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

Re: Goths and Bavaria

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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 12 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.