[gothic-l] Re: Goths Primodial Deed: to Keth

[dirk at SMRA.CO.UK]

--- In gothic-l at y..., keth at o... wrote:
> Hello Dirk!
> Sorry for answering out of chronological order!
> Of course what I wrote below was intended only
> as an overtatement on my part, and has little
> to do with what I consider to be your real opinion.
> Especially after your answer to the other post, I
> see that we are in complete agreement!
>
>
> >--- In gothic-l at y..., keth at o... wrote:
> >> Hi Dirk, when you quote Jordanes, could you please give
> >> reference to the relevant paragraph? Since we all have different
> >> editions, it might be nice to compare notes. You said you
> >> did not feel qualified to use sources, and that you hated the
> >> guts of amateurs who do, because they are "dangerous" and
> >> damage (what cause?).
> >
> >
> >Hi Keth,
> >
> >please be fair, I never said that I 'hated the guts of amateurs' or
> >anything like it. Please don't attribute these kind of expressions
to
> >me. All I said, or at least mean to say, was that there is a
'danger'
> >of mis-interpretation of origianal sources if they are used without
> >the proper care.
>
> Yes, that was a bit unfair.
> I offer you my apologies!


Accepted!



>
> >Also, you wrote 'When you quote Jordanes....". Please note that I
did
> >not quote Jordanes, but refered to Erwig Wolfram's book 'Das Reich
und
> >die Germanen' p. 58, where Wolfram writes that accroding to
> >Jordanes/Cassiodorus the Goths completed their primodial deed, the
> >migration to the Vistula region in 1490BC. But I will be happy to
> >check whether Wolfram gives the exact source and shall let you know

> >tomorrow as I don't have my books on me right now.
>
> Yes, but since I don't have a copy of Wolfram, my only alternative
> is to check in Jordanes. Surely Wolfram will have included a
> reference to paragraph number in Jordanes? If he doesn't
> I'll never buy his book.  But from what I've heard, Wolfram is
> actually very good and never moves far away from the sources
> without explicitly stating so to the reader, so that the reader
> is always allowed insight into what the exact sources for his
> statements are.
>
> Hoping you will elucidate this number 1490 BC then.


Jordanes and Cassiodorus sought to make the Goths as ancient (or even
older) as the classical mediterranean cultures. Thus, they wrongly
identified them with the Getae and let their history start with their
crossing of the sea to the Vistula; 2030 years before the end of the
reign of the last Ostrogothic king. Note that the last Ostrogothic
King who ruled ligitimately in the eyes of Jordanes was Vitigis, who
surrendered in 540AD. Jordanes dispised the later kings Totila and
Teja. He saw them as leaders of uprisings against the legitimate
government and destructive to the merging of the Goths with Rome. So
540AD minus 2030 years is 1490BC! The question is hence, where do the
2030 years come  from and I shall look that up in Wolfram's book
tonight.

cheers,

Dirk







> >>
> >> >Hello Tore,
> >> >
> >> >Jordanes also does not mention 200-300BC either. Wolfram writes
in
> >> >'Das Reich und die Germanen' (p.58) that Jordanes, based on
> >> >Cassiodorus implied that the Goths crossed from the island of
> >Scandza
> >> >to the Vistula region in the year 1490BC. This is what I was
> >refering
> >> >to when I said 'about 1000BC'.


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/