proposition is well supported by the cited literature.
      If
      > >Germanic people spreading out from what is now central Germany had
      > >arrived in Jutland by 2000 BC it might have taken them another few
      > >hundered years to feel the need to move further on (population
      > >pressure
      >
      > Dirk, I feel you fail to differentiate here between Indo European
      and
      > Germanic here. That Germanic is a relatively young Indo European
      > language ( perhaps 700 BC) does not sound unlikely, though it is not
      > known where its centre of initial development lay (it may have been
      in
      > Scandinavia or somewhere in Germany/Poland or somewhere else).
      >
      > However, quite independent of the question of the origin of
      Germanic,
      > I think there are indications that a kind of Indo European language
      > was spoken in Scandinavia already at the end of the Stone Age, say
      > around 2000 BC. At the same time it also seems to me that more than
      > one language may have been spoken there. e.g. something akin to
      Finish
      > or Saami.
      >
      > In Germany the "default" opinion seems to be that Germanic must have
      > arisen in Germany -- what could be more logical! That also gives an
      > excuse for looking at Scandinavia as an area that it is legitimate
      to
      > colonize\ cf. what was done with Low German, that it was defined
      > as a dialect og High German.
      >
      > What about the idea then, that a "new" language needs to arise
      > in relative isolation? -- It needs a period of incubation.
      > And what could be more ideal for such, than an island?
      > Gotland for example ;)
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > >argument). In any case this settlement process was likely gradual
      and
      > >the population balance in Sweden may not have shifted in favour of
      the
      > >newcomers before around 1000 BC, which does not exclude the
      > >propability
      >
      > Also remember that population replacement is not the only possible
      > mechanism of language change. In Northern Norway you see, for
      example,
      > how many people changed their language without really changing their
      > identity nor their culture.
      >
      >
      > >that Germanic settleres had started coming in a few centuries
      earlier.
      >
      > So what I mean is that it doesn't have to have been the same
      scenario
      > as in North America, where the language change occurred by replacing
      > the original native Indian population by Germanic settlers.
      >
      > Best regards
      > Keth
      >
      >
      > >There is always a give and take of a couple of hundred years in
      that.
      > >The important thing is that all the evidence discounts older
      theories
      > >and propositions which still are in circulation that 'the Germanic
      > >people' originated some 5000 to 4000 years ago in Scandinavia.
      > >
      > >Dirk
    • Anthony Appleyard
      ... That depends on whether the Danish Straits were there at the time. As I wrote a bit ago, after the Ice Age ended, there have been times when north Denmark
      Message 2 of 28 , Nov 1, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Dirk wrote:
        > Denmark is strictly speaking not Scandinavia. There can be no doubt that
        > Jutland was settled by Germanic people much earlier, before they spread
        > out across the sea to the Danish islands and than Sweden. ...

        That depends on whether the Danish Straits were there at the time. As I wrote
        a bit ago, after the Ice Age ended, there have been times when north Denmark
        was a bit higher and the Danish islands were continuous land across and the
        Baltic Sea was a big freshwater lake (called by geologists the Ancylus Lake)
        that overflowed into a big river running along the dry bed of the Storebaelt.

        keth@... wrote:-
        > What about the idea then, that a "new" language needs to arise in relative
        > isolation? -- It needs a period of incubation. And what could be more ideal
        > for such, than an island? Gotland for example ;)

        My belief is that the Gautar in and near Scandinavia spoke Common Germanic,
        and that the characteristic features of Wilfila's Gothic developed while the
        Goths were migrating.

        There were likely Indo-European speakers in Germany at the time. But, as we
        look further back in time, the characteristic identifying features of each
        Indo-European language one by one disappear, and we get to a time whem we can
        only talk of undifferentiated Indo-European.

        One thing might possibly solve this: Did Germanic speakers in Scandinavia pick
        up any Finno-Ugrian words from the Lapps? If so, do any of those words also
        occur in German? If so, the languages of Germany may have come from
        Scandinavia. (How far south in Scandinavia did Lapps spread in the old days?)
      • dirk@smra.co.uk
        Hi Anthony, very interesting points, but I am at a loss here. I would have thought that Jutland became separated from the Scandinavian peninsula around the
        Message 3 of 28 , Nov 1, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Anthony,

          very interesting points, but I am at a loss here. I would have thought
          that Jutland became separated from the Scandinavian peninsula around
          the same time as Britain became separated from the continent (some 10
          to 12000 years ago). But I really don't know for sure.

          Your last point is exptremely interesting, but again I don't know
          whether the Germanic languages of the Scandinavian peninsula picked up
          Finno-Ugric words. Prof. Elert (a Swedish linguist) mentioned
          somewhere that the Saami picked up Germanic words mainly in the realm
          of agriculture, but I have never heard of Finno-Ugric words in the
          German language. I don't think that Germanic tribes like the Vangioni,
          Ubier etc who lived in the Mainz-Cologne area (next to the Celts) for
          several centuries BC would have got their language from the
          Scandinavian peninsula - but I may be wrong.

          Perhaps somebody else on the list has more insight?

          I would have thought that people like the Suevi Ariovist, or the
          Cherusci Arminius or the Markomani Marbod would have spoken a common
          Germanic language. Is there any information of whether their languages
          had developed separately. Or in short: Did Arminius and Marbod need a
          translator?

          Dirk




          --- In gothic-l@egroups.com, "Anthony Appleyard" <MCLSSAA2@f...>
          wrote:
          > Dirk wrote:
          > > Denmark is strictly speaking not Scandinavia. There can be no
          doubt that
          > > Jutland was settled by Germanic people much earlier, before they
          spread
          > > out across the sea to the Danish islands and than Sweden. ...
          >
          > That depends on whether the Danish Straits were there at the time.
          As I wrote
          > a bit ago, after the Ice Age ended, there have been times when north
          Denmark
          > was a bit higher and the Danish islands were continuous land across
          and the
          > Baltic Sea was a big freshwater lake (called by geologists the
          Ancylus Lake)
          > that overflowed into a big river running along the dry bed of the
          Storebaelt.
          >
          > keth@o... wrote:-
          > > What about the idea then, that a "new" language needs to arise in
          relative
          > > isolation? -- It needs a period of incubation. And what could be
          more ideal
          > > for such, than an island? Gotland for example ;)
          >
          > My belief is that the Gautar in and near Scandinavia spoke Common
          Germanic,
          > and that the characteristic features of Wilfila's Gothic developed
          while the
          > Goths were migrating.
          >
          > There were likely Indo-European speakers in Germany at the time.
          But, as we
          > look further back in time, the characteristic identifying features
          of each
          > Indo-European language one by one disappear, and we get to a time
          whem we can
          > only talk of undifferentiated Indo-European.
          >
          > One thing might possibly solve this: Did Germanic speakers in
          Scandinavia pick
          > up any Finno-Ugrian words from the Lapps? If so, do any of those
          words also
          > occur in German? If so, the languages of Germany may have come from
          > Scandinavia. (How far south in Scandinavia did Lapps spread in the
          old days?)
        • Tore Gannholm
          Hi Dirk, If you read the Golandic history many of your questions will be answered. The old name of the island from where the Goths emigrated is Gutland and the
          Message 4 of 28 , Nov 1, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Dirk,
            If you read the Golandic history many of your questions will be answered.
            The old name of the island from where the Goths emigrated is Gutland and
            the people is called gutar and the language is called gutniska. According
            to professor Elias Wessén their language is almost identical to the Gothish
            language.

            http://gotland.luma.com



            Tore

            >Hi Anthony,
            >
            >very interesting points, but I am at a loss here. I would have thought
            >that Jutland became separated from the Scandinavian peninsula around
            >the same time as Britain became separated from the continent (some 10
            >to 12000 years ago). But I really don't know for sure.
            >
            >Your last point is exptremely interesting, but again I don't know
            >whether the Germanic languages of the Scandinavian peninsula picked up
            > Finno-Ugric words. Prof. Elert (a Swedish linguist) mentioned
            >somewhere that the Saami picked up Germanic words mainly in the realm
            >of agriculture, but I have never heard of Finno-Ugric words in the
            >German language. I don't think that Germanic tribes like the Vangioni,
            > Ubier etc who lived in the Mainz-Cologne area (next to the Celts) for
            > several centuries BC would have got their language from the
            >Scandinavian peninsula - but I may be wrong.
            >
            >Perhaps somebody else on the list has more insight?
            >
            >I would have thought that people like the Suevi Ariovist, or the
            >Cherusci Arminius or the Markomani Marbod would have spoken a common
            >Germanic language. Is there any information of whether their languages
            > had developed separately. Or in short: Did Arminius and Marbod need a
            >translator?
            >
            >Dirk
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >--- In gothic-l@egroups.com, "Anthony Appleyard" <MCLSSAA2@f...>
            >wrote:
            >> Dirk wrote:
            >> > Denmark is strictly speaking not Scandinavia. There can be no
            >doubt that
            >> > Jutland was settled by Germanic people much earlier, before they
            >spread
            >> > out across the sea to the Danish islands and than Sweden. ...
            >>
            >> That depends on whether the Danish Straits were there at the time.
            >As I wrote
            >> a bit ago, after the Ice Age ended, there have been times when north
            >Denmark
            >> was a bit higher and the Danish islands were continuous land across
            >and the
            >> Baltic Sea was a big freshwater lake (called by geologists the
            >Ancylus Lake)
            >> that overflowed into a big river running along the dry bed of the
            >Storebaelt.
            >>
            >> keth@o... wrote:-
            >> > What about the idea then, that a "new" language needs to arise in
            >relative
            >> > isolation? -- It needs a period of incubation. And what could be
            >more ideal
            >> > for such, than an island? Gotland for example ;)
            >>
            >> My belief is that the Gautar in and near Scandinavia spoke Common
            >Germanic,
            >> and that the characteristic features of Wilfila's Gothic developed
            >while the
            >> Goths were migrating.
            >>
            >> There were likely Indo-European speakers in Germany at the time.
            >But, as we
            >> look further back in time, the characteristic identifying features
            >of each
            >> Indo-European language one by one disappear, and we get to a time
            >whem we can
            >> only talk of undifferentiated Indo-European.
            >>
            >> One thing might possibly solve this: Did Germanic speakers in
            >Scandinavia pick
            >> up any Finno-Ugrian words from the Lapps? If so, do any of those
            >words also
            >> occur in German? If so, the languages of Germany may have come from
            >> Scandinavia. (How far south in Scandinavia did Lapps spread in the
            >old days?)
            >
            >
            >
            >You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email
            >to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.
            >Homepage: http://www.stormloader.com/carver/gothicl/index.html
          • MCLSSAA2@fs2.mt.umist.ac.uk
            ... I thought that:- c.10000 BC: Here the icecap started to melt, but the whole Baltic area was still deep under ice. The sea was a long way below present
            Message 5 of 28 , Nov 1, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In gothic-l@egroups.com, dirk@s... wrote:
              > very interesting points, but I am at a loss here. I would have
              > thought that Jutland became separated from the Scandinavian
              > peninsula around the same time as Britain became separated from
              > the continent (some 10 to 12000 years ago).
              > But I really don't know for sure.

              I thought that:-
              c.10000 BC: Here the icecap started to melt, but the whole Baltic
              area was still deep under ice. The sea was a long way below present
              level: will someone tell me a best value for how far?
              c.6000 BC: Here the rising sea covered the last land bridge between
              Britain and Europe: it was from East Anglia to the Hook of Holland,
              not across the Straits of Dover.
              c.5000 BC: Here the icecap finished melting, and the sea reached
              about its present level.
              After that the Danish Straits were very shallow and sometimes dry,
              as the land around the Baltic Sea moved slowly up and down as the
              earth's crust there slowly recovered from having been pushed down by
              the weight of the Scandinavian ice cap: geologists call this effect
              "isostasy".
            • keth@online.no
              Hello Dirk, ... Yes, I agree that the fazit is, that it is simply not known. I, in my turn react a bit against (some) Germans who seem to think that of
              Message 6 of 28 , Nov 3, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                Hello Dirk,

                You wrote:

                >Personally I think that any claim of origin for the Germanic people
                >is inevitably incorrect. The whole procesess took place dynamically
                >over time and space and my comment was targeted against claims that
                >the Germanic people originated in Scandinavia which is just as wrong
                >as the claim the the Germanic people originated in today's Germany.

                Yes, I agree that the "fazit" is, that it is simply not known.
                I, in my turn react a bit against (some) Germans who seem to think
                that "of course" the Germanics originitated (somewhere) in Germany,
                and think of the Scandinavians as a kind of German settlers.

                "Gotland" was only chosen as an example - a kind of compromise,
                a kind of "let's meet in the middle" (of the Baltic).
                But it is of course true that it probably is a hospitable place
                that must have been relatively more isolated than the
                Danish islands. I have not been to Gotland, but you say that it
                is "too small". That reminds me of a saying [about the Zurich
                bankers]: "Auch die Gnomen haben klein angefangen>"

                On another account, that is only distantly related to the present
                discussion, I always pay attention when I hear about discoveries
                of very early human remains in SW Scandinavia, and it now seems
                that human beings also lived on the Scandinavian peninsula
                _during_ the Ice Age. (in the coastal areas where everything wasn't
                covered with ice, as was previously thought)

                Sweden however, seems to have been _entirely_ covered with ice.
                That is clear whereever a lot of sand and rubble is found.

                The question then is what people lived off.

                Archaeologists who have tried to popularize their insights,
                have represented the people of those days as a kind of eskimos,
                using harpoons and small boats for hunting and fishing.

                So maybe, if there during periods was _a lot of fish_, there
                may also have been a rapid increase in the population,
                as long as they lived near a place here there was a good food-supply.
                But on the whole, I think the main viewpoint is that people in those
                days were much more mobile than they became thousands of years later
                when agriculture was taken up.

                But when we consider the question of the arising of Proto-Germanic
                as a separate language, we were of course already well into the
                agricultural period. A linear kind of reasoning would then
                imply that it was the agriculturalists (=Indo Europeans)
                who became the first Germans, wherever their centre of
                development was. But was it like that? Perhaps linguistics gives
                some hints here; i.e. word counts could
                indicate what kind of society it can have been. But of
                such I only have a memory of someone saying
                that Germanic contains a large percentage of extraneous words.

                Perhaps one should also consider that a strong iron age culture
                could only arise where there was a good supply of iron ore.
                Of course, Sweden _was_ such a place, with lots of timber
                as well. (timber for producing charcoal to process the iron)

                Keth
              • Tore Gannholm
                ... For what is Gotland too small?? If Gotland claimed back all archaeological finds that has been taken from Gotland and brought to the Historical museum in
                Message 7 of 28 , Nov 4, 2000
                • 0 Attachment
                  >Hello Dirk,
                  >
                  >You wrote:
                  >
                  >>Personally I think that any claim of origin for the Germanic people
                  >>is inevitably incorrect. The whole procesess took place dynamically
                  >>over time and space and my comment was targeted against claims that
                  >>the Germanic people originated in Scandinavia which is just as wrong
                  >>as the claim the the Germanic people originated in today's Germany.
                  >
                  >Yes, I agree that the "fazit" is, that it is simply not known.
                  >I, in my turn react a bit against (some) Germans who seem to think
                  >that "of course" the Germanics originitated (somewhere) in Germany,
                  >and think of the Scandinavians as a kind of German settlers.
                  >
                  >"Gotland" was only chosen as an example - a kind of compromise,
                  >a kind of "let's meet in the middle" (of the Baltic).
                  >But it is of course true that it probably is a hospitable place
                  >that must have been relatively more isolated than the
                  >Danish islands. I have not been to Gotland, but you say that it
                  >is "too small".


                  For what is Gotland too small??

                  If Gotland claimed back all archaeological finds that has been taken from
                  Gotland and brought to the Historical museum in Stockholm that museum would
                  probably have to close down.

                  Only on coins from Roman time until early middle ages found in the present
                  day Sweden 2/3 of all coins come from Gotland.

                  Dirk, if you can read German as I understand I would recommend.
                  2000 Jahre Handel und Kultur im Ostseegebiet
                  - Gotland, Perle der Ostsee
                  ISBN 91-972306-6-9

                  Tore



                  That reminds me of a saying [about the Zurich
                  >bankers]: "Auch die Gnomen haben klein angefangen>"
                  >
                  >On another account, that is only distantly related to the present
                  >discussion, I always pay attention when I hear about discoveries
                  >of very early human remains in SW Scandinavia, and it now seems
                  >that human beings also lived on the Scandinavian peninsula
                  >_during_ the Ice Age. (in the coastal areas where everything wasn't
                  >covered with ice, as was previously thought)
                  >
                  >Sweden however, seems to have been _entirely_ covered with ice.
                  >That is clear whereever a lot of sand and rubble is found.
                  >
                  >The question then is what people lived off.
                  >
                  >Archaeologists who have tried to popularize their insights,
                  >have represented the people of those days as a kind of eskimos,
                  >using harpoons and small boats for hunting and fishing.
                  >
                  >So maybe, if there during periods was _a lot of fish_, there
                  >may also have been a rapid increase in the population,
                  >as long as they lived near a place here there was a good food-supply.
                  >But on the whole, I think the main viewpoint is that people in those
                  >days were much more mobile than they became thousands of years later
                  >when agriculture was taken up.
                  >
                  >But when we consider the question of the arising of Proto-Germanic
                  >as a separate language, we were of course already well into the
                  >agricultural period. A linear kind of reasoning would then
                  >imply that it was the agriculturalists (=Indo Europeans)
                  >who became the first Germans, wherever their centre of
                  >development was. But was it like that? Perhaps linguistics gives
                  >some hints here; i.e. word counts could
                  >indicate what kind of society it can have been. But of
                  >such I only have a memory of someone saying
                  >that Germanic contains a large percentage of extraneous words.
                  >
                  >Perhaps one should also consider that a strong iron age culture
                  >could only arise where there was a good supply of iron ore.
                  >Of course, Sweden _was_ such a place, with lots of timber
                  >as well. (timber for producing charcoal to process the iron)
                  >
                  >Keth
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email
                  >to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.
                  >Homepage: http://www.stormloader.com/carver/gothicl/index.html
                • dirk@smra.co.uk
                  Hi Tore, I did not say or mean that Gotland is too small. I just said that the proposition that the Germanic language originated in Gotland is somewhat too
                  Message 8 of 28 , Nov 4, 2000
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Tore,

                    I did not say or mean that Gotland is too small. I just said that the
                    proposition that the Germanic language originated in Gotland is
                    somewhat too narrow (I think I used exactly these words)in my view. I
                    can see that you feel strongly about Gotland's place in history and
                    many of the things that you wrote were new and interesting to me.
                    Especially the info about Roman coin finds on Gotland. If you have
                    more information about this, especially about so called Germanic
                    imitations of Roman coins from Gotland (they do exist but little is
                    known in the literature)I would be very interested to hear about it.

                    Dirk
                    Thanks for the book reference. I shall have a look.

                    --- In gothic-l@egroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm@s...> wrote:
                    > >Hello Dirk,
                    > >
                    > >You wrote:
                    > >
                    > >>Personally I think that any claim of origin for the Germanic
                    people
                    > >>is inevitably incorrect. The whole procesess took place
                    dynamically
                    > >>over time and space and my comment was targeted against claims
                    that
                    > >>the Germanic people originated in Scandinavia which is just as
                    wrong
                    > >>as the claim the the Germanic people originated in today's
                    Germany.
                    > >
                    > >Yes, I agree that the "fazit" is, that it is simply not known.
                    > >I, in my turn react a bit against (some) Germans who seem to think
                    > >that "of course" the Germanics originitated (somewhere) in Germany,
                    > >and think of the Scandinavians as a kind of German settlers.
                    > >
                    > >"Gotland" was only chosen as an example - a kind of compromise,
                    > >a kind of "let's meet in the middle" (of the Baltic).
                    > >But it is of course true that it probably is a hospitable place
                    > >that must have been relatively more isolated than the
                    > >Danish islands. I have not been to Gotland, but you say that it
                    > >is "too small".
                    >
                    >
                    > For what is Gotland too small??
                    >
                    > If Gotland claimed back all archaeological finds that has been
                    taken from
                    > Gotland and brought to the Historical museum in Stockholm that
                    museum would
                    > probably have to close down.
                    >
                    > Only on coins from Roman time until early middle ages found in the
                    present
                    > day Sweden 2/3 of all coins come from Gotland.
                    >
                    > Dirk, if you can read German as I understand I would recommend.
                    > 2000 Jahre Handel und Kultur im Ostseegebiet
                    > - Gotland, Perle der Ostsee
                    > ISBN 91-972306-6-9
                    >
                    > Tore
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > That reminds me of a saying [about the Zurich
                    > >bankers]: "Auch die Gnomen haben klein angefangen>"
                    > >
                    > >On another account, that is only distantly related to the present
                    > >discussion, I always pay attention when I hear about discoveries
                    > >of very early human remains in SW Scandinavia, and it now seems
                    > >that human beings also lived on the Scandinavian peninsula
                    > >_during_ the Ice Age. (in the coastal areas where everything wasn't
                    > >covered with ice, as was previously thought)
                    > >
                    > >Sweden however, seems to have been _entirely_ covered with ice.
                    > >That is clear whereever a lot of sand and rubble is found.
                    > >
                    > >The question then is what people lived off.
                    > >
                    > >Archaeologists who have tried to popularize their insights,
                    > >have represented the people of those days as a kind of eskimos,
                    > >using harpoons and small boats for hunting and fishing.
                    > >
                    > >So maybe, if there during periods was _a lot of fish_, there
                    > >may also have been a rapid increase in the population,
                    > >as long as they lived near a place here there was a good food-
                    supply.
                    > >But on the whole, I think the main viewpoint is that people in
                    those
                    > >days were much more mobile than they became thousands of years
                    later
                    > >when agriculture was taken up.
                    > >
                    > >But when we consider the question of the arising of Proto-Germanic
                    > >as a separate language, we were of course already well into the
                    > >agricultural period. A linear kind of reasoning would then
                    > >imply that it was the agriculturalists (=Indo Europeans)
                    > >who became the first Germans, wherever their centre of
                    > >development was. But was it like that? Perhaps linguistics gives
                    > >some hints here; i.e. word counts could
                    > >indicate what kind of society it can have been. But of
                    > >such I only have a memory of someone saying
                    > >that Germanic contains a large percentage of extraneous words.
                    > >
                    > >Perhaps one should also consider that a strong iron age culture
                    > >could only arise where there was a good supply of iron ore.
                    > >Of course, Sweden _was_ such a place, with lots of timber
                    > >as well. (timber for producing charcoal to process the iron)
                    > >
                    > >Keth
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a
                    blank email
                    > >to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.
                    > >Homepage: http://www.stormloader.com/carver/gothicl/index.html
                  • Tore Gannholm
                    ... Dirk, I don t believe that the Germanic language originated in Gotland but that there was a cultural immigration about 1000-800 BC with a new burial
                    Message 9 of 28 , Nov 5, 2000
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >Hi Tore,
                      >
                      >I did not say or mean that Gotland is too small. I just said that the
                      >proposition that the Germanic language originated in Gotland is
                      >somewhat too narrow (I think I used exactly these words)in my view.


                      Dirk, I don't believe that the Germanic language originated in Gotland but
                      that there was a cultural immigration about 1000-800 BC with a new burial
                      tradition and very possible a new language. It that case it came from the
                      east. Gotland had very close connections with the Skyten.
                      Skeppssättningar (stone settings in the form of ships, unique for Gotland)
                      more than 350 registered remains.

                      Typ Gesamtmenge in Schweden davon in Gotland %

                      Römische Silbermünzen (Denare) 7500 6500 86,7
                      Sassaniden (226 - 651) 120 63 52,5
                      Arabische Münzen (kufisch) 67870 49756 73,3
                      Byzantinische Münzen 576 491 85,2
                      Schwedische Münzen (1013-1050) 781 423 54,2
                      Deutsche Münzen (950-1140) 92890 62144 66,9
                      Englische Münzen 41525 25785 62,1

                      These figures are before the very large Viking treasures found 2 years ago

                      There are very few Germanic imitations known in Gotland. I have seen a few.

                      Tore




                      I can see that you feel strongly about Gotland's place in history and
                      >many of the things that you wrote were new and interesting to me.
                      >Especially the info about Roman coin finds on Gotland. If you have
                      >more information about this, especially about so called Germanic
                      >imitations of Roman coins from Gotland (they do exist but little is
                      >known in the literature)I would be very interested to hear about it.
                      >
                      >Dirk
                      >Thanks for the book reference. I shall have a look.
                      >
                      >--- In gothic-l@egroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm@s...> wrote:
                      >> >Hello Dirk,
                      >> >
                      >> >You wrote:
                      >> >
                      >> >>Personally I think that any claim of origin for the Germanic
                      >people
                      >> >>is inevitably incorrect. The whole procesess took place
                      >dynamically
                      >> >>over time and space and my comment was targeted against claims
                      >that
                      >> >>the Germanic people originated in Scandinavia which is just as
                      >wrong
                      >> >>as the claim the the Germanic people originated in today's
                      >Germany.
                      >> >
                      >> >Yes, I agree that the "fazit" is, that it is simply not known.
                      >> >I, in my turn react a bit against (some) Germans who seem to think
                      >> >that "of course" the Germanics originitated (somewhere) in Germany,
                      >> >and think of the Scandinavians as a kind of German settlers.
                      >> >
                      >> >"Gotland" was only chosen as an example - a kind of compromise,
                      >> >a kind of "let's meet in the middle" (of the Baltic).
                      >> >But it is of course true that it probably is a hospitable place
                      >> >that must have been relatively more isolated than the
                      >> >Danish islands. I have not been to Gotland, but you say that it
                      >> >is "too small".
                      >>
                      >>
                      >> For what is Gotland too small??
                      >>
                      >> If Gotland claimed back all archaeological finds that has been
                      >taken from
                      >> Gotland and brought to the Historical museum in Stockholm that
                      >museum would
                      >> probably have to close down.
                      >>
                      >> Only on coins from Roman time until early middle ages found in the
                      >present
                      >> day Sweden 2/3 of all coins come from Gotland.
                      >>
                      >> Dirk, if you can read German as I understand I would recommend.
                      >> 2000 Jahre Handel und Kultur im Ostseegebiet
                      >> - Gotland, Perle der Ostsee
                      >> ISBN 91-972306-6-9
                      >>
                      >> Tore
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >> That reminds me of a saying [about the Zurich
                      >> >bankers]: "Auch die Gnomen haben klein angefangen>"
                      >> >
                      >> >On another account, that is only distantly related to the present
                      >> >discussion, I always pay attention when I hear about discoveries
                      >> >of very early human remains in SW Scandinavia, and it now seems
                      >> >that human beings also lived on the Scandinavian peninsula
                      >> >_during_ the Ice Age. (in the coastal areas where everything wasn't
                      >> >covered with ice, as was previously thought)
                      >> >
                      >> >Sweden however, seems to have been _entirely_ covered with ice.
                      >> >That is clear whereever a lot of sand and rubble is found.
                      >> >
                      >> >The question then is what people lived off.
                      >> >
                      >> >Archaeologists who have tried to popularize their insights,
                      >> >have represented the people of those days as a kind of eskimos,
                      >> >using harpoons and small boats for hunting and fishing.
                      >> >
                      >> >So maybe, if there during periods was _a lot of fish_, there
                      >> >may also have been a rapid increase in the population,
                      >> >as long as they lived near a place here there was a good food-
                      >supply.
                      >> >But on the whole, I think the main viewpoint is that people in
                      >those
                      >> >days were much more mobile than they became thousands of years
                      >later
                      >> >when agriculture was taken up.
                      >> >
                      >> >But when we consider the question of the arising of Proto-Germanic
                      >> >as a separate language, we were of course already well into the
                      >> >agricultural period. A linear kind of reasoning would then
                      >> >imply that it was the agriculturalists (=Indo Europeans)
                      >> >who became the first Germans, wherever their centre of
                      >> >development was. But was it like that? Perhaps linguistics gives
                      >> >some hints here; i.e. word counts could
                      >> >indicate what kind of society it can have been. But of
                      >> >such I only have a memory of someone saying
                      >> >that Germanic contains a large percentage of extraneous words.
                      >> >
                      >> >Perhaps one should also consider that a strong iron age culture
                      >> >could only arise where there was a good supply of iron ore.
                      >> >Of course, Sweden _was_ such a place, with lots of timber
                      >> >as well. (timber for producing charcoal to process the iron)
                      >> >
                      >> >Keth
                      >> >
                      >> >
                      >> >
                      >> >
                      >> >
                      >> >
                      >> >
                      >> >You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a
                      >blank email
                      >> >to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.
                      >> >Homepage: http://www.stormloader.com/carver/gothicl/index.html
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email
                      >to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.
                      >Homepage: http://www.stormloader.com/carver/gothicl/index.html
                    • dirk@smra.co.uk
                      ... the ... Gotland but ... burial ... from the ... Gotland) ... % ... 86,7 ... 52,5 ... 73,3 ... 85,2 ... 54,2 ... 66,9 ... 62,1 ... years ago ... a few. ...
                      Message 10 of 28 , Nov 6, 2000
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In gothic-l@egroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm@s...> wrote:
                        > >Hi Tore,
                        > >
                        > >I did not say or mean that Gotland is too small. I just said that
                        the
                        > >proposition that the Germanic language originated in Gotland is
                        > >somewhat too narrow (I think I used exactly these words)in my view.
                        >
                        >
                        > Dirk, I don't believe that the Germanic language originated in
                        Gotland but
                        > that there was a cultural immigration about 1000-800 BC with a new
                        burial
                        > tradition and very possible a new language. It that case it came
                        from the
                        > east. Gotland had very close connections with the Skyten.
                        > Skeppssättningar (stone settings in the form of ships, unique for
                        Gotland)
                        > more than 350 registered remains.
                        >
                        > Typ Gesamtmenge in Schweden davon in Gotland
                        %
                        >
                        > Römische Silbermünzen (Denare) 7500 6500
                        86,7
                        > Sassaniden (226 - 651) 120 63
                        52,5
                        > Arabische Münzen (kufisch) 67870 49756
                        73,3
                        > Byzantinische Münzen 576 491
                        85,2
                        > Schwedische Münzen (1013-1050) 781 423
                        54,2
                        > Deutsche Münzen (950-1140) 92890 62144
                        66,9
                        > Englische Münzen 41525 25785
                        62,1
                        >
                        > These figures are before the very large Viking treasures found 2
                        years ago
                        >
                        > There are very few Germanic imitations known in Gotland. I have seen
                        a few.
                        >
                        > Tore
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        Hi Tore,

                        these numbers are astonishing and seem to underscore the importance of
                        Gotland as commercial and probably power centre.

                        Thanks
                        Dirk
                        >
                        > I can see that you feel strongly about Gotland's place in history
                        and
                        > >many of the things that you wrote were new and interesting to me.
                        > >Especially the info about Roman coin finds on Gotland. If you have
                        > >more information about this, especially about so called Germanic
                        > >imitations of Roman coins from Gotland (they do exist but little is
                        > >known in the literature)I would be very interested to hear about
                        it.
                        > >
                        > >Dirk
                        > >Thanks for the book reference. I shall have a look.
                        > >
                        > >--- In gothic-l@egroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm@s...>
                        wrote:
                        > >> >Hello Dirk,
                        > >> >
                        > >> >You wrote:
                        > >> >
                        > >> >>Personally I think that any claim of origin for the Germanic
                        > >people
                        > >> >>is inevitably incorrect. The whole procesess took place
                        > >dynamically
                        > >> >>over time and space and my comment was targeted against claims
                        > >that
                        > >> >>the Germanic people originated in Scandinavia which is just as
                        > >wrong
                        > >> >>as the claim the the Germanic people originated in today's
                        > >Germany.
                        > >> >
                        > >> >Yes, I agree that the "fazit" is, that it is simply not known.
                        > >> >I, in my turn react a bit against (some) Germans who seem to
                        think
                        > >> >that "of course" the Germanics originitated (somewhere) in
                        Germany,
                        > >> >and think of the Scandinavians as a kind of German settlers.
                        > >> >
                        > >> >"Gotland" was only chosen as an example - a kind of compromise,
                        > >> >a kind of "let's meet in the middle" (of the Baltic).
                        > >> >But it is of course true that it probably is a hospitable place
                        > >> >that must have been relatively more isolated than the
                        > >> >Danish islands. I have not been to Gotland, but you say that it
                        > >> >is "too small".
                        > >>
                        > >>
                        > >> For what is Gotland too small??
                        > >>
                        > >> If Gotland claimed back all archaeological finds that has been
                        > >taken from
                        > >> Gotland and brought to the Historical museum in Stockholm that
                        > >museum would
                        > >> probably have to close down.
                        > >>
                        > >> Only on coins from Roman time until early middle ages found in
                        the
                        > >present
                        > >> day Sweden 2/3 of all coins come from Gotland.
                        > >>
                        > >> Dirk, if you can read German as I understand I would recommend.
                        > >> 2000 Jahre Handel und Kultur im Ostseegebiet
                        > >> - Gotland, Perle der Ostsee
                        > >> ISBN 91-972306-6-9
                        > >>
                        > >> Tore
                        > >>
                        > >>
                        > >>
                        > >> That reminds me of a saying [about the Zurich
                        > >> >bankers]: "Auch die Gnomen haben klein angefangen>"
                        > >> >
                        > >> >On another account, that is only distantly related to the
                        present
                        > >> >discussion, I always pay attention when I hear about discoveries
                        > >> >of very early human remains in SW Scandinavia, and it now seems
                        > >> >that human beings also lived on the Scandinavian peninsula
                        > >> >_during_ the Ice Age. (in the coastal areas where everything
                        wasn't
                        > >> >covered with ice, as was previously thought)
                        > >> >
                        > >> >Sweden however, seems to have been _entirely_ covered with ice.
                        > >> >That is clear whereever a lot of sand and rubble is found.
                        > >> >
                        > >> >The question then is what people lived off.
                        > >> >
                        > >> >Archaeologists who have tried to popularize their insights,
                        > >> >have represented the people of those days as a kind of eskimos,
                        > >> >using harpoons and small boats for hunting and fishing.
                        > >> >
                        > >> >So maybe, if there during periods was _a lot of fish_, there
                        > >> >may also have been a rapid increase in the population,
                        > >> >as long as they lived near a place here there was a good food-
                        > >supply.
                        > >> >But on the whole, I think the main viewpoint is that people in
                        > >those
                        > >> >days were much more mobile than they became thousands of years
                        > >later
                        > >> >when agriculture was taken up.
                        > >> >
                        > >> >But when we consider the question of the arising of
                        Proto-Germanic
                        > >> >as a separate language, we were of course already well into the
                        > >> >agricultural period. A linear kind of reasoning would then
                        > >> >imply that it was the agriculturalists (=Indo Europeans)
                        > >> >who became the first Germans, wherever their centre of
                        > >> >development was. But was it like that? Perhaps linguistics gives
                        > >> >some hints here; i.e. word counts could
                        > >> >indicate what kind of society it can have been. But of
                        > >> >such I only have a memory of someone saying
                        > >> >that Germanic contains a large percentage of extraneous words.
                        > >> >
                        > >> >Perhaps one should also consider that a strong iron age culture
                        > >> >could only arise where there was a good supply of iron ore.
                        > >> >Of course, Sweden _was_ such a place, with lots of timber
                        > >> >as well. (timber for producing charcoal to process the iron)
                        > >> >
                        > >> >Keth
                        > >> >
                        > >> >
                        > >> >
                        > >> >
                        > >> >
                        > >> >
                        > >> >
                        > >> >You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a
                        > >blank email
                        > >> >to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.
                        > >> >Homepage: http://www.stormloader.com/carver/gothicl/index.html
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a
                        blank email
                        > >to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.
                        > >Homepage: http://www.stormloader.com/carver/gothicl/index.html
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.