[gothic-l] Re: Introduction of myself.

[Axeage]

HELLO AGAIN!


In gothic-l at egroups.com, Manuel Gutierrez Algaba <irmina at c...> wrote:

> Iberians? are they semitic? are they north africans? old
>europeans? Are basques iberians ?

THE IBERIANS WERE NOT SEMITIC. SEMITIC RELATES TO THE ARABIC AND
HEBREW PEOPLE, THEIR CULTURE, AND LANGUAGES. "IBERIAN" IS BASICALLY
THE COLLECTIVE TERM USED TO DESCRIBE VARIOUS MEDITERRANIC PRE-INDO
EUROPEAN INVADERS WHO BEGAN TO SPREAD ACROSS MUCH OF WESTERN EUROPE
DURING THE MESOLITHIC AND NEOLITHIC PERIODS. OBVIOUSLY, THEIR
PRESENCE WAS STRONGEST IN THE IBERIAN PENINSULA - BUT THEY ALSO
SETTLED IN LARGE NUMBERS IN AQUITANIA (GASCONY), SOUTHERN ENGLAND,
WALES, THE WESTERN COASTS OF IRELAND AND SCOTLAND, AND EVEN THE
WESTERN COASTS OF NORWAY...
I HAVE NO CLUE AS TO WETHER OR NOT THE BASQUES ARE IBERIANS OR NOT.
LIKE I SAID - THE TERM "IBERIAN" IS USED RATHER LOOSELY TO DESCRIBE
MORE THAN ONE GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO VARIED IN LANGUAGE AND EVEN
PHYSICAL APPEARANCE.

>> I'd say that most Spaniards are basically a mixture of Iberians,
>> Celts, Romans, and Germanics.

> Yes, but to what extent? I think it's basically unmeasurable. I
> wouldn't measure even the semitic/indoeuropean/african variables.

AGAIN - IT MAY DEPEND ON WHAT REGION OF SPAIN A PERSON IS
FROM,BECAUSE OF ALL THE DIFFERENT ETHNIC GROUPS (CASTILIANS,
GALICIANS, CATALANONIANS, BASQUES, ETC.) FOR EXAMPLE: MANY CELTS,
PLUS THE SUEBIES SETTLED IN GALICIA - WHERE THERE WERE LESS ROMANS
THAN IN ANDALUSIA, FOR EXAMPLE. LIGHT COLORED HAIR AND EYES ARE MORE
COMMON IN GALICIA THAN ANDALUSIA AREN'T THEY?? SO MAYBE GALICIANS
HAVE MORE CELTIC AND GERMANIC BLOOD THAN ANDALUSIANS?

>> Hmmm, this is a tough one. I too have heard that names ending
>>with "ez" are of gothic origin. Surnames ending with "ez" mean "son
>>of"

>Well, it's the "is" ending of indoeuropean.

SORRY, BUT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEANT IN THE ABOVE SENTENCE.

> Gonzalo comes from Gundinsalvo.

REALLY? I READ IN A GENEOLOGY MESSAGE BOARD THAT THE ORIGINAL NAME
WAS "KINSOLVING", WHICH LATER EVOLVED TO "CONSOLVO", AND FINALLY TO
"GONZALO". ANYWAYS - IS "GUNDINSALVO" GOTHIC? IS DEFINITELY LOOKS
LIKE IT COULD BE.

> Vandals quickly passed to Africa.

TRUE, BUT NOT BEFORE HAVING MANY KIDS WITH HISPANIC WIVES. THE
VANDALS ARE ANOTHER TRIBE THAT ALSO HAVE AN UNFAIRLY BAD REPUTATION.
THEY DID TRY TO FINALLY SETTLE DOWN IN ANDALUSIA WITH THEIR NEW
FAMILIES, BUT THE VISIGOTHS KCIKED THEM OUT. IRONIC ISIN'T IT?

>> This equals to atleast 360,000 Germanics in a country who's
>>population ranged somewhere between 4-6 million - this is a pretty
>>significant number if you ask me.

> It's 5-10 % at most.

5-10% IS SIGNIFICANT IF YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. THE FRANKS IN GAUL
WERE OUTNUMBERED 1/20, BUT IT IS STILL CALLED "FRANCE" AND THE PEOPLE
STILL THINK OF THEMSELVES AS "FRENCH".

>> If 5,000 Vikings is enough to name an entire
>> region of France "Normandy" how can hundreds of thousands of
>>Germanics living in Hispania be dismissed as a minor element?

> Because Normandy was an _empty_ place. And, they were not 5000.

NORMANDY WAS BY NO MEANS AN EMPTY PLACE. IT ALREADY HAD A SIGNIFICANT
GALLO-ROMAN AND FRANKISH POPULATION. HAD IT BEEN EMPTY - THE VIKINGS
WOULD HAVE NOTHING TO PLUNDER.


SALUDOS!,

<img src="http://www.legends.dm.net/art/cid-sm3.jpg">


--------------------------------------------------------------------<e|-
Failed tests, classes skipped, forgotten locker combinations.
Remember the good 'ol days
http://click.egroups.com/1/8012/8/_/3398/_/966551945/
--------------------------------------------------------------------|e>-