[gothic-l] Re: Goths and Bavaria

[cstrohmier at YAHOO.COM]

Hi Keth,
	Thank you for your kind words.  Here is the information that 
you are looking for.  It comes from page 582 in "Elfter Band
Sol-Unj" in Der Grosse Brockhaus.  (You weren't able to find
it, because you probably weren't looking in the edition
copyrighted in 1957.)
Sincerely yours,
Cory

	"Baiern, Bajuwaren, Bojoarier, Baianoi (PTOLEMÄUS 150 n. 
Chr.), Baibari (JORDANES), in Bayern eingewanderter german. Stamm, 
nach seiner früheren Heimat benannt; nach TACITUS war dies
Böhmen(Boihaemum).  Neuere denken an Baia am Schwarzen Meer (J. 
ZIBERMAYR).  In Böhmen wohnten vor den Markomannen die kelt.
Boier. Die Bajuwaren setzten sich wohl aus Markomannen, Quaden, 
Naristen, sueb. Resten, Splittern von Ostgoten, Skiren, Turkilingern, 
Rugiern, kelt. und röm., slaw. und illyr. Resten zusammen  (L. 
SCHMIDT, M. SPINDLER);  zwischen 490 und 530 nahmen sie die Donau-
Hochebene in Besitz.
	"Bis 800 siedelten die B. in mindestens 2500 (auf -ing 
endenden) Orten, und zwar nach S in den Alpentälern bis zur Etsch,
wo die langobard. Siedlung und Herrschaft begann, nach W bis zum 
Lech, der seit 565 die Grenze gegen die Alemannen bildete, im Nordgau 
(der Oberpfalz) bis zum Stammesgebiet der Franken und Thüringer. 
Nach O erreichten sie zunächst die Enns, dann den Wiener Wald;
hier bestanden sie schwere Abwehrkämpfe gegen die Awaren und
Ungarn. Diese Stammesgrenzen haben sich im wesentl. bis heute 
erhalten, so daß die B. mit den Österreichern, 
Kärtnern,Steiermärkern, Salzburgern, Tirolern innerhalb des 
Oberdeutschen  (--> Deutsche Mundarten) eine Gruppe bilden; doch hat 
die österr. Kultur eine Eigenentwicklung genommen."

	The following passage comes from pages 174-175 of the New 
Catholic Encyclopedia:
	"Christian Origins and Medieval Period.  The Bavarians belong 
to the great west Germanic tribe of the Suevi and are the descendants 
of the Marcomanni, whose name disappeared from historical records in 
the 4th century.  Mixed with other Germanic national groups, they 
came into the region where they are settled today.  As *Jordanis 
reports in his History of the Goths (551), they became eastern 
neighbors of the Alemanni.  Their name Baiawarioz, i.e., "people
from Baia" (later Baiwari or Baiuwari), was probably given them by
their Romano-Celtic neighbors.  In the course of the great 
migrations, they occupied in the 6th century those parts of the Roman 
provinces of Rhaetia and Noricum that were situated between the Lech 
and Enns Rivers, the Northern Forest (Bavarian and Bohemian Forest), 
and the Alps." 

	The following passage comes from page 179 of the same New 
Catholic Encyclopedia:
	"BAVARIANS (BAVARII), a Germanic people who settled in 
southeast Germany between the Lech and Enns rivers, and along the 
Danube, chiefly within the Roman province of Noricum.  Their origin 
is obscure.  Traditionally they have been considered remnants or 
descendants of the Marcomanni, long resident in Bohemia, the land of 
the Celtic Boii.  Hence, supposedly, the origin of the names 
Baioarii, Bajuvarii, or Bavarii.  Some recent scholarship rejects the 
Marcomannic theory, without supplying another generally acceptable.   
I. Zibermayr considers the Bavarians an independent East German 
people; E. Schwarz and H. Löwe believe their nucleus was West
German, mainly *Suevi from Pannonia.  Details of their migration are 
not known, but they seem to have occupied their new homeland between 
489 and 539, and were a unified people under one ruler, a duke of the 
Agilolfing family.  By the time of Garibald (560-590), the first 
known duke, the Bavarians had fallen under Frankish control, 
evidently without resistance.  Frankish rule weakened after 639, but 
the Avar threat inclined the Bavarians to remain under Frankish 
domination and protection."  



--- In gothic-l at y..., keth at 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.
> 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 at egroups.com>. 
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Small business owners...
Tell us what you think!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/vO1FAB/txzCAA/ySSFAA/wWMplB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

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

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