[gothic-l] Re: Christianisation of Crimean Goths

[dirk at SMRA.CO.UK]

Dear Andreas,

thanks a lot for this most detailed response. I knew already from one 
of your articles that signs of permanent Gothic settlement on the 
Crimean only start in the late 4th century. I have no reason to doubt 
that, but it does create a problem for a certain, very rare coin 
series which I am researching. 

These coins are imitations of a certain type of Roman denari and were 
minted from the mid 3rd century to the late 4th century on the south 
eastern Crimean. Russian authors traditionally attribute these coins 
to the Goths.  The argument for the attribution of these coins to the 
Goths rests mainly on the fact that these coins were introduced from 
the west and were based on prototypes that have no predecessor in the 
Black Sea area. The Bosporan kingdom never used Roman coins and 
Bosporan coins are never found together with the coins in question.  

Interestingly, the latest group of these coins even show a clear cross 
on the avers, indicating that the people who made these coins had 
adopted  Christianity sometimes in the course of the 4th century. In 
general, these coins are very enigmatic and only one illustration of 
such a coin can be found in the entire western literature (while there 
are a number or Russian articles on this series) I have about 20 of 
these coins, bought in the Ukraine, where they are still found 
regularly in the south eastern Crimean. 

At any rate, the information that you provided will seriously affect 
my interpretation of these coins, which I am currently formulating in 
an article. 

cheers,

Dirk




--- In gothic-l at y..., andreas.schwarcz at u... wrote:
> Dear Dirk,
> This is what I wrote in my article "Cult and religion among the 
> tervingi and the Visigoths and their conversion to Christianity" in: 
> The Visigoths from the Migration Period to the Seventh Century, 
> ed. Peter Heather. San Marino 1999, p.451 f.:
> But we find already a bishop Theophilus of 
> Gothia in the lists of this first oecumenical 
> council, whom Socrates calls the teacher of 
> Wulfila.(Patrorum Nicaenorum nominum LXIV 
> (ed.Heinrich Gelzer, Heinrich Hilgenfeld, Otto 
> Cuntz). Socrates, Historia ecclesiastica, 2, 41, 
> 23.) This has been a point of discussion for a 
> long time, because Philostorgios called Wulfila 
> the first bishop of the Goths,(Philostorgios, 
> Historia ecclesiastica, 2, 5.) which led Jacques 
> Zeiller and Ludwig Schmidt to suppose the see of 
> Theophilus in the Crimea, near Bosphoros and 
> Chersonesos, a choice lately favoured also by 
> Peter Heather.(Jacques Zeiller, Les origines 
> chrétiennes dans les provinces danubiennes. 
> Paris 1918, 409414. Ludwig Schmidt, Die 
> Ostgermanen. Geschichte der deutschen Stämme bis 
> zum Ausgang der Völkerwanderung 2. 2nd ed. 
> München 1941, 233 f. Peter Heather, Goths and 
> Romans. 332489. Oxford 1991, 93.) The 
> traditional view, shared by Wolfram, was 
> recently emphasized once again by Knut 
> Schäferdiek, who also indicates that Theophilus' 
> theological point of view may not have been 
> totally different from Wulfila's, bearing in 
> mind the developements after 325. He supposes 
> Theophilus to have been a member of the broad 
> socalled middle party around Eusebius of 
> Nikomedia, finally sharing the chisological 
> convictions of the second aantiochenian formula 
> of 341.(Hippolyte Delehaye, Saints de Thrace et 
> de Mésie. Analecta Bollandiana 31 (1912) 
> 161300, esp.284 f. Wolfram, Die Goten, 87. 
> Schäferdiek, Gotien, 37 and 49.) Schäferdiek's 
> view is underlined by modern archeology, which 
> finds the first signs of permanent Gothic 
> settlements in the Crimea only in the last 
> quarter of the fourth century and a second wave 
> of Goths after the end of Attila's reign.(Karl 
> von der Lohe in his summary of recent 
> excavations at the Caputh conference 1995.) The 
> localisation of Theophilus in Tomi, once again 
> brought into discussion by Evangelos Chrysos, 
> was already rejected by Schmidt and is firmly 
> and finally done so by Schäferdiek.(Evangelos K. 
> Chrysos, To Byzantion kai hoi Gotthoi. 
> Thessalonike 1972, 8588. Schmidt, Ostgermanen, 
> 233. Schäferdiek, Gotien, 37 with n.13.) 
> Personally I think, while sharing in the main 
> the view of Wolfram and Schäferdiek that 
> Theophilus was a predecessor of Wulfila, that 
> there might have been a difference in their 
> mandate. Both were episcopi intra gentes, but 
> Wulfila was clearly designed for the federated 
> Goths under treaty with the Empire, i.e. the 
> Tervingi, whereas Theophilus' Gothia, not so 
> strictly connected with imperial policy, may 
> also have included the southern regions of the 
> Greuthungi, where Christian beginnings from the 
> same roots, i.e. prisoners, and from the poleis 
> on the Black Sea coast are also possible. This 
> difference may explain Philostorgios' remark. 
> Anyway, christianity among the Goths before 
> Wulfila is also attested by St. Athanasius, who 
> counted the Goths among the peoples whom the 
> word of the Gospel had already 
> reached.(Athanasius, De incarnatione, 51, 2. 
> Schäferdiek, Germanenmission, 498. Schwarcz, 
> Anfänge, 107.)
> 
> To sum up this passage, Theophilus of Gothia was 
> not bishop of the Crimean Goths and the first 
> signs of permanent settlement of the latter in 
> the Crimea are from the end of the fourth 
> century.
> Kind regards
>             Andreas Schwarcz
> Ao.Univ.Prof.Dr.Andreas Schwarcz
> Institut für österreichische Geschichtsforschung
> Universität Wien
> Dr.Karl Lueger-Ring 1
> A-1010 Wien
> Österreich
> Tel.0043/1/42-77/272-16
> Fax 0043/142-77/92-72


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/