[gothic-l] Hachmann on the Goths

[dirk at SMRA.CO.UK]

--- In gothic-l at y..., keth at o... wrote:
> Hi Dirk ,

> I'd like to make use of the opportunity to ask if Pritsak's can
> be considered as a kind of universal lookup-book on things Gothic.
> I do not have the book, but have been hearing about it for many
years.
> If it is that good, I should like to get myself a copy.
> (though I heard Rolf Hachmann is better)
> The title indicates a more restricted topicality, than might
> be required to for detailed information about The Goths in Western
> regions.


Hi Keths,

I don't think that Pritsak's book, which seems to be dealing with the
origin of the Kievan Rus and Hachmann's book `Die Goten und
Skandinavien' are comparable or substitutes. As I said I don't know
Pritsrak's book at all, but I have read Hachmann.

Hachmann systematically investigates the age-old question: did they or
did they not come from Scandinavia; the Goths that is. Hachmann starts
by discussing problems with historical sources about the Goths. He
deals with the so-called `Scandza-topos', which developed as a
commonplace in the early medieval histiography. He also analysis and
compares this to the contemporary and near-contemporary authors like
Tacitus, Ptolemy, Strabo, etc. One of his findings is that early
medieval/late antiquity authors like Jordanes, Ablabius and
Cassiodorus differ in the description of the earliest continental
settlement areas of the Goths. While the above authors place
Gothiscandza at the coast of the Baltic Sea, authors like Tacitus and
Ptolemy made it clear that the early continental Goths settled further
south inlands and not at the coast.

Then Hachmann moves on to discuss the development of the Scandza
topos, its persistence in Scandinavia and its reintroduction to German
scholarship by Gustav Kossinna in the 19th century.

In chapter 4 Hachmann discusses problems of archaeological evidence.
He states that there must have been a link between the continental
Goths and the Scandinavian Goths at some stage, but adds that it is
unclear what the nature of this contact was and in from which point
the contact started. Hachmann shows that the continental Goths are the
bearers of the 'Masurische Gruppe'(Masovian group culture, i.e.
Willenberg/Wilbark culture). Hachmann postulates that any migration
from the North must have taken place before 100BC if indeed the
Masovian group represented a culture of newcomers from the North.
Hachmann shows that this is not the case. The Masovian Wilbark group
is an autochon culture that developed from an earlier, so-called
Oxthoefter (i.e. Oksywie) culture. While autochon in its southerly
centres, the Masovian culture is non-autochon in its northern region,
where it expanded into the so-called Baltische Gruppe (Baltic group).
The forerunner of the Masovian group, the Oxthoefter culture was once
part of the Oder/Warthe, i.e. Przeworsk culture in the south and has
received all its impulses from the south.

Hachmann states that similar to the Alamanni who constituted
themselves when Suevian groups accumulated before the limes, which
they eventually breached, the Goths could have constituted themselves
through the establishment of the `Masovian group'. Hachmann concludes
the chapter by saying that there are virtually no traces of
Scandinavian cultures to be found in the Masovian culture. But
likewise, he states that there are no traces of the Masovian group to
be found in Scandinavian cultures of that time.

This ultra-short synopsis does naturally not do justice to Hachmann's
study, which is about 580 pages long. Some of the group members will
likely state that Hachmann's book was published in 1970 and that new
evidence has emerged. It is however, important to note that Hachmann
does not argue a strong opinion either way, but attempts to present a
positivistic analysis of the available evidence.

At any rate, one of the main notions that were stressed by Hachmann
certainly entered the mainstream view on the continental Gothic
ethnogenesis. That is, that the continental Goths were the bearers of
an indigenous culture that had developed from local early iron age
cultures in the last centuries BC, with the main cultural impulses
stemming from the southerly Przeworsk groups.

This is not to say that they did not have any contact with iron age
cultures across the Baltic Sea. In contrary, Hachmann, just like
Wolfram, Heather or Wenskus stated that small groups have most likely
crossed the Baltic Sea at various stages thus leading to the exchange
of - among others- traditions and beliefs. This view, however, clearly
distances itself from the 19th century scholarship of Kossinna and the
like, by stating that the continental Goth are not a Scandinavian
tribe that set out for the south, just stopping over a couple of
centuries in the Vistula region, the Ukraine, the Black Sea to end up
in Italy and Spain.


Polish archaeologist Tadeusz Makiewicz wrote about the status of
research on early Gothic history in 2000:

"Recent archaeological research and lengthy debate on this subject
have, however, established that the Wielbark Culture did not simply
come into being as a result of the arrival of tribes of Scandinavian
Goths in Pomerania. Instead, it evolved from the development of the
local Oksywie Culture, possibly having been subject to outside
influences from Scvandinavia. This is evidenced primarily by the
fact that in its initial phase, the Wielbark Culture had exactly the
same territorial extent as the Oksywie Culture, many cemeteries having
been kept in continued use by these two societies. Wielbark
communities comprised mostly members of tribes already settled in
this area with the possible addition of Scandinavian migrants, who
maybe arrived here in small groups."


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/