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

Goths and Bavaria

Expand Messages
  • dirk@smra.co.uk
    Hi Cory and Francisc, your discussion is really interesting. I think one of the arguments against a Gothic mission to Bavaria is based on the fact that the
    Message 1 of 13 , Jul 31 12:30 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Cory and Francisc,

      your discussion is really interesting. I think one of the arguments
      against a Gothic mission to Bavaria is based on the fact that the
      Arian church was never really focused on missionary work in general.
      However, one thing is obvious Theoderic was keen to secure the borders
      of his realm once the conquest of Italy was complete. In some cases he
      sought marriage alliances while he resorted to war against the Gepids
      in order to secure the important north-eastern gate-way into Italy.
      The Bajuvari were at the northern border of the Ostrogothic kingdom at
      a strategically important position. Controlling Bavaria could
      potentially help to thwart Frankish attempts to expand east and
      south-eastwards. The Thuringian kingdom was also allied with the
      Ostrogoths to a similar end. However, in Bavaria I suppose that the
      Ostrogoths might have seen a chance for more direct intervention. It
      has been argued that some of the administrative divisions of Bavaria
      were put into place by the Goths.

      I agree with Corey, that the ways of political and linguistic
      influence of the Goths on Bavaria is probably more complicated than
      missions and refugees, but I am slightly more sceptical about a real
      'influx' of actual Goths into Bavaria. I would propose a more indirect
      scenario. It is an established fact that the Bavarian dukedom was
      closely related with the Langobardic kingdom in Italy. We know that
      some Langobardic kings spend much of their lifetime in Bavaria and the
      last Langobardic kings are often called the Bavarian dynasty. After
      the fall of the Ostrogothic kingdom, the Goths did not vanish from
      Italy, but basically blended into the local and new Langobardic
      population. As such Gothic will likely have made some impression on
      Langobardic, and this influence could have been carried through
      Langobards/Goths to Bavaria.

      I believe one area where a linguistic and other influence should be
      visible is personal names. Bavaria has to this day a number of
      peculiar personal names that could portray an East Germanic (not
      necessarily Gothic) influence. Thus, we have otherwise unknown male
      names like Tassilo, Odilo/Uatila and Athala, but also Otakar which is
      directly derived from Odoaker. Interestingly, a lead-name of the
      Bavarian Agilofing ducal house was Fara. This name may have been
      brought to Bavaria, by the Herul prince of that name who became also
      duke of Bavaria. In addition, Fara was also a lead-name of some
      Langobardic ducal houses.

      In contrast to Corey I believe that Bavarian is essentially a West
      Germanic language and that the 'men from Baia', where initially
      Langobards and later after the 530s Thuringians. These were
      supplemented by East Germanic splinter groups such as Skiri (who have
      given their name to Scheyern/Skirensis in Bavaria), Rugians near
      Passau and Heruls in Austro-Bavaria (where we may even have placenames
      based on the Herul name), as well as some Goths and 'Italian
      Langobards'.

      I wonder if the so- called 5 'Genealogiae', i.e. the five leading
      early Bajuvarian families in the 6th and 7th centuries: the Huosi,
      Fagana, Hahhilinga, Draozza and Anniona plus the Agilofing dukes are
      not the ruling clans of 5 or 6 different tribal groups. Is anybody
      aware of an interpretation of these names?

      cheers,
      Dirk
    • dirk@smra.co.uk
      Hi Cory, there is lots of interesting material here and I will need some time to digest that all. However, it strikes me that there is one major
      Message 2 of 13 , Aug 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Cory,

        there is lots of interesting material here and I will need some time
        to digest that all. However, it strikes me that there is one
        major mis-understanding.

        When I said that the first Bajuvari, i.e. 'the men of Baia' could have
        been Langobards I did not mean Langobards from Italy. By that time
        (perhaps the first half of the 5th century, and earlier) the
        Langobards were situated in the area of Bohemia (i.e. Baia). I believe
        that Scheurer is right in the following article, where he shows on the
        basis of archaeological evidence that the first Bajuvarii arrived
        around 400AD in the area of Straubing, Althmuehltal etc. coming from
        Bohemia.

        http://www.bingo-ev.de/~ks451/archaeol/kemath01.htm

        The people, or at least one of the peoples, who had just arrived in
        Bohemia were the Langobards. Scheurer argues that the first Germanic
        settlers were attracted to the area by the prospect of Roman military
        service and they started to settle at a time when the area was still
        part of the Roman empire. These people may have been formed into a
        'proper' tribe of Bajuvari under the influence of the Ostrogoths in
        the late 5th century.

        Scheuerer writes: "Dagegen konnte man über die modisch beeinflußten
        Gewandfibeln der Zeit Importe oder einen Zuzug neuer Siedler aus
        Thüringen oder Franken, von den Alamannen, Langobarden, Ostgoten oder
        Burgundern gut nachweisen." (... imports or in-migration of settlers
        from Thuringia, the Franks, Alamanns, Langobards, Ostrogoths and
        Burgundians can be well demonstrated)


        cheers
        Dirk

        PS Did you know that Bavaria is the oldest state in Europe; that has
        been in uninterrupted existence since about 520AD. At least that is
        what the Bavarians say;-)



        --- In gothic-l@y..., cstrohmier@y... wrote:
        > Hi Dirk,
        > Thanks for the information; you've given me some new ideas to
        > think about and some areas to explore. I think your idea about the
        > six leading houses of Bavaria is very interesting, and it merits
        > further investigation.
        > I'm not familiar with the Thuringian Kingdom. Awhile back
        > you sent to Gothic-List an interesting report about an East Germanic
        > castle in Thuringia called Funkenburg and about East Germanic
        > settlements stretching from Silesia to Hesse; would these be
        > connected with a possible immigration from Thuringia to Bavaria?
        > The Langobards are an interesting people. I have read that
        > their king wore a crown called the Iron Crown, which was trimmed in
        > gold, and which contained one of the iron nails used to crucify
        > Christ. The Langobards connection with the Bavarians is also
        > interesting, but I am very skeptical about the idea that they were
        > the first Bavarians.
        > The Tyrol is a part of Austria in the Bavarian speech
        > region. Concerning the Tyrol, "Compton's Pictured Encyclopedia"
        > says: "During Roman Empire times, it was the province of Raetia.
        In
        > the 5th century the Ostrogoths Teutonized the northern part, while
        > the Teutonic Langobards (Lombards) who invaded the southern part
        > became Romanized. Thus the Tyrol early acquired its dual character"
        > (volume 14, page 232b). The same encyclopedia says of Lombardy:
        "It
        > takes its name from the barbarian Lombard hordes who overran it in
        > the 6th century. These people were the last Germanic invaders of
        > Italy. They pressed down from the north in A.D. 568 within 15 years
        > after the emperor Justinian had expelled the East Goths" (volume 8,
        > page 279). These quotes are important for several reasons.
        > The first quote shows that the Ostrogoths did "Teutonize" at
        > least part of the Bavarian speech region long before the southern
        > part of the Ostrogothic Kingdom began to founder. It also shows
        that
        > the Gothic influence on Lombardic is not directly connected to
        Gothic
        > refugees. The second quote is even more interesting. The southern
        > part of the Ostrogothic Kingdom fell in about 555; the Lombards
        > arrived 13 years later in 568. This is interesting because the
        > Lombards arrived in the area after the Bavarians were already
        settled
        > in Bavaria.
        > In 551, a Goth named Jordannes wrote a work called
        > the "Getica", or "The History of the Goths", and in it he mentions
        > the Bavarians (the Baiovari) who were already settled in Bavaria:
        > "LV (280) After a certain time, when the wintry cold was at hand,
        the
        > river Danube was frozen over as usual. For a river like this freezes
        > so hard that it will support like a solid rock an army of foot-
        > soldiers and wagons and carts and whatsoever vehicles there may
        be,--
        > nor is there need of skiffs and boats. So when Thiudimer, king of
        the
        > Goths, saw that it was frozen, he led his army across the Danube and
        > appeared unexpectedly to the Suavi from the rear. Now this country
        of
        > the Suavi has on the east the Baiovari, on the west the Franks, on
        > the south the Burgundians and on the north the Thuringians. (281)
        > With the Suavi there were present the Alamanni, then their
        > confederates, who also ruled the Alpine heights, whence several
        > streams flow into the Danube, pouring in with a great rushing sound.
        > Into a place thus fortified King Thiudimer led his army in the
        winter-
        > time and conquered, plundered and almost subdued the race of the
        > Suavi as well as the Alamanni, who were mutually banded together.
        > Thence he returned as victor to his own home in Pannonia and
        joyfully
        > received his son Theodoric, once given as hostage to Constantinople
        > and now sent back by the Emperor Leo with great gifts. (282) Now
        > Theodoric had reached man's estate, for he was eighteen years of age
        > and his boyhood was ended." One supposes that if the Bavarians were
        > Suavi or Alamanni, they would have allied themselves with their
        > neighbors against the Goths, and that Thiudimer, King of the Goths,
        > would have attacked them too. It is interesting to note that
        > Jordannes does not present the Bavarians as Suevi, Alamanni,
        > Thuringians, or Marcomanni. (In Chapters XVI [89] and XXII [113]
        > Jordannes mentiones the Marcomanni, but he does not connect them
        with
        > the Bavarians.) In any case, this clearly shows that the Bavarians
        > were in Bavaria long before the Lombard invasions began. In
        > addition, I have two sets of encyclopedia dates which give the time-
        > frame for the Bavarian settlement in Bavaria: A.D. 488-520 and A.D.
        > 489-539. Both of these dates about thirty years before the arrival
        > of the Lombards.
        > The "New Catholic Encyclopedia says: "After the Agilolfing
        > House had attained domination in Bavaria under the suzerainty of the
        > Franks (c. 550), the Irish and Frankish mission began. The
        > missionaries Eustace and Agilus, who came fom Luxeuil, had only
        > limited success. The work of the missionary bishops Emmeram,
        Rupert,
        > and Corbinian (c. 700) was much more lasting and effective" (page
        > 175). This too clearly shows that the Bavarians were already
        settled
        > in Bavaria before the time of the Langobards, that the Bavarians
        > turned to the Franks for protection when the southern part of the
        > Ostrogothic Kingdom was collapsing, and that the Bavarians were not
        > the Catholic Marcomanni.
        > For these reasons I do not consider it likely that the
        > Langobards are the first Bavarians; however, it is entirely possible
        > that when the peoples of the areas "Teutonized" by the Ostrogoths
        > came into close proximity with the Langobards, they may have
        affected
        > each others' languages through linguistic sharing; merchants from
        > these areas may have carried these changes to towns and cities
        > throughout Southern Germany, perhaps setting off the Second German
        > Sound Shift. So in this sense, Dirk, I think you may be right,
        that
        > some of these characteristics may have occured indirectly and may
        > have involved the Langobards.
        > Sincerely yours,
        > Cory
        >
        > --- In gothic-l@y..., dirk@s... wrote:
        > > Hi Cory and Francisc,
        > >
        > > your discussion is really interesting. I think one of the
        arguments
        > > against a Gothic mission to Bavaria is based on the fact that the
        > > Arian church was never really focused on missionary work in
        > general.
        > > However, one thing is obvious Theoderic was keen to secure the
        > borders
        > > of his realm once the conquest of Italy was complete. In some
        cases
        > he
        > > sought marriage alliances while he resorted to war against the
        > Gepids
        > > in order to secure the important north-eastern gate-way into
        Italy.
        > > The Bajuvari were at the northern border of the Ostrogothic
        kingdom
        > at
        > > a strategically important position. Controlling Bavaria could
        > > potentially help to thwart Frankish attempts to expand east and
        > > south-eastwards. The Thuringian kingdom was also allied with the
        > > Ostrogoths to a similar end. However, in Bavaria I suppose that
        the
        > > Ostrogoths might have seen a chance for more direct intervention.
        > It
        > > has been argued that some of the administrative divisions of
        > Bavaria
        > > were put into place by the Goths.
        > >
        > > I agree with Corey, that the ways of political and linguistic
        > > influence of the Goths on Bavaria is probably more complicated
        than
        > > missions and refugees, but I am slightly more sceptical about a
        > real
        > > 'influx' of actual Goths into Bavaria. I would propose a more
        > indirect
        > > scenario. It is an established fact that the Bavarian dukedom was
        > > closely related with the Langobardic kingdom in Italy. We know
        that
        > > some Langobardic kings spend much of their lifetime in Bavaria and
        > the
        > > last Langobardic kings are often called the Bavarian dynasty.
        After
        > > the fall of the Ostrogothic kingdom, the Goths did not vanish from
        > > Italy, but basically blended into the local and new Langobardic
        > > population. As such Gothic will likely have made some impression
        > on
        > > Langobardic, and this influence could have been carried through
        > > Langobards/Goths to Bavaria.
        > >
        > > I believe one area where a linguistic and other influence should
        be
        > > visible is personal names. Bavaria has to this day a number of
        > > peculiar personal names that could portray an East Germanic (not
        > > necessarily Gothic) influence. Thus, we have otherwise unknown
        male
        > > names like Tassilo, Odilo/Uatila and Athala, but also Otakar which
        > is
        > > directly derived from Odoaker. Interestingly, a lead-name of the
        > > Bavarian Agilofing ducal house was Fara. This name may have been
        > > brought to Bavaria, by the Herul prince of that name who became
        > also
        > > duke of Bavaria. In addition, Fara was also a lead-name of some
        > > Langobardic ducal houses.
        > >
        > > In contrast to Corey I believe that Bavarian is essentially a West
        > > Germanic language and that the 'men from Baia', where initially
        > > Langobards and later after the 530s Thuringians. These were
        > > supplemented by East Germanic splinter groups such as Skiri (who
        > have
        > > given their name to Scheyern/Skirensis in Bavaria), Rugians near
        > > Passau and Heruls in Austro-Bavaria (where we may even have
        > placenames
        > > based on the Herul name), as well as some Goths and 'Italian
        > > Langobards'.
        > >
        > > I wonder if the so- called 5 'Genealogiae', i.e. the five leading
        > > early Bajuvarian families in the 6th and 7th centuries: the
        Huosi,
        > > Fagana, Hahhilinga, Draozza and Anniona plus the Agilofing dukes
        > are
        > > not the ruling clans of 5 or 6 different tribal groups. Is anybody
        > > aware of an interpretation of these names?
        > >
        > > cheers,
        > > Dirk
      • keth@online.no
        Hello Dirk! Yes, I was also impressed by Cory s detailed historic knowledge of Bavaria. Her post was so solid that I felt there was nothing I could add. It is
        Message 3 of 13 , Aug 1, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Hello Dirk!
          Yes, I was also impressed by Cory's detailed historic knowledge of
          Bavaria. Her post was so solid that I felt there was nothing I could add.
          It is odd with really good posts, that they frequently do not get answered,
          because they seem so comlete that nobody has anything to add.

          Cory also referred to Brockhaus. However, when I went to look there,
          I found nothing, except the standard dictionary entries that Bavarian
          history begins in the sixth century with the "Einmarsch der Bajuwaren"
          who are supposed to have come from Bohemia. (any connection with
          the Boii?) And then also a mention of Agilwulf and the "Agilolfingen"
          dynasty.

          However when I looked under "Bairisch" (writen with "i", whereas Bayern
          is written with "y" - any one know why?), the Brockhaus referred to
          "deutsche mundarten" and under that topos I found an interesting map
          of the Germanic dialects. And there I found something that surprised
          me; for it became clear that linguists refer to the language spoken in
          Tirol *also as bairisch ! ! ! Now why didn't that come up on the list
          as we discussed this before? I even specifically mentioned Süd Tirol,
          with Bozen and the Brenner. Now if all that is *also Bairisch (linguist-
          ically speaking), then that changes things quite a bit. No wonder I
          found I could understand Bairisch when I visited there some years ago,
          after having spent many months in Tirol.

          You see, what I thought until now, was that Bairisch referred strictly to
          the dialect spoken within the present borders of the Teilstaat Bayern.
          But if the dialect spoken in Tirol (Innsbruck!) is also bairisch,
          then that changes things quite a bit from my point of view.

          However, what the map *also says (o, erstaunen, erstaunen) is that
          Vienna is *also in the "bairischen mundarten" area. Now, that is
          beginning to sound a bit odd to me. For if there is something that
          is certain, then it is that the "Wienersprache" has a very distinct
          note to it, that distinguishes it from other Austrian dialects.
          And especially "bairisch". More likely is perhaps the attribution
          of Steiermärkisch to bairisch, but even that is a long distance
          from Tirol, and clearly distinguishable, even to my ear. (or maybe
          especially to my ear)

          What should also be discussed when Bayern is discussed, is that its
          present area perhaps only gives a very approximate indication of
          its area in the 6th century. Any way, it is well know that "Milano"
          is not really an Italian city, but an old German city that is called
          "Mailand", and consulting the map shows that "Mailand" is in fact
          the major city of Lombardia. Tirol must earlier have extended rather
          far south. Perhaps as far as Verona? From the map I see that it is
          approx. 150 kilometers from Bozen to Verona. And so I think the
          discussion might be much clarified if one specifies where one
          envisions the old 5th century language borders, as well as what
          areas that were then conceived of as Bayern and Lombardia.
          Raetia it also said. That was the old name of Baiern, before
          the Bavarians came.

          Best regards
          Keth




          >Hi Cory and Francisc,
          >
          >your discussion is really interesting. I think one of the arguments
          >against a Gothic mission to Bavaria is based on the fact that the
          >Arian church was never really focused on missionary work in general.
          >However, one thing is obvious Theoderic was keen to secure the borders
          >of his realm once the conquest of Italy was complete. In some cases he
          >sought marriage alliances while he resorted to war against the Gepids
          >in order to secure the important north-eastern gate-way into Italy.
          >The Bajuvari were at the northern border of the Ostrogothic kingdom at
          >a strategically important position. Controlling Bavaria could
          >potentially help to thwart Frankish attempts to expand east and
          >south-eastwards. The Thuringian kingdom was also allied with the
          >Ostrogoths to a similar end. However, in Bavaria I suppose that the
          >Ostrogoths might have seen a chance for more direct intervention. It
          >has been argued that some of the administrative divisions of Bavaria
          >were put into place by the Goths.
          >
          >I agree with Corey, that the ways of political and linguistic
          >influence of the Goths on Bavaria is probably more complicated than
          >missions and refugees, but I am slightly more sceptical about a real
          >'influx' of actual Goths into Bavaria. I would propose a more indirect
          >scenario. It is an established fact that the Bavarian dukedom was
          >closely related with the Langobardic kingdom in Italy. We know that
          >some Langobardic kings spend much of their lifetime in Bavaria and the
          >last Langobardic kings are often called the Bavarian dynasty. After
          >the fall of the Ostrogothic kingdom, the Goths did not vanish from
          >Italy, but basically blended into the local and new Langobardic
          >population. As such Gothic will likely have made some impression on
          >Langobardic, and this influence could have been carried through
          >Langobards/Goths to Bavaria.
          >
          >I believe one area where a linguistic and other influence should be
          >visible is personal names. Bavaria has to this day a number of
          >peculiar personal names that could portray an East Germanic (not
          >necessarily Gothic) influence. Thus, we have otherwise unknown male
          >names like Tassilo, Odilo/Uatila and Athala, but also Otakar which is
          >directly derived from Odoaker. Interestingly, a lead-name of the
          >Bavarian Agilofing ducal house was Fara. This name may have been
          >brought to Bavaria, by the Herul prince of that name who became also
          >duke of Bavaria. In addition, Fara was also a lead-name of some
          >Langobardic ducal houses.

          Odoacer is the same as "Oddvar

          >In contrast to Corey I believe that Bavarian is essentially a West
          >Germanic language and that the 'men from Baia', where initially
          >Langobards and later after the 530s Thuringians. These were
          >supplemented by East Germanic splinter groups such as Skiri (who have
          >given their name to Scheyern/Skirensis in Bavaria), Rugians near
          >Passau and Heruls in Austro-Bavaria (where we may even have placenames
          >based on the Herul name), as well as some Goths and 'Italian
          >Langobards'.
          >
          >I wonder if the so- called 5 'Genealogiae', i.e. the five leading
          >early Bajuvarian families in the 6th and 7th centuries: the Huosi,
          >Fagana, Hahhilinga, Draozza and Anniona plus the Agilofing dukes are
          >not the ruling clans of 5 or 6 different tribal groups. Is anybody
          >aware of an interpretation of these names?
          >
          >cheers,
          >Dirk
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.
          >
          >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • Le Bateman
          Does anyone know Matt Carver s email address his old one does not work. ... From: To: Sent: Wednesday, August 01,
          Message 4 of 13 , Aug 1, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Does anyone know Matt Carver's email address his old one does not work.
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: <keth@...>
            To: <gothic-l@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 2:27 PM
            Subject: Re: [gothic-l] Goths and Bavaria


            Hello Dirk!
            Yes, I was also impressed by Cory's detailed historic knowledge of
            Bavaria. Her post was so solid that I felt there was nothing I could add.
            It is odd with really good posts, that they frequently do not get answered,
            because they seem so comlete that nobody has anything to add.

            Cory also referred to Brockhaus. However, when I went to look there,
            I found nothing, except the standard dictionary entries that Bavarian
            history begins in the sixth century with the "Einmarsch der Bajuwaren"
            who are supposed to have come from Bohemia. (any connection with
            the Boii?) And then also a mention of Agilwulf and the "Agilolfingen"
            dynasty.

            However when I looked under "Bairisch" (writen with "i", whereas Bayern
            is written with "y" - any one know why?), the Brockhaus referred to
            "deutsche mundarten" and under that topos I found an interesting map
            of the Germanic dialects. And there I found something that surprised
            me; for it became clear that linguists refer to the language spoken in
            Tirol *also as bairisch ! ! ! Now why didn't that come up on the list
            as we discussed this before? I even specifically mentioned Süd Tirol,
            with Bozen and the Brenner. Now if all that is *also Bairisch (linguist-
            ically speaking), then that changes things quite a bit. No wonder I
            found I could understand Bairisch when I visited there some years ago,
            after having spent many months in Tirol.

            You see, what I thought until now, was that Bairisch referred strictly to
            the dialect spoken within the present borders of the Teilstaat Bayern.
            But if the dialect spoken in Tirol (Innsbruck!) is also bairisch,
            then that changes things quite a bit from my point of view.

            However, what the map *also says (o, erstaunen, erstaunen) is that
            Vienna is *also in the "bairischen mundarten" area. Now, that is
            beginning to sound a bit odd to me. For if there is something that
            is certain, then it is that the "Wienersprache" has a very distinct
            note to it, that distinguishes it from other Austrian dialects.
            And especially "bairisch". More likely is perhaps the attribution
            of Steiermärkisch to bairisch, but even that is a long distance
            from Tirol, and clearly distinguishable, even to my ear. (or maybe
            especially to my ear)

            What should also be discussed when Bayern is discussed, is that its
            present area perhaps only gives a very approximate indication of
            its area in the 6th century. Any way, it is well know that "Milano"
            is not really an Italian city, but an old German city that is called
            "Mailand", and consulting the map shows that "Mailand" is in fact
            the major city of Lombardia. Tirol must earlier have extended rather
            far south. Perhaps as far as Verona? From the map I see that it is
            approx. 150 kilometers from Bozen to Verona. And so I think the
            discussion might be much clarified if one specifies where one
            envisions the old 5th century language borders, as well as what
            areas that were then conceived of as Bayern and Lombardia.
            Raetia it also said. That was the old name of Baiern, before
            the Bavarians came.

            Best regards
            Keth




            >Hi Cory and Francisc,
            >
            >your discussion is really interesting. I think one of the arguments
            >against a Gothic mission to Bavaria is based on the fact that the
            >Arian church was never really focused on missionary work in general.
            >However, one thing is obvious Theoderic was keen to secure the borders
            >of his realm once the conquest of Italy was complete. In some cases he
            >sought marriage alliances while he resorted to war against the Gepids
            >in order to secure the important north-eastern gate-way into Italy.
            >The Bajuvari were at the northern border of the Ostrogothic kingdom at
            >a strategically important position. Controlling Bavaria could
            >potentially help to thwart Frankish attempts to expand east and
            >south-eastwards. The Thuringian kingdom was also allied with the
            >Ostrogoths to a similar end. However, in Bavaria I suppose that the
            >Ostrogoths might have seen a chance for more direct intervention. It
            >has been argued that some of the administrative divisions of Bavaria
            >were put into place by the Goths.
            >
            >I agree with Corey, that the ways of political and linguistic
            >influence of the Goths on Bavaria is probably more complicated than
            >missions and refugees, but I am slightly more sceptical about a real
            >'influx' of actual Goths into Bavaria. I would propose a more indirect
            >scenario. It is an established fact that the Bavarian dukedom was
            >closely related with the Langobardic kingdom in Italy. We know that
            >some Langobardic kings spend much of their lifetime in Bavaria and the
            >last Langobardic kings are often called the Bavarian dynasty. After
            >the fall of the Ostrogothic kingdom, the Goths did not vanish from
            >Italy, but basically blended into the local and new Langobardic
            >population. As such Gothic will likely have made some impression on
            >Langobardic, and this influence could have been carried through
            >Langobards/Goths to Bavaria.
            >
            >I believe one area where a linguistic and other influence should be
            >visible is personal names. Bavaria has to this day a number of
            >peculiar personal names that could portray an East Germanic (not
            >necessarily Gothic) influence. Thus, we have otherwise unknown male
            >names like Tassilo, Odilo/Uatila and Athala, but also Otakar which is
            >directly derived from Odoaker. Interestingly, a lead-name of the
            >Bavarian Agilofing ducal house was Fara. This name may have been
            >brought to Bavaria, by the Herul prince of that name who became also
            >duke of Bavaria. In addition, Fara was also a lead-name of some
            >Langobardic ducal houses.

            Odoacer is the same as "Oddvar

            >In contrast to Corey I believe that Bavarian is essentially a West
            >Germanic language and that the 'men from Baia', where initially
            >Langobards and later after the 530s Thuringians. These were
            >supplemented by East Germanic splinter groups such as Skiri (who have
            >given their name to Scheyern/Skirensis in Bavaria), Rugians near
            >Passau and Heruls in Austro-Bavaria (where we may even have placenames
            >based on the Herul name), as well as some Goths and 'Italian
            >Langobards'.
            >
            >I wonder if the so- called 5 'Genealogiae', i.e. the five leading
            >early Bajuvarian families in the 6th and 7th centuries: the Huosi,
            >Fagana, Hahhilinga, Draozza and Anniona plus the Agilofing dukes are
            >not the ruling clans of 5 or 6 different tribal groups. Is anybody
            >aware of an interpretation of these names?
            >
            >cheers,
            >Dirk
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email
            to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.
            >
            >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




            You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email
            to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




            ----------------------------------------------------
            NetZero Platinum
            Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
            http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97
          • dirk@smra.co.uk
            ... add. Hi Keth, her? I think Cory is a male name! ... answered, ... Bavarian ... Bajuwaren ... Agilolfingen ... The following web-site gives a really good
            Message 5 of 13 , Aug 1, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In gothic-l@y..., keth@o... wrote:
              > Hello Dirk!
              > Yes, I was also impressed by Cory's detailed historic knowledge of
              > Bavaria. Her post was so solid that I felt there was nothing I could
              add.


              Hi Keth,

              her? I think Cory is a male name!




              > It is odd with really good posts, that they frequently do not get
              answered,
              > because they seem so comlete that nobody has anything to add.
              >
              > Cory also referred to Brockhaus. However, when I went to look there,
              > I found nothing, except the standard dictionary entries that
              Bavarian
              > history begins in the sixth century with the "Einmarsch der
              Bajuwaren"
              > who are supposed to have come from Bohemia. (any connection with
              > the Boii?) And then also a mention of Agilwulf and the
              "Agilolfingen"
              > dynasty.


              The following web-site gives a really good overview of Bajuvarian
              archaeology.

              http://www.bingo-ev.de/~ks451/archaeol/baiuw-01.htm

              Of course, the name Bohemia is derived from the Celtic Boii, who were
              driven out/surplanted/integrated by the Suevian Marcomanni and Quadi
              in the first century AD.




              > However when I looked under "Bairisch" (writen with "i", whereas
              Bayern
              > is written with "y" - any one know why?), the Brockhaus referred to
              > "deutsche mundarten" and under that topos I found an interesting map
              > of the Germanic dialects. And there I found something that surprised
              > me; for it became clear that linguists refer to the language spoken
              in
              > Tirol *also as bairisch ! ! ! Now why didn't that come up on the
              list
              > as we discussed this before? I even specifically mentioned Süd
              Tirol,
              > with Bozen and the Brenner. Now if all that is *also Bairisch
              (linguist-
              > ically speaking), then that changes things quite a bit. No wonder I
              > found I could understand Bairisch when I visited there some years
              ago,
              > after having spent many months in Tirol.
              >
              > You see, what I thought until now, was that Bairisch referred
              strictly to
              > the dialect spoken within the present borders of the Teilstaat
              Bayern.
              > But if the dialect spoken in Tirol (Innsbruck!) is also bairisch,
              > then that changes things quite a bit from my point of view.



              Yes, in historical and linguistic terms Bavaria covers a large area
              from Northern Italy in the south to Franconia in the North, with
              Alamannic languages (Swiss German and Suevian) in the West (+
              Raeto-Romanic) and Slavic languages in the east.





              >
              > However, what the map *also says (o, erstaunen, erstaunen) is that
              > Vienna is *also in the "bairischen mundarten" area. Now, that is
              > beginning to sound a bit odd to me. For if there is something that
              > is certain, then it is that the "Wienersprache" has a very distinct
              > note to it, that distinguishes it from other Austrian dialects.
              > And especially "bairisch". More likely is perhaps the attribution
              > of Steiermärkisch to bairisch, but even that is a long distance
              > from Tirol, and clearly distinguishable, even to my ear. (or maybe
              > especially to my ear)


              That is right, but Swiss German is also very distinctive from
              Schwaebisch/Suevian, or Alsacian. Yet, they are all Alamannic
              languages.



              > What should also be discussed when Bayern is discussed, is that its
              > present area perhaps only gives a very approximate indication of
              > its area in the 6th century.


              Very true. Present day Bavaria includes also non-Bavarian dialects,
              such as Alamannic dialects in the west of Bavaria and Frankish in the
              North of Bavaria.



              cheers,

              Dirk
            • dirk@smra.co.uk
              ... Langobards ... of ... foundation ... Hi Cory, I seemed to remember the year 520AD from somewhere, but cannot really say where I read this. Here are two
              Message 6 of 13 , Aug 2, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In gothic-l@y..., cstrohmier@y... wrote:
                > Hi Dirk,
                > I agree: The connections between the Goths and the Bavarians
                > are a fascinating topic. Thank you for clarifying how the
                Langobards
                > fit in: I had misunderstood what you meant. (I took you to mean
                > that the connections of the Langobardic royal family with the
                > Bavarian royal family pertained to the Italian Langobards, and that
                > the proposed emigration followed the same pattern.) An imigration
                of
                > Langobards from Bohemia seems less problematic than one from Italy,
                > especially if it was north of the Danube. (The "devastation"
                > and "depopulation" of the region south of the Danube in A.D. 476 by
                > Odoacer and this troops would seem to make this theory problematic
                > there.) This would certainly seem to be one more piece of a
                > complicated puzzle. (I'm still pondering the significance of
                > Scheuerer's interesting article.)
                > I was unaware that the modern Bavarians connect the beginning
                > of their state in an unbroken line back to Ostrogothic times; it
                > seems reasonable, but I wonder how they arrive at the exact date of
                > A.D. 520. Is there some specific historical event underlying this
                > date? In my previous posting, I mentioned two sets of encyclopedia
                > dates: A.D. 489-539 and A.D. 488-520. (I believe one of these two
                > sets of dates came from the Encyclopedia Britannica.) The earliest
                > arrival dates of A.D. 488 and 489 no doubt refer to the beginning of
                > Theodoric's invasion of Italy (which he entered through the Alpine
                > region), but I wonder what events the encyclopedia writers had in
                > mind when they selected A.D. 520 and 539 as the latest possible
                > arrival date. There must be some historical references to the
                > Bavarians in these two years which I am unaware of. The date A.D.
                > 520 is especially interesting, since it coincides with the
                foundation
                > date of the Bavarian state in the northern part of the Ostrogothic
                > Kingdom. It would be interesting to know what these two dates refer
                > to.
                > Sincerely yours,
                > Cory
                >


                Hi Cory,

                I seemed to remember the year 520AD from somewhere, but cannot really
                say where I read this. Here are two short histories of the early
                Bavarians:

                http://www.bayern.de/HDBG/pgkap01.htm

                http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/6711/austria.html#The Bavarians


                I don't know how reliable these texts are, but the second article,
                stated that the first duke/king of the Bajuvari was Theodo I
                (508-511AD, but said to have been born in 420AD!). Note the many
                'Langobardic' names in the Bavarian king-list (Garibald, Grimwald,
                Agiulf) and the text also mentiones the Herulic Prince Fara (died
                535AD) as co-founder of the Bavarian ducal house. Fara, Farwald etc.
                is also a common name of Langobardic dukes, especially at Spoleto.

                The text also states :"After the highest level of protection granted
                to the Agilolfing dukes, the next highest was the double weregeld
                granted to the five noble families of Huosi, Drozza, Fagana,
                Hahilinga, and Anniona - probably the descendants of kings of seperate
                lesser tribes incorporated within the Bavarian nation..."






                > P.S.
                > I need to make two clarifications. In my last posting, I
                > included a quote about the Ostrogoths "Teutonizing" the Austrian
                > Tyrol. The word "Teutonizing" has several possible meanings: The
                > author seems to have left the meaning deliberately ambiguous. I
                take
                > it to mean that the area was unpopulated, and that it
                > became "Teutonized" through settlement of Ostrogoths in the area.



                I am not sure, but the Tyrol area was where the Celtic (barely
                Romanised) Brennones lived. Maybe, it was these people in South Tyrol
                (now Italy) who were 'teutonised'.




                In
                > another previous posting, I mentioned that some pieces of Old and
                > Middle High German literature which show a curious mixing of Old
                > Saxon and Old and Middle High German influences may point to an
                > explanation of the West and North Germanic features in Southern
                > German; two more examples of this would be: "Das Hildebrandslied"
                > (which also shows Langobardic influences) and the so-called "Low"
                > German "Der Heliand". I believe there are also smaller fragments
                > such as prayers which also reflect both Saxon and High German
                > influences. No doubt there are more examples.


                My understanding was that the Hildebrandslied was written down by an
                Old Saxon speaker based on a Bavarian 'original'. I think it is
                probable that the material goes back to Ostrogothic tales of the
                5th/6th century, was taken up by the Langobards in Italy (the name
                ending -brand/prant was popular among the Bavarian dynasty of
                Langobardic kings (Ansprant, Hildeprant, Luitprant) and then passed on
                to the Bavarians.

                cheers,
                Dirk
              • dirk@smra.co.uk
                Hi Cory and Keth I found this quote about Bavarian: Man unterscheidet innerhalb der bairische Sprache zwischen drei Dialektgruppen: Nordbairisch wird in der
                Message 7 of 13 , Aug 2, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Cory and Keth

                  I found this quote about Bavarian:

                  Man unterscheidet innerhalb der bairische Sprache zwischen drei
                  Dialektgruppen: Nordbairisch wird in der Oberpfalz und im Donauraum
                  gesprochen, Mittelbairisch in Ober- und Niederbayern sowie im größten
                  Teil von Österreich, Südbairisch in Tirol und südlich der Ostalpen.
                  Dazu kommen einige Sprachinseln in Oberitalien, wo archaische
                  bairische Dialekte noch heute in Gebrauch sind.

                  Thus, there are also isolated areas in upper Italy were
                  archaic variants of Bavarian are still spoken. The southern-most
                  German language-area is the Zimbric/Cimbric language spoken only in
                  one villages near Trient/Verona. Cimbric is also related to Bavarian.

                  cheers,
                  Dirk





                  --- In gothic-l@y..., dirk@s... wrote:
                  > --- In gothic-l@y..., cstrohmier@y... wrote:
                  > > Hi Dirk,
                  > > I agree: The connections between the Goths and the Bavarians
                  > > are a fascinating topic. Thank you for clarifying how the
                  > Langobards
                  > > fit in: I had misunderstood what you meant. (I took you to mean
                  > > that the connections of the Langobardic royal family with the
                  > > Bavarian royal family pertained to the Italian Langobards, and
                  that
                  > > the proposed emigration followed the same pattern.) An imigration
                  > of
                  > > Langobards from Bohemia seems less problematic than one from
                  Italy,
                  > > especially if it was north of the Danube. (The "devastation"
                  > > and "depopulation" of the region south of the Danube in A.D. 476
                  by
                  > > Odoacer and this troops would seem to make this theory problematic
                  > > there.) This would certainly seem to be one more piece of a
                  > > complicated puzzle. (I'm still pondering the significance of
                  > > Scheuerer's interesting article.)
                  > > I was unaware that the modern Bavarians connect the beginning
                  > > of their state in an unbroken line back to Ostrogothic times; it
                  > > seems reasonable, but I wonder how they arrive at the exact date
                  of
                  > > A.D. 520. Is there some specific historical event underlying this
                  > > date? In my previous posting, I mentioned two sets of
                  encyclopedia
                  > > dates: A.D. 489-539 and A.D. 488-520. (I believe one of these
                  two
                  > > sets of dates came from the Encyclopedia Britannica.) The
                  earliest
                  > > arrival dates of A.D. 488 and 489 no doubt refer to the beginning
                  of
                  > > Theodoric's invasion of Italy (which he entered through the Alpine
                  > > region), but I wonder what events the encyclopedia writers had in
                  > > mind when they selected A.D. 520 and 539 as the latest possible
                  > > arrival date. There must be some historical references to the
                  > > Bavarians in these two years which I am unaware of. The date A.D.
                  > > 520 is especially interesting, since it coincides with the
                  > foundation
                  > > date of the Bavarian state in the northern part of the Ostrogothic
                  > > Kingdom. It would be interesting to know what these two dates
                  refer
                  > > to.
                  > > Sincerely yours,
                  > > Cory
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  > Hi Cory,
                  >
                  > I seemed to remember the year 520AD from somewhere, but cannot
                  really
                  > say where I read this. Here are two short histories of the early
                  > Bavarians:
                  >
                  > http://www.bayern.de/HDBG/pgkap01.htm
                  >
                  > http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/6711/austria.html#The
                  Bavarians
                  >
                  >
                  > I don't know how reliable these texts are, but the second article,
                  > stated that the first duke/king of the Bajuvari was Theodo I
                  > (508-511AD, but said to have been born in 420AD!). Note the many
                  > 'Langobardic' names in the Bavarian king-list (Garibald, Grimwald,
                  > Agiulf) and the text also mentiones the Herulic Prince Fara (died
                  > 535AD) as co-founder of the Bavarian ducal house. Fara, Farwald etc.
                  > is also a common name of Langobardic dukes, especially at Spoleto.
                  >
                  > The text also states :"After the highest level of protection granted
                  > to the Agilolfing dukes, the next highest was the double weregeld
                  > granted to the five noble families of Huosi, Drozza, Fagana,
                  > Hahilinga, and Anniona - probably the descendants of kings of
                  seperate
                  > lesser tribes incorporated within the Bavarian nation..."
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > > P.S.
                  > > I need to make two clarifications. In my last posting, I
                  > > included a quote about the Ostrogoths "Teutonizing" the Austrian
                  > > Tyrol. The word "Teutonizing" has several possible meanings:
                  The
                  > > author seems to have left the meaning deliberately ambiguous. I
                  > take
                  > > it to mean that the area was unpopulated, and that it
                  > > became "Teutonized" through settlement of Ostrogoths in the area.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > I am not sure, but the Tyrol area was where the Celtic (barely
                  > Romanised) Brennones lived. Maybe, it was these people in South
                  Tyrol
                  > (now Italy) who were 'teutonised'.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > In
                  > > another previous posting, I mentioned that some pieces of Old and
                  > > Middle High German literature which show a curious mixing of Old
                  > > Saxon and Old and Middle High German influences may point to an
                  > > explanation of the West and North Germanic features in Southern
                  > > German; two more examples of this would be: "Das Hildebrandslied"
                  > > (which also shows Langobardic influences) and the so-called "Low"
                  > > German "Der Heliand". I believe there are also smaller fragments
                  > > such as prayers which also reflect both Saxon and High German
                  > > influences. No doubt there are more examples.
                  >
                  >
                  > My understanding was that the Hildebrandslied was written down by an
                  > Old Saxon speaker based on a Bavarian 'original'. I think it is
                  > probable that the material goes back to Ostrogothic tales of the
                  > 5th/6th century, was taken up by the Langobards in Italy (the name
                  > ending -brand/prant was popular among the Bavarian dynasty of
                  > Langobardic kings (Ansprant, Hildeprant, Luitprant) and then passed
                  on
                  > to the Bavarians.
                  >
                  > cheers,
                  > Dirk
                • babeck@alphalink.com.au
                  ... Hello Keth, I am not sure what you mean by this. Mailand is derived from Milano , not the reverse. And Milano is derived from the Latin
                  Message 8 of 13 , Aug 2, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In gothic-l@y..., keth@o... wrote:
                    >...Any way, it is well know that "Milano"
                    > is not really an Italian city, but an old German city that is called
                    > "Mailand", and consulting the map shows that "Mailand" is in fact
                    > the major city of Lombardia.

                    Hello Keth,
                    I am not sure what you mean by this. "Mailand" is derived
                    from "Milano", not the reverse. And "Milano" is derived from the
                    Latin "Mediolanum", which is probably of Celtic origin. Milan was
                    originally a Celtic settlement dating from about the 5th century BC
                    and was conquered by Rome in 222BC. It was capital of the Western
                    Roman Empire from the 4th century AD. So I am not sure how it can be
                    an old German city rather than an Italian city, in fact, it initially
                    declined under the Germanic invasions. Perhaps I have misunderstood
                    you.
                    Cheers,
                    Brian
                  • LeonardoHern�ndez-Cortez
                    ... Any way, it is well know that "Milano" is not really an Italian city, but an old German city that is called "Mailand", and
                    Message 9 of 13 , Aug 2, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- keth@... wrote:

                      Any way, it is well know that "Milano"<BR>
                      is not really an Italian city, but an old German city
                      that is called<BR>
                      "Mailand", and consulting the map shows that
                      "Mailand" is in fact<BR>
                      the major city of Lombardia. Tirol must earlier have
                      extended rather<BR>
                      far south. Perhaps as far as Verona? From the map I
                      see that it is <BR>
                      approx. 150 kilometers from Bozen to Verona. And so I
                      think the <BR>
                      discussion might be much clarified if one specifies
                      where one<BR>
                      envisions the old 5th century language borders, as
                      well as what<BR>
                      areas that were then conceived of as  Bayern and
                      Lombardia.<BR>
                      Raetia it also said. That was the old name of Baiern,
                      before<BR>
                      the Bavarians came.<BR>

                      Re: I'm sorry but here I've got to correct you, Milano
                      is in fact an old "celto-roman city", it was called
                      Mediolanum and was founded by the romans on a place
                      where there were/had been some celtic settlements.


                      Yours Sincerely.
                      Leonardo.


                      __________________________________________________
                      Do You Yahoo!?
                      Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
                      http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
                    • keth@online.no
                      Hello Leonardo! ... But you know the Germans call it Mailand . I thought perhaps this name went back to the Goths and the Lombards; especially because it is
                      Message 10 of 13 , Aug 2, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hello Leonardo!
                        you wrote:
                        >Re: I'm sorry but here I've got to correct you, Milano
                        >is in fact an old "celto-roman city", it was called
                        >Mediolanum and was founded by the romans on a place
                        >where there were/had been some celtic settlements.


                        But you know the Germans call it "Mailand".
                        I thought perhaps this name went back to the Goths and
                        the Lombards; especially because it is today (still?) the
                        capital of Lommbardia.

                        And besides, if it was the Kelts who founded it, then its
                        original name might not have been "Mediolanum", which sounds
                        Latin to me.

                        It says that in 774 it came under Charlemagne and the Franks.
                        And then later in the Middle Ages there was a strife there
                        between the "Welps" (sp) and the "Ghibellins" and then
                        also Frederic Barbarossa was involved there. But of course
                        I do not know anything about the language. But I believe Tirol
                        used to extend further south and that German or a variety of
                        Bavarian may then have been spoken there.

                        Best regards
                        Keth
                      • keth@online.no
                        Cory, I found the Britannica of 1962, and looked under Bavaria . It says the year 520 stems from a Frankish document, of that date, which mentions the
                        Message 11 of 13 , Aug 2, 2001
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Cory,
                          I found the Britannica of 1962, and looked under "Bavaria".
                          It says the year 520 stems from a Frankish document, of that
                          date, which mentions the "Baivarii" as having settled in
                          the Donau valley and adjacent areas by that time. It is
                          only a brief note, but I interpret it as meaning that the date
                          of the document is 520, and that hence they must have been
                          known to have settled there sometime before that date.
                          So maybe there wasn't a definite date, only a fact of presence.


                          And you were right about the Brockhaus, since the one I looked
                          in was from 1996, and the text there was a little different from
                          your excerpt. Thanks!

                          Keth

                          P.S. The Britannica quotes G.T.Rudhardt and A.Quitzmann as references
                          for the oldest history of Bavaria. Both wrote around 1840-1860.
                          Maybe you can find something there.
                        • Francisc Czobor
                          hI kETH, ... Bajuwaren ... The Boii were a Celtic tribe who gave the name Bohemia (from Boio-haemus). Baju-wari means in fact dwellers of the
                          Message 12 of 13 , Aug 3, 2001
                          • 0 Attachment
                            hI kETH,

                            --- In gothic-l@y..., keth@o... wrote:
                            > Hello Dirk!
                            > ...
                            Bajuwaren"
                            > who are supposed to have come from Bohemia. (any connection with
                            > the Boii?)

                            The Boii were a Celtic tribe who gave the name "Bohemia" (from
                            Boio-haemus). "Baju-wari" means in fact "dwellers of the Boii(-land)",
                            because they lived in Bohemia before coming in Bavaria.

                            > However when I looked under "Bairisch" (writen with "i", whereas
                            Bayern
                            > is written with "y" - any one know why?), the Brockhaus referred to
                            > "deutsche mundarten" and under that topos I found an interesting map
                            > of the Germanic dialects. And there I found something that surprised
                            > me; for it became clear that linguists refer to the language spoken
                            in
                            > Tirol *also as bairisch ! ! ! Now why didn't that come up on the
                            list
                            > as we discussed this before? I even specifically mentioned Süd
                            Tirol,
                            > with Bozen and the Brenner. Now if all that is *also Bairisch
                            (linguist-
                            > ically speaking), then that changes things quite a bit. No wonder I
                            > found I could understand Bairisch when I visited there some years
                            ago,
                            > after having spent many months in Tirol.
                            >
                            > You see, what I thought until now, was that Bairisch referred
                            strictly to
                            > the dialect spoken within the present borders of the Teilstaat
                            Bayern.
                            > But if the dialect spoken in Tirol (Innsbruck!) is also bairisch,
                            > then that changes things quite a bit from my point of view.
                            >
                            > However, what the map *also says (o, erstaunen, erstaunen) is that
                            > Vienna is *also in the "bairischen mundarten" area. Now, that is
                            > beginning to sound a bit odd to me. For if there is something that
                            > is certain, then it is that the "Wienersprache" has a very distinct
                            > note to it, that distinguishes it from other Austrian dialects.
                            > And especially "bairisch". More likely is perhaps the attribution
                            > of Steiermärkisch to bairisch, but even that is a long distance
                            > from Tirol, and clearly distinguishable, even to my ear. (or maybe
                            > especially to my ear)
                            >

                            In all the classifications of the German dialects that I have seen,
                            one division of the "Oberdeutsch" part of Hochdeutsch is
                            Bairisch(-Österreichisch), where are included not only the dialects of
                            Bavaria, but also those of Austria and the Alto Adige (= South Tirol)
                            province of northern Italy.

                            Francisc
                          • Francisc Czobor
                            ... Mediolanum is considered a Celtic toponym, meaning middle plain . medio- middle is Celtic, inherited from Indo-European, that s why it sound similar to
                            Message 13 of 13 , Aug 3, 2001
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In gothic-l@y..., keth@o... wrote:
                              >...
                              > And besides, if it was the Kelts who founded it, then its
                              > original name might not have been "Mediolanum", which sounds
                              > Latin to me.

                              Mediolanum is considered a Celtic toponym, meaning "middle plain".
                              medio- "middle" is Celtic, inherited from Indo-European, that's why it
                              sound similar to Lat. medius, Goth. midjis, Greek mezos, Sanskrit
                              madhya etc.
                              lan- "field, plain" appears in many Celtic topnyms.
                              Only the ending -um indicates a latinization of the original Celtic
                              place name.

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