[gothic-l] Re: Names of Heruls

[Tore Gannholm]

>Hi Tore,
>
>that is all very nice, but the problem is that Procopius sometimes
>reported reliable information and sometimes he reported a mixture of
>fiction and fantasy. Sometimes it is easy to tell the two appart, but
>often it isn't. That is why Procopius has to be interpreted against
>the background of other sources, evidence and theory.
>
>Consider the following exerpts from Procopius, and you will see that
>he had no clear idea about where or what Britain was and where or what
>Thule was.
>
>
>History of the Wars 8.20.4-5
>
>"The island of Brittia lies in this the northern ocean, not far from
>the shore, rather about two hundred stades away, approximately
> opposite the mouths of the Rhine; and it is between Britannia and the
>island of Thule. Whereas Britannia lies towards the West opposite the
>extremities of the land of the Spaniards, separated from the mainland
>[of the Spaniards] by about four thousand stades, no less, Brittia on
>the other hand faces the rear of Gaul, the parts of it facing the
>ocean – clearly, to the north of Spain and Britannia."
>
>
>If Brittia is Britannia as Procopius later suggested, we have one
>Britain to many. In fact, if Thule is Sweden, his Britta would be
>Jutland or so. But then he states it is an island 200 stades from the
>mouth of the Rhine. Other authors said that his Thule must be Norway
>and that Britta are the Orkneys. But then his distance is out of
>scale and his later identification with Britannia makes no sense. What
>remains is the fact that Procopius used different and contradictory
>sources without making an effort to adjust the information one way or
>another. Thus, when he said that somebody went to Thule, he had no
>clue where that was, apart from 'somewhere in the North'.
>
>Consider the following expert to see that Procopius' information about
>political ongoings in those areas was also highly confused and
>probably assempled from unreliable hear-say stories.
>
>
>History of the Wars 8.20.6-10
>"Three very populous nations inhabit the Island of Brittia, and one
>king is set over each of them. And the names of these nations are
>Angles, Frisians, and Britons who have the same name as the island. So
>great apparently is the multitude of these peoples that every year in
>large groups they migrate from there with their women and children and
>go to the Franks. And they [the Franks] are settling them in what
>seems to be the more desolate part of their land, and as a result of
>this they say they are gaining possession of the island. So that not
>long ago the king of the Franks actually sent some of his friends to
>the Emperor Justinian in Byzantium, and despatched with them the men
>of the Angles, claiming that this island [Britain], too, is ruled by
>him. Such then are the matters concerning the island called Brittia."
>
>Now it is clear, Procopius thinks that Britta is Britannia, meaning
>that Thule is completely misplaced in his earlier statement. In fact,
>it cannot be clearly identified with anything. Also, with this report
>Procopius shows that he had no understanding of the geography of
>northern Europe and very little understanding about the political
>situation. He used the same names and components again and again. He
>knew about the Varnians and squeezed them into all sorts of stories,
>but he didn't really knew about the Saxons, so he does not mention
>them in Britain or on the continent, although at least two of his
>reports would have required him to do so, if he only had reliable
>information.
>
>This is why Procopius leaves us no choice but to interpret and to
>speculate.
>
>As for archaeological evidence, there is nothing to relate the grave
>assemblages of Moravia or the Neusiedler See which are seen as Herulic
>with those in Scandinavia or the Upsalla region. In fact some of the
>most startling indications are curiosly absent from there.
>
>cheers
>
>Dirk
>
>PS  I think we should move this discussion back to the Germanic list,
>where it is probably better placed.
>

Sorry Dirk,
I didn'r realize that I was on the Gothic list. I just pressed reply.
Somebody else must have moved it there.

Tore


>
>>
>> I quote from Origin of Svear:
>> 1. Suddenly a Svea power appeared which was strong enough to wage
>war
>> against the Gutar, island of Gotland in the Baltic. From where did
>those
>> Svear come?
>> 2. A new fashion in burying saw the light in the Lake Mälar Area
>during the
>> 6th century. The burials were very ritual, which indicates that
>religion
>> very much directed the treatment of man for the next life.
>> 3. The Svear used the Roman Julian sun calender which is considered
>to have
>> been introduced in Uppland about the year 500. Still in the 17th
>century
>> the Disthing-day in Uppsala was calculated according to this
>calendar.
>> 4. The Æsir-religion which can be interpreted as the religion of the
>> warlike masters makes its appearance whilst the Vana-belief probably
>was
>> the religion of the peaceful farming people. The Æsir-religion can
>be
>> considered a child of an Iranian religion, which after its founder,
>Mani,
>> is called Manikeism. This religion gained from the 4th century wide
>> acceptance outside of the Persian state of the time. The
>Æsir-religion has
>> also borrowed ideas from early Christianity.
>>
>> Tore

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Stop Smoking Now
Nicotrol will help
http://us.click.yahoo.com/2vN8tD/_pSDAA/ySSFAA/wWMplB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

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/