[gothic-l] Re: Re; Francisc

[Francisc Czobor]

Hi, Sunny,

the official historiography in Romania always considered and 
considers also now that the identification of Getae with Goths is 
totally wrong. I learned in the school some 30 years ago, like all 
the school-age children of Romania, that Jordanes was totally wrong 
by identifying the Goths with the Getae, basd only on a name 
ressemblance. And today the attitude is the same. All the Romanians 
learn at school that the Goths, like other nomadic peoples, came and 
went, but the ancestors of the Romanians stayed in place. These were 
the Thracian Daco-Getae, who became romanized and their descendants 
are the Romanians of today.
Now, considering the language: if the Goths were germanized Getae, 
there should be some Thracic substratum in Gothic. But, as I already 
said, taking appart the Greek-Latin loanwords introduced mostly by 
Wulfila himself to render biblical terms, the Gothic language of the 
4th century is purely Germanic, with very few (2-3) probably Slavic 
words.
The other alternative would be that the Getae were Germanic, fact 
which would contradict all the ancient sources that present them as 
Thracians.

Francisc

--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "Sunny" <sunnyjat12002 at y...> wrote:
> Hi Francisc, 
> 
> "Indeed, as I already mentioned, ti was not my intention to offend 
> anybody. I just wanted to warn against that kind of excessed to 
which 
> unfortunately I was witness in too many instances, as I have shown 
in 
> my message. Maybe the "über alles" was an unhappy choise, I used it 
> only to be more convincing. And I have to apologize if anybody felt 
> offended by this, having in view that in that message I used this 
> expression not only for Jats, but also for Romanians, Hungarians, 
> Jews, Turks, Austronesians, etc."
> 
> No one was offended by this comment, for me it is actually 
> encouraging.  I can understand your concern, but the identification 
> with the Jats and Getae is by no means a terra incognita, it was 
> first proposed from Western perspective by Father Monserate (1536-
> 1600), a Jesuit Priest in Akbar's (Moghul King) court; he believed 
> the Jats were the Getae of the Classical writers.  In the mid 
1750's 
> Joseph De Guignes, the French Orientalist also claimed the Jats 
were 
> Indo-Scythians.  
> 
> James Tod, in 1829, was the first to suggest the link between 
Rajput, 
> Jat, Getae, Yuezhi, and the Goths.  Alexander Cunningham, the 
former 
> Director-General of the Archaeological Survey of India, in 1888, 
> suggest the Jats were descendents of the Xanthi of Strabo, and then 
> later (1894) the Iatii (Yuezhi) of Ptolemy.  By the 1930's British 
> authorities used the words "Jat", "Getae", and "Scythian" 
> interchangeably; though this notation, in my opinion, was loose and 
> crude.  
> 
> Cunningham, A. Coins of the Indo-Scythians, Sakas, and Kushans. 
> Varanasi, India. Reprinted by Indological Book House: 1971, first 
> published in 1888.
> 
> Cunningham A. Later Indo-Scythians, from the Numismatic Chronicle 
> 1893-1894. Varanasi, India. Reprinted by Indological Book House: 
> 1979, first published in 1894.
> 
> De Guignes.  Academi des Inscriptions. Vol. XXV: 1756.
> 
> Maclagan, E. The Jesuits and The Great Moghals. Gurgaon, India. 
> Vintage Books: 1990.
> 
> Tod, J. Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan. Vol. 1. Delhi. Motilal 
> Banarsidass: 1971, First Published in 1829.
> 
> Take care,


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges & Refill Kits for Your HP at Myinks.com
Free shipping on orders $50 or more to the US and Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5706&lp=home/hp.asp
http://us.click.yahoo.com/arYXfA/.xWGAA/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/