[gothic-l] Re: Names of Heruls

[Einar Birgisson]

--- In gothic-l at y..., dirk at s... wrote:
> --- In gothic-l at y..., "Einar Birgisson" <einarbirg at y...> wrote:
> > --- In gothic-l at y..., dirk at s... wrote:
> > > --- In gothic-l at y..., "Einar Birgisson" <einarbirg at y...> wrote:
> > > > --- In gothic-l at y..., dirk at s... wrote:
> > > > > --- In gothic-l at y..., "Einar Birgisson" <einarbirg at y...> 
> wrote:
> > > > > > --- In gothic-l at y..., dirk at s... wrote:
> > > > > > > --- In gothic-l at y..., Tore Gannholm 
<tore.gannholm at s...> 
> > > wrote:
> >
> Hi Einar,
> 
> is it now science by majortiy vote? A majority once thought that 
the 
> earth was a disc ... you know the rest....
> 
    Einar; Hæ, Dirk.   I understand your point here and agree with 
you. The opinion of a majority or a consensus reached by a majority 
does not have to reflect the truth or be the correct analysis of a 
particular subject.
>                                                      
> > If you are here(above) talking about the analysis made by Walter 
> > Goffart in Narrators of Barbarian History(I hope the book´s name 
is 
> > right here) then I did not find his approach trustworthy and it 
was 
> > very much lacking in depth.And his approach was not made in a 
> neutral 
> > manner. Far away from 
> > 
that.                                                                
> > I have discussed that opinion of mine in a special letter. The 
name 
> > of the letter was: Walter Goffart(as far as I remember).
> 
 
> I remember your letter, it was not an analysis but polemics. Sorry, 
> but I really don't think that you are in a league to discredit 
people 
> like Prof. Goffart. 
 
  Einar; I do not think I was discrediting Goffart. But the 
shortcomings of his approach and his conclusions is obvious to 
everybody,both laymen like me and to 
professionals.                                              

And his approach is neither balanced nor neutral. You do not have to 
be a professional to see that.                                        
I suspect it to be easy for professionals to tear his writings about 
Jordanes and Procopius to pieces.
 What I have been reading on the Gothic-L and the letters 3367,3374 
and 3381( Andreas Schwarcz) makes me even more sure that I was right 
in my analysis or if you like it more, polemics.                     
 

 Actually I find Goffarts approach more like some polemics than 
analysis. Not a trustworthy approach.

I am just a layman and I know my limits, and I allow myself to do 
mistakes and try to learn from them.  But Goffart as a Professor in 
History can not allow himself the same thing. He should be more 
careful and neutral in his analysis. He seems to do a lot of 
mistakes. 
 
Another thing is that there is one problem Historians are facing when 
doing reaserch like Goffart has been doing on Jordanes and Procopius. 
Goffart like many other Historians does not know his limits. Actually 
what I was reading in; The Narrators of Barbarian History, was not 
about History.                                                        
It seemed to me that Goffart was in a territory not known to him, 
though it seems to me that he had no doubts about what he was doing.  
A little bit of selvreflection is needed sometimes.                  

Goffart seems to me a little bit selfconceit. And then he is very 
aggressive. And this is not a good mix if you want to analyze human 
behavior(like Goffart is trying to do)

I am talking about here that Goffart has no training in analyzing 
human behavior,neither individuals nor behavioral patterns of groups. 
And he does not seem to have any special insight into such behavior 
either.                                                     
His reaserch should have been a teamwork of 
Historians,Psychoanalysts,Social anthropologists and other 
specialists in analyzing the behavioral patterns of humans,either 
individuals or groups.                                                
If Goffart would have consulted specialists in these fields,he would 
have done fewer mistakes.                                          
And he should have breathed deeply and counted from one to ten, 
before starting writing. Then too, he would have done fewer 
mistakes.                                             

I think Goffart is a good Historian but he is no psychoanalyst,social 
anthropologist nor(to my knowledge) has any trainig in any field 
connected to the study of human behavior.                           
And that fact is very much reflected in his approach and his writings.
(At least in what I was reading) 

The Narrators of Barbarian History(what I read in it) was not about 
History but Goffart trying to be something of a analyst of human 
behavior. That is analyzing the behavior of Jordanes and Procopius 
and speculating about their motives and 
intentions.                    
And the results are not trustworthy.                                  

He even stated once that HE KNEW what the Goths knew and knew not! 
In my previous letter on the Germ-L, I took a example of that.
I found many incredible statements made by Goffart in that particular 
book. As can be seen in my above mentioned letter.

Apart from that then his approach is not very scientific. He seems to 
have an "opinion" and then tries to build up a theory around that 
opinion. Strange approach in History reaserch.

> 
>   Einar, read for example J. Svennung on this 
> matter, he shows that at the time of Jordanes and Procopius two 
> independent sources were available in Constantinopel that reported 
> about the Fennae and Scerefennae, who are believed to be one and 
the 
> same Scandinavian tribe. Procopius, I think used what Svennung 
called 
> 'source 2'. 

>  Einar; If I can find those writings I will take a look.  But I 
guess that many members of the Gothic/Germ.-L and scholars know of 
this source. And even so they still claim that Procopius was right 
when descriping the travel of the Heruli.
And, why are you so sure that Procopius copied that information from 
others.? What evidence is behind that statement? And who says so?     
It would be nice to have some answers here. 


> Once again you should really get some back ground information first 
> before you make allegations and engage in polemics aimed at 
silencing 
> others.

Einar; First, then I am not trying to silence anybody. That is your 
misunderstanding. And I am not making any allegations.                
You seem to be making allegations as can be seen in one of your 
letters from 
yesterday.                                                       
And Goffart makes a lot of allegations.

And then second;silencing whom? If you are talking about silencing 
you, then I will say to that, that I enjoy your writings a lot. You 
have a lot of knowledge and I always enjoy the information you have 
to share.

You came with a statement and as a response to your statement I asked;

This is very interesting. On what basis do you claim that the Heruli 
group moving to Scandinavia was only a couple of hundred people. At 
most 2000 in number. ??

You have still not come up with any supporting evidence to support 
this statement of yours.

Bless,bless. Einar.
> 
>


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95
Refill any ink cartridge for less!
Includes black and color ink.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/QzLWzD/MkNDAA/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/