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

Re: what is the real objection against the Scandiavian origin of the Goths?

Expand Messages
  • vendelkrka
    With all due respect, but the unverifiability claim is a strawman . You can not call it a hypothesis because the hypothesis is that Jordanes account was
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 9 2:13 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      With all due respect, but the unverifiability claim is a "strawman".
      You can not call it a "hypothesis" because the hypothesis is that
      Jordanes account was wrong. That is why it is a strawman.

      There is both archaeological, toponomical and other linguistic
      support. Moreoever, "certainty" is a rare animal in research. There
      are many generally accepted "facts" that are also hard to verify.

      I should perhaps rephrase my question:

      Why are the demands for proof so high when the Scandinavian origin
      of the Goths is concerned, and why are some (especially German)
      scholars so categorically against it?

      cordially,
      VendelkrÄka

      --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, macmaster@r... wrote:
      >
      > Hi all,
      > In my understanding, the objection to a prehistoric Scandinavian
      origin
      > for the Goths is simply that it is unverifiable. The
      archaeological
      > remains from the Vistula and elsewhere are probably Gothic but,
      being that
      > of a preliterate people, are impossible to verify as being from the
      > speakers of any language.
      > Also, it's important not to have too much faith in what Jordanes
      writes
      > regarding Gothic origins: while he uses what are probably real
      sixth
      > century traditions regarding Gothic origins, he does place the
      migration
      > out of Scandinavia impossibly early (several centuries before the
      Trojan
      > War!!!) and identifies the Goths with practically every pre-Hunnic
      steppe
      > people (most of whom were Iranic rather than Germanic).
      > At best, all that can be said for certain about the early Goths is
      that
      > they probably came from Scandinavia, etc; before the third century,
      > everything is hypothetical.
      > So, there is no "real problem" with it beyond the fact that it
      cannot
      > advance from hypothesis to fact.
      >
      > Tom MacMaster
      >
      > Ingemar Nordgren said:
      > >
      > >
      > > Hi Vendelkraka and Tore!
      > >
      > > I agree with Tore and his reccomendation of literature is
      good. Still
      > > I must point out that I have just such a theory that
      Vendelkraka asks
      > > for. It is the main object with my book 'The Well Spring of the
      > > Goths' that is available as both paperback and e-book on most
      net
      > > book stores.
      > >
      > > Best
      > > Ingemar
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Tore Gannholm wrote:
      > > > Hi,
      > > > I don't think there is any real objections against the Baltic
      area with
      > > > Gotland in the centre having been very influential in the
      forming of
      > > > the Goths.
      > > > It is only that some scholars can't accept this. The Polish
      > > > archaeologists who have excavated the Gothic areas in the
      last 30 years
      > > > fully accept it.
      > > >
      > > > However, the problem is more complicated than most people
      think. The
      > > > contacts during the millennia before zero between Gotland and
      some
      > > > costal areas on the Swedish Baltic coast are extensive.
      > > >
      > > > Suggested reading Kaliffs book "Gothic connections"
      > > >
      http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/gothicconnectio_/gothic/default.htm
      > > >
      > > > Tore
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > On Mar 23, 2005, at 9:56 PM, vendelkrka wrote:
      > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > I have read a lot about the pros and cons about the
      Scandinavian
      > > > > origin of the Goths, and I simply don't understand why
      some scholars
      > > > > are so categorically against it.
      > > > >
      > > > > The way I see it, Poland is either the urheimat of the
      Germanic
      > > > > languages, or the Gothic language arrived to the Vistula
      basin from
      > > > > somewhere else. If we look at toponymics the names
      Götaland and
      > > > > Gotland are already suggesting where to look for the
      origin. If we
      > > > > combine with Jordanes account, it becomes even more
      convincing.
      > > > > Moreover, the Gothic language had a great deal in common
      with North
      > > > > Germanic and especially with Gutnish.
      > > > >
      > > > > Now, I'd be perfectly happy if there was a just as
      convincing theory
      > > > > about a north German origin, but AFAIK, there is none.
      > > > >
      > > > > My impression is that the archaelogical objections are
      carefully
      > > > > limited to the time period after 100 BC, ignoring the
      period 600 BC-
      > > > > 300 BC when the climate of Scandinavia deteriorated.
      > > > >
      > > > > So what is the REAL problem with the Scandinavian origin?
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a
      blank
      > > email to .
      > >
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > To visit your group on the web, go to:
      > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gothic-l/
      > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > > gothic-l-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
      Service.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.