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

Re: [gothic-l] Goths and Bavaria

Expand Messages
  • Le Bateman
    Does anyone know Matt Carver s email address his old one does not work. ... From: To: Sent: Wednesday, August 01,
    Message 1 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
      ... 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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.