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

Re: Emigration av (some) Goths

Expand Messages
  • akoddsson
    Hi Wilhelm and Tore. ... the least. Most scientists acknowledge that they don t know from where the Goths came. What we know is that that they surface in
    Message 1 of 15 , Mar 9, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Wilhelm and Tore.

      > Your answer, that the Goths came from Gotland, is remarkable, to say
      the least. Most scientists acknowledge that they don't know from where
      the Goths came. What we know is that that they surface in history a
      couple of centuries AD in the area of the Donahue or north of the
      Black Sea. This is what we think we know. That is what we have as a
      working hypothesis.

      Two things seem obvious to me in connection with the Goth's homelend.
      The first is that there is a land, Gotland, that is called the land of
      the Goths. As far back as sources go, the land appears to have born
      this name. As parallels we have Sweden (the land of the Swedes),
      Ireland (the land of the Irish), and likely thousands of other such
      names from throughout the world and in numerous languages. This makes
      me wonder why Goths should be such an exception, emigration aside. The
      second is that as one specializing mostly in Germanic linguistics, and
      as one who has studied both Gothic and Gotlandic, it seems painfully
      obvious that Gotlandic, while absorbed into North Germanic, deviates
      from it, especially phonologically but also in other matters, in ways
      which agree with Gothic. As a non-specialist in Gothic history, and as
      a layman in Gothodemia, I still see no reason why the Goths should not
      have a homeland in Gotland, where Goths still live, emigration aside,
      and even if their original territory was wider, as it likely was.

      Sincerely,
      Konrad
    • macmaster@riseup.net
      Names can stick around after peoples move on (or those left behind transform into something else). Just looking at the peoples of the Volkerwanderung, we also
      Message 2 of 15 , Mar 9, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Names can stick around after peoples move on (or those left behind
        transform into something else). Just looking at the peoples of the
        Volkerwanderung, we also find Rugen as the homeland of the Rugi and
        Bornholm as the Burgundian homeland. Other names left behind include the
        several Burgundies in France and the "Homeland of the Boii", a Celtic
        people, giving the name to a Slavic area (bohemia) and a German area
        (Bavaria) as well as a name in French for a group ultimately from India
        (the Romany "Bohemians"). "Frank" meant a Germanic people now but
        "French" means a romance speaker. And so on.

        Similarity of names may indicate a historic link but doesn't prove it (if
        one reads Jordanes literally, one would assume that the Sarmatian "Getae"
        were Goths rather than just similarly named; if he'd known about them, I'm
        sure Jordanes would have tossed in the Guti, 'barbarian' raiders of
        ancient Mesopotamia).

        As the names of bavarians and French suggest, there probably is a
        hoistoric link between Gotland and the Goths but it may be much less
        straight forward.

        I'm inclined to leave it in the "Unprovable speculation" category.

        Tom


        akoddsson wrote:
        > Hi Wilhelm and Tore.
        >
        > > Your answer, that the Goths came from Gotland, is remarkable, to say
        > the least. Most scientists acknowledge that they don't know from where
        > the Goths came. What we know is that that they surface in history a
        > couple of centuries AD in the area of the Donahue or north of the
        > Black Sea. This is what we think we know. That is what we have as a
        > working hypothesis.
        >
        > Two things seem obvious to me in connection with the Goth's homelend.
        > The first is that there is a land, Gotland, that is called the land of
        > the Goths. As far back as sources go, the land appears to have born
        > this name. As parallels we have Sweden (the land of the Swedes),
        > Ireland (the land of the Irish), and likely thousands of other such
        > names from throughout the world and in numerous languages. This makes
        > me wonder why Goths should be such an exception, emigration aside. The
        > second is that as one specializing mostly in Germanic linguistics, and
        > as one who has studied both Gothic and Gotlandic, it seems painfully
        > obvious that Gotlandic, while absorbed into North Germanic, deviates
        > from it, especially phonologically but also in other matters, in ways
        > which agree with Gothic. As a non-specialist in Gothic history, and as
        > a layman in Gothodemia, I still see no reason why the Goths should not
        > have a homeland in Gotland, where Goths still live, emigration aside,
        > and even if their original territory was wider, as it likely was.
        >
        > Sincerely,
        > Konrad
        >
        >
      • akoddsson
        Hi Tom and all. ... Sure. The problem, however, is that not everyone moves on. Some stay behind. Gotland, for instance, has been continuously populated, and
        Message 3 of 15 , Mar 10, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Tom and all.

          > Names can stick around after peoples move on (or those left behind
          > transform into something else).

          Sure. The problem, however, is that not everyone moves on. Some stay
          behind. Gotland, for instance, has been continuously populated, and
          the island can only hold so many folk, at least as a traditional
          agricultural society (one man one farm). Logically, folk who didn't
          inherit farms would be inclined to seek other employment.

          > Just looking at the peoples of the Volkerwanderung, we also find
          Rugen as the homeland of the Rugi and Bornholm as the Burgundian
          homeland.

          Yes, but there are also modern Rugi and Burgungians, and these land
          have also been continually populated. I, for instance, work with
          several folk from Rogaland, who mostly claim to be descendants of
          Rugi as far back as they can trace their descent. I found this out
          after I asked. Thus, there certainly are Rugi, like there are Goths,
          even if times have changed.

          > Other names left behind include the several Burgundies in France
          and the "Homeland of the Boii", a Celtic people, giving the name to
          a Slavic area (bohemia) and a German area (Bavaria) as well as a
          name in French for a group ultimately from India (the
          Romany "Bohemians").

          Yes.

          > "Frank" meant a Germanic people now but "French" means a romance
          speaker. And so on.

          Yes, but France is, admittedly, a rather large nation. Perhaps one
          should look at provincial populations more closely, as several
          groups in France would seem to exist as smaller cultural groupings,
          common language aside (Basks an exception here). Consider, for
          instance, the Gaelic population of Galitia (wrong spelling, no
          doubt ;) From what I understand, they still speak a kind of Gaelic.
          I discovered on a radio program that they also play some fierce and
          beautiful Gaelic music, closely related to Irish. There are likely
          numerous other links. Thus, I don't believe that cultures simply
          disappear due to emigration by some members.

          > Similarity of names may indicate a historic link but doesn't prove
          it (if one reads Jordanes literally, one would assume that the
          Sarmatian "Getae" were Goths rather than just similarly named; if
          he'd known about them, I'm sure Jordanes would have tossed in the
          Guti, 'barbarian' raiders of ancient Mesopotamia).

          But a simple survey of major European 'tribal' names would seem to
          suggest, emigration aside, that most groups still live in areas
          where they once lived. Obviously, folk move, but those that remain
          often have descendants as well, as so on.

          > As the names of bavarians and French suggest, there probably is a
          hoistoric link between Gotland and the Goths but it may be much less
          straight forward.

          Probably complicated, like most issues involving human populations,
          I agree. However, as there is still a Gotland and a Gothic folk, I
          think it important that cultural sensitivity be shown. No one will
          deny the existance of England, simply because Americans, Canadians,
          Australians and others speak English, or because academics deeming
          English highly important wish to locate its origins in Canada, for
          instance. That would be absurd. Likewise, while Goths would seem to
          be highly important to certain Germanic academics (no doubt largely
          due to a fluke attestation of a portion of their language via a
          Bible translation), this hardly gives them the right to fleece the
          Gotlanders of their culture and history. A fluke is a fluke, not
          something planned. Earlier Gotlanders could hardly have known that
          Goths would become such an important and hotly debated topic in the
          future, raising by extention questions and controversial debate on
          the topic ad infinitum. Gotlanders are, after all, regular folk and,
          as history would have it, Goths. Not that it matters, or should even
          matter. Denying it, I think, could only be based on romantic ideas,
          whereby an historical folk cannot be allowed to exist in any form in
          modern times, especially not an historical folk deemed important by
          academics. Thus, if anything, we academics probably owe Gotlanders
          an apology for dragging their culture and history through the mud
          for personal gain and academic agendas.

          > I'm inclined to leave it in the "Unprovable speculation" category

          What I would say is that, like other populations, Goths experienced
          emigration. How many left and how many stayed is not the point. The
          point is that while academia may be highly interested in the remains
          of their 4th century language, or in the historical activities of
          later continental Goths, this hardly gives us the right to simply
          remove Gotland and its Goths from the map or erase them from the
          history books. Folks change, but they don't thereby loose membership
          in their culture. Thus, I will grant the Gotlanders the same rights
          as other folks to define their own culture and see it as they will,
          without too much interference from the rest of us. Stating things
          like 'you are not a Goth' or 'this list has nothing to do with your
          culture' to living Goths would be like telling an Irish person that
          he need no apply to a list about ancient Irish or Celts, as he is
          neither Irish nor Celtic. Therefore, I simply offer these words in
          the hope that academics, and others, interested in Goths, show the
          living the same respect as the dead.

          Sincerely,
          Konrad

          > Tom
          >
          >
          > akoddsson wrote:
          > > Hi Wilhelm and Tore.
          > >
          > > > Your answer, that the Goths came from Gotland, is remarkable,
          to say
          > > the least. Most scientists acknowledge that they don't know
          from where
          > > the Goths came. What we know is that that they surface in
          history a
          > > couple of centuries AD in the area of the Donahue or north of
          the
          > > Black Sea. This is what we think we know. That is what we have
          as a
          > > working hypothesis.
          > >
          > > Two things seem obvious to me in connection with the Goth's
          homelend.
          > > The first is that there is a land, Gotland, that is called the
          land of
          > > the Goths. As far back as sources go, the land appears to have
          born
          > > this name. As parallels we have Sweden (the land of the Swedes),
          > > Ireland (the land of the Irish), and likely thousands of other
          such
          > > names from throughout the world and in numerous languages. This
          makes
          > > me wonder why Goths should be such an exception, emigration
          aside. The
          > > second is that as one specializing mostly in Germanic
          linguistics, and
          > > as one who has studied both Gothic and Gotlandic, it seems
          painfully
          > > obvious that Gotlandic, while absorbed into North Germanic,
          deviates
          > > from it, especially phonologically but also in other matters,
          in ways
          > > which agree with Gothic. As a non-specialist in Gothic history,
          and as
          > > a layman in Gothodemia, I still see no reason why the Goths
          should not
          > > have a homeland in Gotland, where Goths still live, emigration
          aside,
          > > and even if their original territory was wider, as it likely
          was.
          > >
          > > Sincerely,
          > > Konrad
          > >
          > >
          >
        • joe
          In the March 2006 edition of National Geographic there is an article on the Celts, their history and culture. It includes a map showing where Celtic people
          Message 4 of 15 , Mar 10, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            In the March 2006 edition of National Geographic there is an article on the Celts, their history and culture. It includes a map showing where Celtic people currently live in Western Europe..and it includes Brittany in France and Galicia in Spain.

            akoddsson <konrad_oddsson@...> wrote:
            Yes, but France is, admittedly, a rather large nation. Perhaps one
            should look at provincial populations more closely, as several
            groups in France would seem to exist as smaller cultural groupings,
            common language aside (Basks an exception here). Consider, for
            instance, the Gaelic population of Galitia (wrong spelling, no
            doubt ;) From what I understand, they still speak a kind of Gaelic.
            I discovered on a radio program that they also play some fierce and
            beautiful Gaelic music, closely related to Irish. There are likely
            numerous other links. Thus, I don't believe that cultures simply
            disappear due to emigration by some members.



            ---------------------------------
            Yahoo! Mail
            Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Ingemar Nordgren
            Hear, hear! At last a sensible voice. Thank you Konrad.As you know I have already stated since long both gutar, gautar and possibly ýtar (Eutoz) and many
            Message 5 of 15 , Mar 10, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Hear, hear!
              At last a sensible voice. Thank you Konrad.As you know I have already
              stated since long both gutar, gautar and possibly ýtar (Eutoz) and
              many Norwegians are Gothic or kindred folks (e.g. Rugii) and a large
              quantity of them remains. The Gutar probably might have been more
              directly involved with the Continental Goths because of geographical
              reasons but also other Scandinavians are Gothic or else e.g.
              Gautland/Götaland should not exist. Well, I know there is opposition
              by certain members tovards my theories and I do not intend to try to
              convert them. The easiest way to understand what I claim is, for those
              other interested, to buy and read my dissertation that is published as
              'The Well Spring of the Goths' by iUniverse and available at every
              major netbookstore as paperback or e-book.

              Best
              Ingemar

              --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "akoddsson" <konrad_oddsson@...> wrote:

              Thus, I will grant the Gotlanders the same rights
              > as other folks to define their own culture and see it as they will,
              > without too much interference from the rest of us. Stating things
              > like 'you are not a Goth' or 'this list has nothing to do with your
              > culture' to living Goths would be like telling an Irish person that
              > he need no apply to a list about ancient Irish or Celts, as he is
              > neither Irish nor Celtic. Therefore, I simply offer these words in
              > the hope that academics, and others, interested in Goths, show the
              > living the same respect as the dead.
              >
              > Sincerely,
              > Konrad
            • macmaster@riseup.net
              Actually, Galician (or Gallego as it is called) is a Romance language closely related to Portuguese (it s sometimes considered a dialect of Portuguese) and is
              Message 6 of 15 , Mar 10, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Actually, Galician (or Gallego as it is called) is a Romance language
                closely related to Portuguese (it's sometimes considered a dialect of
                Portuguese) and is spoken in the northwest corner of Spain, immediately
                'above' Portugal.

                It's actually a good example of my point of how names move around.
                There's also a Galicia divided between Poland and the Ukraine and formerly
                a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire that happens to have the same name
                (it's a latinization of the name "Halych" and has nothing to do with
                Celts. The region around Ankara in Turkey used to be called Galatia (iit
                appears in the New Testament as such) due to Celtic settlers.

                Northern Italy was Cisalpine Gaul in Roman times and France was Gaul, of
                course. All but the Polish region do show a relation with the ancient
                Celts but not so much with modern speakers of Gaelic (except that all come
                from the same source).

                As has been pointed out, there are several place names/peoples in what are
                now Sweden and Denmark that look a lot like "Goths" - Geats, Gotlanders,
                Jutes and so on. Are they all the same people? maybe but maybe not.

                There are also "Danes" scattered all over the Indo-European diaspora, from
                the Hebrew Tribe of Dan that seems to have been one of the "sea-peoples"
                initially through the Greek Danaans of Homer and the Irish Tuatha de
                Danann to the Don Cossacks and so. Are they all one people? Of course
                not ...

                While it's nice to imagine ourselves as descended from magnificent ancient
                peoples, sticking to the actual stuff of history is more convincing and
                sometimes more exciting. With the Goths, let's try to stick to what is
                actually known from the written sources and from archaeology. To me,
                that's fascinating enough.

                Tom macMaster


                joe wrote:
                > In the March 2006 edition of National Geographic there is an article
                > on the Celts, their history and culture. It includes a map showing
                > where Celtic people currently live in Western Europe..and it includes
                > Brittany in France and Galicia in Spain.
                >
                > akoddsson wrote:
                > Yes, but France is, admittedly, a rather large nation. Perhaps one
                > should look at provincial populations more closely, as several
                > groups in France would seem to exist as smaller cultural groupings,
                > common language aside (Basks an exception here). Consider, for
                > instance, the Gaelic population of Galitia (wrong spelling, no
                > doubt ;) From what I understand, they still speak a kind of Gaelic.
                > I discovered on a radio program that they also play some fierce and
                > beautiful Gaelic music, closely related to Irish. There are likely
                > numerous other links. Thus, I don't believe that cultures simply
                > disappear due to emigration by some members.
                >
                >
                >
              • OSCAR HERRERA
                the other speakers seem to be on track, pretty much......tho faura rodaizaim atsaila fagra god laistjana......oscar macmaster@riseup.net wrote: Actually,
                Message 7 of 15 , Mar 11, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  the other speakers seem to be on track, pretty much......tho faura rodaizaim atsaila fagra god laistjana......oscar

                  macmaster@... wrote:
                  Actually, Galician (or Gallego as it is called) is a Romance language
                  closely related to Portuguese (it's sometimes considered a dialect of
                  Portuguese) and is spoken in the northwest corner of Spain, immediately
                  'above' Portugal.

                  It's actually a good example of my point of how names move around.
                  There's also a Galicia divided between Poland and the Ukraine and formerly
                  a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire that happens to have the same name
                  (it's a latinization of the name "Halych" and has nothing to do with
                  Celts. The region around Ankara in Turkey used to be called Galatia (iit
                  appears in the New Testament as such) due to Celtic settlers.

                  Northern Italy was Cisalpine Gaul in Roman times and France was Gaul, of
                  course. All but the Polish region do show a relation with the ancient
                  Celts but not so much with modern speakers of Gaelic (except that all come
                  from the same source).

                  As has been pointed out, there are several place names/peoples in what are
                  now Sweden and Denmark that look a lot like "Goths" - Geats, Gotlanders,
                  Jutes and so on. Are they all the same people? maybe but maybe not.

                  There are also "Danes" scattered all over the Indo-European diaspora, from
                  the Hebrew Tribe of Dan that seems to have been one of the "sea-peoples"
                  initially through the Greek Danaans of Homer and the Irish Tuatha de
                  Danann to the Don Cossacks and so. Are they all one people? Of course
                  not ...

                  While it's nice to imagine ourselves as descended from magnificent ancient
                  peoples, sticking to the actual stuff of history is more convincing and
                  sometimes more exciting. With the Goths, let's try to stick to what is
                  actually known from the written sources and from archaeology. To me,
                  that's fascinating enough.

                  Tom macMaster


                  joe wrote:
                  > In the March 2006 edition of National Geographic there is an article
                  > on the Celts, their history and culture. It includes a map showing
                  > where Celtic people currently live in Western Europe..and it includes
                  > Brittany in France and Galicia in Spain.
                  >
                  > akoddsson wrote:
                  > Yes, but France is, admittedly, a rather large nation. Perhaps one
                  > should look at provincial populations more closely, as several
                  > groups in France would seem to exist as smaller cultural groupings,
                  > common language aside (Basks an exception here). Consider, for
                  > instance, the Gaelic population of Galitia (wrong spelling, no
                  > doubt ;) From what I understand, they still speak a kind of Gaelic.
                  > I discovered on a radio program that they also play some fierce and
                  > beautiful Gaelic music, closely related to Irish. There are likely
                  > numerous other links. Thus, I don't believe that cultures simply
                  > disappear due to emigration by some members.
                  >
                  >
                  >






                  You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email to .
                  Yahoo! Groups Links









                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Wilhelm Otto
                  Hi Tore, Oscar, Macmaster and Konrad et al. This is about idea swapping. On one hand everyone has a right to hold any views, and on the other side if I give
                  Message 8 of 15 , Mar 29, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Tore, Oscar, Macmaster and Konrad et al.

                    This is about idea swapping.

                    On one hand everyone has a right to hold any views, and on the other side if
                    I give voice to a line of thought on a mailing what I say is fair game, so
                    to speak. I see such a view as unconditional. If I confront your views I
                    also stake my own, i.e. if my views do not stand the test I am prepared to
                    try the views of the other party, at least tentatively, and the other way
                    around. It is like comparing watches in the market. The best watch wins and
                    winner takes al. This applies to science matters. But how do we treat belief
                    systems? And where in the grey zone do I draw the line between myth and
                    science?



                    There is certainly a grey zone as we know much less than we think we do.
                    Much of that we take for granted is just a more or less well founded
                    intellectual construction. We imply, we presume, we consider that a
                    statistical probability speaks for this or that. We are actually lumbering
                    about with a back pack full of myths. This is OK in everyday life. It makes
                    it possible for us to navigate in life. But is it good enough when it comes
                    down to science or those areas, where we apply scientific rules? And on a
                    mailing list we try to apply scientific methods. The general answer to these
                    and similar questions is answered by historians, who I am not, by careful
                    testing of every assumption on which an idea is founded. Similar sounding
                    words are not given much credit by these historians. If you pick Goth and
                    Gotland you could as easily pick jute and Jutland. They contain the same
                    root of the word. And why leave out Gotaland, i.e. the south of Sweden.
                    There has to be a well proven binding connection. Historians of this kind
                    are found in every country. In Tore’s Sweden there are among others the
                    Weibull brothers, Erik Lönnroth.





                    This is but an example of method to push our knowledge a bit further. Sir
                    Karl Popper tells us to disprove and falsify our own views. In the wake of
                    failure we might have found something useful. According to this view
                    intellectual improvement is a result of consecutive failures. And history
                    teaches us that what we believe in to day is to morrow probably all wrong.
                    What is great and important to day will to morrow probably be forgotten.
                    Admittedly we know a lot more to day about the construction of our solar
                    system then we did in Kepler´s times, but we are still making great
                    improvements. So your views, as well as mine, are probably tentative. There
                    are indeed very few matters that can described as final. Not even the Goths
                    heritage.



                    This process of intellectual development is intimately connected with the
                    evolution of ideas. Thomas S Kuhn came in the early 1960´s with “The
                    Structure of Scientific Revolutions”. There he claimed there was a sudden
                    shift of paradigms. Gradually the old dominant one was considered obsolete
                    and a new one was chosen. These revolutions can be triggered by
                    technological breakthroughs, such as construction of the first telescope and
                    we found that the heavenly bodies were not perfect and unchanging. There can
                    be a conceptual breakthrough as the invention of calculus so laws of motion
                    can be formulated. And there can be a breakthrough which explains older
                    ideas as when Mendel’s genetic results proved Darwins theories. Most
                    researchers see this to day as a Darwinian process. Teachers, researchers
                    but maybe foremost the staffs of the scientific newspapers play an important
                    part. This is a very slow process, you think, when you are inside it. But
                    remember that this process is still young. It is about 180 years ago that a
                    young man started to organize the Kings of Denmark cabinet of curiosities.
                    He then sorted the very old things in three compartments, one for things of
                    stone, one for things of bronze and on for iron. Eventually the concepts of
                    Stone Age, of Bronze Age and of Iron Age were born out of this. It is my
                    grandparents’ time. In the history of nations it is not even yesterday. It
                    is to day. Let this process then work for a notable time and you see the
                    evolution of science. And in this process of change some of us are slower,
                    but others are more up to change. But history can not be an isolated part of
                    that process!



                    So it is doubtful that we ever will find common acceptance of facts and how
                    they are related from times long gone, for example the heritage of the
                    Goths. Those were times when common writing seldom took place, and when it
                    happened it had other purposes than finding the truth. But it seems to me,
                    with all this in mind that Heathers revision of Jordanes, which is very well
                    considered by the leading scientists, was not entirely out of place.

                    Wilhelm




                    --
                    No virus found in this outgoing message.
                    Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                    Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.3.0/290 - Release Date: 2006-03-23



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.