[gothic-l] Gothic Identity

[Alburysteve at AOL.COM]

Hi again, Dirk:
>
>  thanks for your detailed response. Tacitus mentioned the so called
>  'orignal names' and stated that, for example, the Suevi consisted of
>  many distinct tribes of which the most noble were the Semnones, who
>  were the keepers of an important holy place (Semnonenhain). I suppose
>  that these descriptions have contributed to this view of cultic
>  groups.

I apologize for beying unclear with my use of the term "tribe" which I meant
in the current anthropological sense.   In the classical ethnographies,
'tribe' is often used to translate a range of Latin/Greek terms which
coincide rarely and then only accidentally with my more modern meaning.  Nor
do they necessarily reflect with how the natives (then) perceived their own
social units.  In an anthropological sense, individuals in "tribal" societies
belong to lineages (sometimes called "clans") a number of which comprise a
"tribe".  Affinities in language or belief systems are often recognized
beyond that (Celtic or Germanic) but generally, an individuals loyalty is
first to his clan and then to his tribe.  You find similar confusion among
attempts by Europeans to treat with the aboriginal inhabitants of North
America, ascribing to them political concepts (king, chief, etc) foreign to
the natives.

>  But what exactly these 'super-groups' were, is rather difficult to
>  assertain. Authors like Kuhn and Kossack (Voelker zwischen Germanen
>  und Kelten) have argued that their were a number of such
>  'super-groups' including among others the Mannus-tribes, possibly
>  Nerthus-tribes, but certainly Suevi.

While I suppose that it's possible to classify groups of tribes according to
the particularly god they worshipped, it is hard to see it as being the
principal source of ethnic unity.  For example, Turville-Petre (Myth &
Religion of the North) notes regional concentrations of "Thor-worship"
(Iceland) and "Odin-worship" (Denmark & So Sweden) and both (Norway). These
clusters cut across ethnic boundaries and appear to reflect little beyond
local preferences.  Within the Germanic world there existed regional
differences in dress, hair style, ornaments, weaponry, burial practices, etc.
which help us recognize groups of people whose own sense of identity was
derived from their clan/tribal affiliation.

>  I think that the fact, that many tribes seemed to have maintained this
>  'group-name' in parallel to their tribal name underlines the
>  significance of these groups. E.g.  Alamanni have apparently never
>  stopped calling themselves Suevi (Schwaben) and Quadi and Marcomanni
>  'reverted' to the name Suevi when they moved to Spain.

It seems more likely that this is the proliferation of designations that
accummulate in a historic record maintained by sources outside the culture.
It is almost impossible to find a North American Indian tribe whose term for
themselves matched that used for them by historians, much like the odd habit
of the Deutch stubbornly not calling themselves German <grin>.  Note that
Marcomanni ("borderfolk") bears all the earmarks of a name applied by an
outsider.

>Similarly,
>  Silingi and Asdingi seemed to have given up these names infavour of
>  the common Vandal-group-name when they moved to the West.

Asdings and Silings might have been lineages or clans who gained political
ascendance during the migration period.  Certaining Niebelungs and Volsungs
were kin groups.  Likewise perhaps Tervings and Greuthings.  A hierarchical
network of clan groupings, each with their own name, is characteristic of
tribal society.

>For the
>  continental Gothones and the Scandinavian 'Goths'the god Gaut (a
>  Gautic tradition) may have played a significant role as focal point of
>  worship.

Certainly I concede that a god "Gaut" may have been the  one prinicpally
worshiped by the Goths.  What I don't believe is that one became a Goth by
worshipping Gaut.

>  Ok, I may have overstated the point with my example, which was
>  intended to make it clearer. I don't belief that 'Gothicism' of the
>  first century is 'strictly' a religious concept, but it may have been
>  centered around a certain belief-system/ or Gautic tradition, which
>  may also have included people like the Lemovii, Warinii, who in this
>  sense could also say that they were Goths. Maybe Ingemar Nordgren, who
>  supported the concept of a Gothic cultic league in his book, will step
>  in at this point to elaborate on the concept.

I would be most interested to hear it.

>  I certainly agree with the view that tribes/peoples, at times, split
>  up and seperated; but the problem with the continental Gothones and
>  the Scandinavian 'Goths' seems to be that archaeologists have a hard
>  time finding any similarity in their respective material cultures. A
>  Polish archaeologist recently underscored Hachmann's findings, namely
>  that comparing archaeological assemblages from the Masovia group and
>  those from Vaestergotland etc. showed practically no similarity,
>  leading to belief that the contact between these groups can at best
>  have been minimal... while it remains uncertain if this contact was
>  from North to South or South to North.... In fact, the Wilbark culture
>  is basically an indigenous culture of the Pommerania/Masovia area
>  developed from the earlier Oxthoefe (forgotten the Polish name)
>  culture.

And this very legitimate objection certainly remains an obstacle to any
attempt to find Gothic origins in Scandinavia.

>  On the other hand, to pick up your exampe, Crimean Gothic artefacts of
>  the 6th/7th century are clearly related to other East Germanic
>  artefacts from Central/Eastern Europe and are related to the Wilbark
>  culture via the Chernyakhov culture.

Excellent example of how to demonstrate ethnic origins.

>  Yes, you are right, when I said that the question of origin is
>  obsolete, I meant that it is obsolete in the sense practiced by many
>  scholars of the 19th early 20th century (e.g. Gustav Kossinna etc).
>  One can certainly search for the origins, but we should distance
>  ourselves from oversimplifications like: Goths are either from
>  Scandinavia or from the Pommerania/Masovia region without allowing for
>  more imaginative solutions.

Absolutely right!

Regards,

Steve O'Brien
Albury, Ontario

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/