[gothic-l] Re: The Eruli and Runes

[faltin2001]

--- In gothic-l at y..., "troels_brandt" <trbrandt at p...> wrote:
> --- In gothic-l at y..., "faltin2001" <dirk at s...> wrote:
> > I suppose Denmark, i.e. Jutland including Schleswig-Holstein is
not
> a
> > bad guess for the origin of the runes. -There are really really
two
> > concentration of runic inscriptions in Germany.
>
> I know, but as far as I remember the map they were few in
Weser/Lower
> Elb region.
>
>  The south German
> > runes, made mainly by Alamanni and dating from 500AD onwards and
> > North German Runes, which according to the Kiel University are
the
> > oldest runes of all inscriptions, including the Weser runes from
> > around 180AD and the Meldorf (near Hamburg) runes from around
> 25AD.
> > Runic inscriptions from Germany include also a number of East
> > Germanic inscriptions like the Dahmdorf blade.
> >
> > In general, the frequency distribution that I provided was not
> meant
> > to show a relation of finds between Scandinavia and Germany, but
> > between Scandinavia with Germany on the one side and the East
> > Germanic areas on the other. Such a comparison is meaning full
> > because the difference is so large indicating that the Goths were
> > likely not the inventors of the runes.
> >
> > Overall, the number of runic inscriptions is so small that a
> > comparison of frequency distributions among countries like
Germany,
> > Denmark, Sweden and Norway is practically meaningless. The find
> > frequency can be easily distorted by find circumstances,
> preservation
> > conditions, local customs etc. Thus, the custom of inscribing big
> > stones has developed almost exclusively in Scandinavia, while
> further
> > south latin letters were used. As such inscriptions are more
likely
> > to survive, it greatly increases the number of occurances. If
> people
> > in other areas inscribed only perishable objects, this would
> greatly
> > distort the distribution. E.g. the survival of the rune-bones of
> the
> > Weser is only due to unusual environmental conditions. There were
> > probably thousands of these bones originally.
>
>
> I think we agree, if your argument does not lead you to a region of
> origin where we have very few inscriptions or no finds at all - or
to
> regions too close to the Roman civilisation.
>
>
> >
> > There is a fairly new article by Walter Pohl "Die gentes im
Vorfeld
> > von Ostgoten und Franken" (or similar, I can get the exact quote,
> > were he devotes a section to the Heruls with an interesting
> > interpretation. His upcoming book 'Die Voelkerwanderung:
Eroberung
> > und Integration', might also contain this interpretation of the
> > Herulic kingdom at the Danube. He basically sees the Heruls at
the
> > Danube as a very small warrior elite that perpetuated the
lifestyle
> > adopted from their former Hunnic masters. Thus, they dominated
and
> > lived off a majoritiy population of 'Roman' provincials and
Suevian
> > Germanics.
>
>
> This is partly the claim made by Alvar Ellegaard in 1987. Ludwig
> Schmidt used the charming expression: "Die Heruler waren ein echtes
> Herrenvolk"!!.


Yes, a very unfortunate expression indeed.




I believe the truth lies between Ellegaard and a
> traditional migration, as their strength in the 6th century
probably
> was due to their superiority as warriors rather than their number.
As
> they probably sometimes were a minority in their own society and we
> do not know their characteristics, they are difficult to identify
by
> archaeology.


I agree! (even if that is a first)

cheers
Dirk

I can't wait to see what Walter Pohl has to say about the Heruls in
his new book on the migration era, due to come out any day now.







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/