[gothic-l] Re: People Names/GJOTA/CADMUS

[keth at ONLINE.NO]

Hallo Bertil,
>Have not written an essay,  only a selected
>bibliography. That the latest writings
>come from Professor Andersson and not from
>me is pretty obvious from the text. I can see
>no risk that I would in any way be regarded as the
>originator of this material, as I am not mentioned
>in the bibliography. 

I should like to see you write up something more about what
Prof. Anderson's area of specialisation is, if you have the 
information. I note that he has been invited as one of the
contributors to the Reallexicon, which I think is quite an
honour. He is Swedish, as I assume from his name, as
well as his publications in Namn och Bygd.

I am discussing some of the origin questions on one of
the other lists, but there I find some of the contributors
to go too far in the opposite directin, in pronouncing
opinions with the oposite sign. What I said was that
since the question could not be given a rigorous proof,
that I'd rather stand back and assume an detached attitude.
That of course means with respect to both opinions.

The opinion that a technologically advanced Celtic community
living in Poland or in Thüringen, should suddenly mutate
into a Germanic-speaking nation, so to speak spontaneously
on a whim, I also hold as very unlikely, and I do not understand
how any one can seriously propose such a thing, without at the
same time indicating what kind of (serious) external stresses
led to such a transmutation.

First of all, it then needs explanation how the Germanic
language ended up being spoken on the Continent at all.
If it wasn't immigration from Scandinavia, how can you then
explain that a technically advanced Celltic nation should
suddenly switch to the language of a culturally and technologically
inferior, almost insignificant group of coastdwellers?

No, a much better explanation is that these configurations
arose long before the Celtic nations began to explore the
iron technology for which they became famous and which was,
as I understand it, the technology behind their expansion.

Also, since the Celtic and Germanic languages are so different,
it is unreasonable to assume that Germanic arose as a peripheral
phenomenon in close vicinity to the Celtic groups. It is far
more reasonable that the languages developed so differently
because they were initially separated by a considerable distance.

Who was it that said Germanic has a large set of its vocabulary
filled up with words that you do not find in the other Indo-
European languages? And that these words were to a large extent
words of maritime connotation? Do you have the references for
that in your files? 

 

>Thank you for the Noreen addition. Will check it
>out and add to my bibliography, which I hope
>to make available on the web.

Well, it is only a short note under his summary of the second
ablaut series. But it shows that this was known prior to
1903. Presumably one would then find publications on it,
in the philological journals that were published some 
time before that date. If those were found, it could
be part of a short survey of the subject's history.

>Concerning the verb gjuta it implies, in my opinion,
>that it is something liquid: when an iron is cast
>that is gjuta and a goet,  (in English it is cast or found)
>but Swedish has the same word, gjuta. The expression 
>"gjuta olja på vaagorna" also has with líquid to do as
>well as semen. Gjuta is "pour" and there is another
>Swedish word for pour, that is "haella", which of course
>also has a connection to liquid. There is also
>the expression "rocken sitter som gjuten" (the coat fits
>like a glove).

Citat fra Jonas Lie: "faa dem (skøiterne) til at sidde 
som støbt paa foden."

Remember that it is also used about fish, when they lay
their eggs under water. So it doesn't have to be a liquid.
"Hella" has something to do with the physical angle at which you
hold an object, such as a cup. When you tip it over a certain
angle, then the liquid suddenly begins to flow. This is "hella".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

But there is an important point about which I was not explicit
in my previous post, and that is that iron age technology
implied a hammering but not a melting of the iron. Luckily,
this turned out to give a high quality of steel, and it
wasn't necessary to work at the much higher temperatures
that would have been required to melt the iron. But in the
Bronze Age, I believe the Bronze was always cast, which
was also possible at such an early stage in the history
of technology, because copper and tin have much lower
melting points than iron does.

The point then is, that if "gjóta, gautar, gotar" refers
to "cast men", then it is probably a name that derives
from the Bronze Age.   This hypothesis could then 
also be tested, by looking for evidence of bronze
casting around the Baltic. It would have to be in the
vicinity of the Baltic, since it is a Germanic word,
and the early Germanics lived in the vicinity of the
Baltic. These hypothetical Bronze Age Goths must then
also have lived there; it is only that we do not know
on which side of the ocean they lived or whether it
was on one of the islands. But if we could find a center
for the production of bronze objects somewhere in the
region, then maybe these were the Goths. I don't know
if bronze production was uniformly distributed or not.
But if there was a major center in the Baltic region,
then these may have been the early Goths !    :)

Perhaps "Wotan" or "Gaut" was also an image of the
Bronze Age metal worker, and the dwarves who in the myth
make all his sacred objects are his laborerers or thralls.
(Bertil, this is just to propose an alternative theory,
since you are always on the lookout for such)
The mythic king who disappears into the mountain
running after a dwarf, and returning with much treasure
after having magically constrained the dwarf, is an
image of the  metal prospector, who sucessfully returns
with his bounty.

>Of course the relation with semen is not certain but
>it fits well with the meaning "man" or "men" for the
>Gauts and the Goths.

It could mean "men", but then again, what does "man/men"
mean? Wouldn't the name have to reflect some mythic 
ideas about what a man *is* or what his origin is?
The word "man" or "maðr" is supposed to have an etymology
related to a word for "thinking" (mind). Thus a "man"
is "he who thinks". But in other languages the words
they use for "man" may have a different connotation.

For example in Hebrew, one of the words for man is
"adam", which is supposed to mean "earth". Here the
myth behind the name is that the first man was 
created from earth. That is why he got the name "adam".
This is another example that very often there is
a creation myth connected with a name for "man".
That is why I am saying that your reading as "semen"
is too simple, since it does not point toward
a myth of origin.

The Cadmus myth I quoted, is another example of
mytological connotations tied to the word that is
used for "people".

Here is the example of the "brazen men" in Gk. Myth:

    Zeus the Father made a third generation of
    mortal men, a brazen race, sprung from 
    Ash-trees ; and it was in no way equal
    to the silver age ; but it was terrible 
    and strong. They loved the lamentable
    works of Ares and deeds of violence ;

Could this be the "Goths"?   ;)


Best regards
keth





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/