Name of the Goths

[akoddsson]

Hails Michael.

--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, Michael Erwin <merwin at ...> wrote:
>
> Agreed, 7500 years is too long.
> 
> I'm not familiar with Gotlandic archaeaology. Is it possible that  
> many settlers came from the Vistula to the island in the first  
> several centuries A.D. and simply carried the name with them?

The other way around, I think, is more logical. To begin with, the 
Germanic archeaological record on Gotland is older than the Vistula 
culture, which is supposed to show marked similarity (see archeaology 
of Gotland, Vistula, Wielbark culture, etc.) as regards material 
culture, disposal of the dead, etc.. Also, the fact that Gotland has 
been continually inhabited by a Gothic folk, as well as it bearing the 
name Gotland itself, is highly suggestive of older inhabitation there, 
while the Vistula-region's culture had a much shorter lifespan and 
then simply disappeared (we don't even know when, exactly). Now, the 
capital of the Gothic Vistula-region culture is named in Norse sources 
as A:rheimar, a very convincing name of older type (ON names in heimar 
being generally archaic). It means 'river-homes' or 'homes at the 
river', being suggestive of a settlement (group of houses) around or 
at a river. I think that this name is in all likelihood correct, as it 
shows none of the hallmarks of later name-innovation. Now, if the 
Vistula-culture were really older than Gotland (not born out by the 
archeaological record, see that for further reference), why would it 
not have a name like Gotland? On the whole, I think that the very name 
Gotland itself, along with its continuous inhabitation, is indicative 
of centrality for Goths. It is interesting that no other region later 
inhabited by the emigrant Goths receives this special name. I suspect 
that the reason may lie in it already have been taken in use as the 
name of the Goth's original homeland. If this is the case, then it is 
easy to understand how the name could have become synonymous in song 
and oral history (not extant in Gothic, however) amongst the emigrant 
Goths with their ancestral origins, and that to apply the name to a 
new area, regardless of how many Goths lived there, might have seemed 
absurd. Given that there are no records about this subject of any kind 
(other than the voiceless archeaology, suggesting Gotland as the older 
Gothic settlement), however, I think it important to steer away from 
wild theories and instead take a sober look at what is most probable: 
that Gotland, with its tell-tale name and older archealogy, as well as 
special linguistic links to Gothic, was likely the center/nucleous of 
the oldest Gothic culture, which then gradually broadened over time. 

Regards,
Konrad








You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>. 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gothic-l/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    gothic-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/