[gothic-l] Re: Cultic leauges

[dirk at SMRA.CO.UK]

> 
> I fail to see the importance of the Fürstengräber. They represent an 
> international group of wealthy warriors having close personal 
> relations and being part of the Gefolgschaft system. They have 
nothing 
> at all to do with cultic leagues and they are also mostly later than 
> the times I discuss. Remeber these old leagues were dissolved or 
under 
> dissolving. For the Goths in the time of the Cerniachov culture it 
was 
> only the last death-shrugs of a league    which the kindins   fought 
> to preserve. Arianism  became the substitute for a time   but the 
> development towards different political states had already gone too 
> far.
>  

Hello Ingemar,

thanks for your reponse. I refered to the evidence of the 
princely-graves-study because it indicates the geographical 
development of social organisation in the 'Germanic' world. Since you 
were refereing to kings as far north as Scandinavia at a very early 
stage (500BC). The findings of this study suggests that the concept of 
kings etc. started among southern tribes like the Marcomanni and Quadi 
and spread from there northwards, eventually reaching Scandinavia at a 
much later stage. On the other hand, I am not sure if your term king 
(sunking) would be equivalent to a political prince who would also 
display the trappings of political power in this grave. 



> > Interestingly, Caesar reported that the Usipii and Tencteri, who 
> were > not Suevi reported that the Suevi were the most glorious and 
> powerful > of all people east of the Rhine and '...that not even the 
> importal > gods are equal to the Suevi...'. (whatever that meant).
> 
> The Suevi must derive their namn from the same word 'svida'and their 
> cultic habits from Semnonenhain is exactly the same as in the Nordic 
> Helgikviðas.


 
> Why confusing? The Saxons might well have been inside the area of 
the 
> old league and broken loose as did the Jutes. Later they were in 
> alliance. Maybe also that the Saxons, working with the Jutes, were 
> just influenced.About the people from Thüringen I dare not say      
> but they might have been influnced or also broken away as the other. 
> The Langobards are just mentioned as a small group visiting 
> Semnonenhain and then disapering again. It makes good sense that 
they 
> were breaking away from the old league. Remember they changed from 
> Vinnili to Langobards. Also remember that the "Suebian league" in 
> connection with the Semnones in the time of Tacitus was no real 
league 
> but a political union aiming towards a state. Hence a lot of peoples 
> periodically could mention themselves or be called Sueves.I suggest 
> you find a translator who could interpret what I have written in the 
> book about "Kultförbundsproblematiken", 'the problem of cultic 
> leagues.' As you can see this chapter is not so very long, and there 
I 
> just treat the Sueves in the final part.


At this point our views not surprisingly diverge. You regard the Suevi 
as peripheral, implying that even their spiritual centre was in 
Scandinavia.  Pohl writes in 'Die Germanen' when summarising the 
latest on the origin of the Germanic language (p45) that:

"Most philologists are nowadays placing the origin of the Germanic 
language on the continent." 

I now the spiritual centre and the linguistic centre does not need to 
be identical, but I guess one would need to come up with some sort of 
explanation for the divergence. But this is now definitely material 
for the Germanic-L and I would propose that we continue our discussion 
there if you don't mind.

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/