[gothic-l] Re: Mars =? Gaut/Gapt (Tyr) - Origin of tribes

[trbrandt at POST9.TELE.DK]

Hi Steve

I am afraid we are talking at cross purposes. My only objection
against your mail was a quoted general remark about Jordanes - which
I found too categorical. The remaining part derived from that
problem, but was primarily - in general terms - addressed to other
contributors discussing the origin of the Goths. I did not claim that
my explanation covered all examples, and I did not claim that
Jordanes was a reliable historian. Sorry for mixing up several
comments in one letter.

However I find Jordanes' combination of Goths and Getae interesting,
but that question has earlier been discussed at this list seen from
another angle.

Concerning your last remarks below: It makes your analyzes easier if
you distinguish the French and English people culturally and
linguistically over a long period of time in Europe, but my point
was, that it is not possible to understand the background of the
culture, languages and origin of the Canadian/American people if you
neglect the background of groups of people like the above settling in
Canada/USA.

Regards
Troels


--- In gothic-l at y..., Alburysteve at a... wrote:
> Hi Troels:
>
> >  Hi Steve
> >  and other contributors
> >
> >  You are probably right in your identification, but Jordanes
might
> >  also be a little right in case "disappeared" groups of such
people
> >  joined the Goths who conquered their territory. To whom
did "their
> >  history" belong? Maybe one of the "mistakes" of Jordanes was,
that he
> >  or one of his sources tried to place them in a single
chronological
> >  order.
>
> Very possibly though earlier historians were quite clear on the
ethnicity of
> these peoples.  It is generally true that ancient ethnographers
tended to
> borrow other peoples history when they wanted to establish their
subject's
> antiquity.  I mentioned it only to save another subscriber
fruitless research
> because he had taken at face value Jordanes' claim that the "Goths"
had
> invented the bowstring.
>
> >  I believe that most of the confusion being discussed at this
list
> >  regarding the origin of Goths and other tribes is caused by
groups of
> >  tribe members or a whole tribe following a strong and succesfull
> >  leader or army of another tribe - sometimes after being subdued.
This
> >  was of course especially possible among the Germanic tribes who
were
> >  often closely related due to language and religion, but in the
Hunnic
> >  campaign a lot of Germanic and Asiatic people were also mixed
up.
> >  These mixtures of tribes and following splits were natural among
the
> >  migrating groups and the groups of Roman mercenaries not being
tied
> >  up by a farming area - and this was just the case for many
people in
> >  the Migration Ages.
>
> Very true.  But the people in question, the Thracian Getai who
resisted the
> Persians, lived in the region half a millenium before the arrival
of the
> Goths.  This in not a minor temporal dislocation.
>
> >  This does not mean that the tribal membership was without
importance
> >  as the tribal structure and its chieftain family probably often
> >  survived inside the new group - sometimes at a lower social
level.
> >  When they worshipped their own ancestorgods, the old structure
must
> >  have been especially strong.
> >
> >  Maybe Ingemar is right about non ethnic leagues like the Gauts
> >  binding tribes together around the Baltic Sea and Kattegat at an
> >  early stage, but for a migrating tribe the strong leader was so
> >  important, that a devine status was natural if he was
succesfull -
>
> Again, perhaps true.   When Theodoric entered Italy, he was
accompanied by
> some Bessoi, people of a Thracian tribe.  But that was almost a
thousand
> years after the event in question.
>
> >  and consequently was followed by foreign warriors wanting to
share
> >  his success. Therefore Gaut (whom we don't know much about) or
his
> >  decendents probably changed to characters like the warriorgods
Wothan-
> >  Woden-Odin-Tyr (By Roman writers translated to Ares-Mars-
Mercury).
> >  Because of the above mentioned changings we can find the same
heroic
> >  gods/ancestors and legends in different shapes and spellings in
the
> >  cronicles of several of the later groups of more settled people
> >  formed/merged 450-550.
> >
> >  This is of course not the only truth, but I think this will
guarantee
> >  us a lot of confusion if we try to analyze the history of a
specific
> >  tribe or tribal religion by regarding it as the same entity
through
> >  hundreds of years. This is just what historians like Jordanes -
and
> >  we in these discussions - are often doing.
>
> While we may be generally guilty of this, in this case I am drawing
a very
> specific distinction between the Thracians tribes who lived at the
time of
> the Goths and those who preceded the Goths by five hundred years or
more.
> Our study of the Goths would devolve into chaos if, like Jordanes,
we did not
> distinguish them culturally and linguistically from the antecedent
Skythians,
> Thracians, Parthians, Amazons, Dacians, and other peoples real or
mythical.
> A case in point is Keth's ponderings over the 'Getic' bowstrings,
something
> he would not have done if Jordanes had not misidentified the Getai
as a
> Gothic people.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve


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/