[gothic-l] Re: Names of Heruls-Procop.-Cameron-DNA R.-Barði-Einar P.

[faltin2001]

--- In gothic-l at y..., "einarbirg" <einarbirg at y...> wrote:
> --- In gothic-l at y..., "faltin2001" <dirk at s...> wrote:
> > 
> > >                       
> > > And we should not take this "mate with donkeys stuff" too 
> seriously. 
> > > Everybody knows that people have been having sex with animals in 
> all 
> > > cultures and in all time periods.I know it,you know it and 
> Procopius 
> > > knew it.
> > 
> > 
> > So what then should we take 'seriously'? How can we decide what to 
> > take seriously and what not? Just because we don't like one bit of 
> > information we can not simply dismiss it as irrelevant for the 
rest 
> of 
> >  his writing. We cannot simply say Procopius' information about 
> some 
> > Herulic customs (as gruesome as they may be ) are absolutely 
> accurate, 
> > while at the same time dismiss another remark as 'not so serious', 
> > this would be extremely bad scholarship. But I admitt it is done 
> all 
> > the time.
>     
>     Einar; Hæ Dirk.
> 
>    No you misunderstand me here.  I was not saying that Procopius 
was 
> lying. I was just saying that this passage does not matter for 
> anything. It can not be used to prove anything.


Hi Einar,

and I did not say that you did not say that Procopius was lying. The 
passage does matter a lot, otherwise Prof. Cameron had not chosen to 
elaborate on it. 









> > 
> >
> > > And maybe he did not dislike them at all!! He just pretended to 
> to 
> > > so,because he was expected to dislike them.And express that in 
> his 
> > > writings. If he would not have done so,then people would have 
> said; 
> > > You seem to like the barbarians!                     
> > > Well I am just speculating. My point; It is very hard to say 
what 
> > was 
> > > really going on in Procopius mind.
> > 
> > 
> > Exactly true, and this relates also to your speculations about the 
> > motivations about the Thule-journey.                               
> 
>       Einar, I agree. And the same about yours and Goffart´s 
> speculations. Neither of you have any idea what was going on in 
> Procopiu´s mind.


That is true, we can only glimse some indications of his state of mind 
from the way how he expressed himself and that is exactly what Cameron 
and Goffart tried to do.





> 
> 
> > >             Einar; I just wonder if those historians were 
writing 
> > > against their best knowledge? They were maybe just writing what 
> the 
> > > Roman elite wanted and expected to hear? And I am not sure they 
> > > respected the Roman elite anymore than the barbarians!!!
> >
> > Strange, after dismissing Goffart completely, now you are 
> pretending 
> > to know what somebody wanted to hear in the 6th century.
> 
> 
>    Einar; This must be your imagination. I was not pretending to 
know 
> anything. Read what I said again(above).


Yes, I read again and you came up with a peculiar theory arguing that 
Procopius was writing against his better knowledge to satisfy what you 
believed 6th century Romans wanted to hear. 





> > > 
> > 
> > >        Einar; I think that such writings just show us that 
> Procopius 
> > > was a rather rough person. A little bit special and maybe his 
> > > language use(and manners) were influenced beeing in such a 
> intensive 
> > > contact with the barbarians.? His manners were maybe no better 
> than 
> > > the manners of the Heruli.!
> > > It is not really possible to judge about his reliability from 
> that.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > If it is not possible to judge his credibility from that than it 
> will 
> > never be possible to judge his credibilty at all. Goffart stated 
> that 
> > Procopius tells us more about perceptions, prejustices and 
> polictial 
> > discourse in 6th century Constantinopel, than about real hard 
> evidence 
> > for tribal history. I think that is the best view to look at it. 
> 
>    Einar; That is one angle to look at it from. And not the only 
one. 
> 
> If Goffart was a painter,painting a mountain. He would find a nice 
> place to sit down and paint.                                         
 
> Two other persons get the same idea.They want to paint that mountain 
> too. 
> They choose another place to sit on and paint the mountain,another 
> angle.                                                               
 
> Maybe Goffart is sitting in the south from the mountain,one of the 
> others sitting in the eastern direction from the mountain and the 
> other one sits in front of the mountain in the west direction.       
 
> Then they paint the mountain.                                        
 
> 
> On the way back they meet each other and take a look at each others 
> pantings.                                                            
> Well of course the pictures would be very different because they 
were 
> looking at the mountain from different directions/angles. The same 
> mountain from different directions. Different angles.
> 
> But then Goffart would start claiming that "his angle" to look at 
the 
> mountain was the right one. His painting shows the "real" 
> mountain,not the paintings of others.                 
> 
> Same with Procopius. Goffart sees him and his writings from a 
special 
> location/angle and claims his view/angle is the only right 
> one.            
> That is one of his major mistakes(apart from the smaller ones).
> 
> >  
> > > I seriously think that Swedish scholars do harbor some 
predjudice 
> > > against the Goths and maybe therefore the Heruli!  
> > 
> > 
> > If you read J Svennung's famous article on Swedish Gothicism, you 
> will 
> > find that the opposite is the case.
>    
>     Einar; I did one error here(above). In front of Swedish,I should 
> have had the word; many.                                             
 
>  I saw this mistake after I had sent the letter,but found it such a 
> minor mistake,I did not bother to come with a correction.



No problem, everybody will have known that the opposite is the case.



> > 
> > 
> >  
> > > Well, I see the clear signs that some Icelandic scholars do 
> harbor a 
> > > predjudice agains the Celts. That is they do not like the idea 
> that 
> > > maybe 40-50% of the Icelandic gene pool can be traced to them. 
> They 
> > > even call them "slaves that knew nothing and nothing could be 
> > learned 
> > > from" Get the idea?
> > > Some kind of nationalism standing in the way for progress?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > That is would be very worring indeed. I just hear a speech at the 
> BM, 
> > were one historian pointed to the many things that the Vikings in 
> > Icleand learned from the Celts (including such basic skills like 
> > pottery making).
> 
>    Einar; That is interesting. What is BM.? And what is the 
> nationality of that historian?


Sorry, the BM is the British Museum. She was British, but for serious 
scholars that does not matter a bit.




> > 
> > > 
> > > As far as I remember then the gene mix in Icelanders(beeing 
> traced 
> > > back at least about 1000 years) is more than can be accounted 
for 
> > > with a simple gene mix between British Isles and Scandinavian 
> > > populations. I think that was stated clearly. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I completely fail to see how this supports the argument for Heruls 
> in 
> > Iceland. Just because 'continental genes' are stronger than 
> expected 
> > in Iceland does not mean that this contribution came from the 
> Heruls. 
> 
>   Einar; Well, even if you completely fail to see it then these 
> conclusions do support that hypothesis.
> 
> > A recent study on Viking gene contribution to Britain showed that 
> > there is absolutely no genetic difference between Danish Vikings 
> and 
> > North German Saxons, Frisians, Angles and others. 
> 
>    Einar; I do not believe this statement of yours(absolutely no 
> genetic difference). You must have misunderstood something. Even in 
> Iceland there are DNA differences between people in different parts 
> of the country. Small differences,but they do exist. 


Maybe I misunderstood them, that is possible because I am not a 
geneticist, but that is pretty much what they said: There is no 
detectable genetic difference between Danish and North German DNA 
making it impossible to establish the exact genetic contribution of 
Danish Vikings to Britain.

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/