[gothic-l] Choice of Hachmann over Nordgren and Wolfram?

[keth at ONLINE.NO]

Dear Bertil:
You wrote:
>"Very professional group". I thought Hachmann
>was singular, but may be it is a collection
>of essays?

Yea, the book is part of a series of high grade books published by de Gruyter


>What makes Hachmann preferable to Wolfram
>for a complete coverage of Gothic history?

I tried to say that it was that it was a monograph on the Goths
in their relationship with Scandinavia,
whereas the other books pretend to cover all of Gothic
history. I tried to be clear the first time, but I am not
sure if it serves any purpose to elaborate further without
finding someone who has actually reead the book. Fact is:
the book has good reviews, and is recommended in academic circles.


>Or
>Ingemar Nordgren's highly professional study
>of the _Goterkaellan_(Gothic Source), for that matter, dealing much
>with the Gothic-Scandinavian relation?

Perhaps Nordgen's book is a more recent book ?


>As far as understand Hachmann
>was recommended to you by several Norwegian
>professors? So several Norwegians praising
>Hachmann, or have I understood you incorrectly?

Why can't a book just be a good book?


>(Keth recommending (without having read)
>with several Norwegian professors recommending
>having read Hachmann?).

As I said above, a book can just happen to be a good book,
and it shouldn't matter where the author came from. Sometimes
I do say "Germany" or "Sweden" because I think such are
convenient labels, and also gives information about what
language prerequisites are necessary.


>Just curious "people going overboard in wild speculations".
>I understood that Hachmann supports a German origin
>of the Goths, or did I miss something?
>
Really?
Why would he then write a book about the Goths and Scandinavia?

Cheers
Keth



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/