[gothic-l] Re: "Eruli", "Goths", "Danes" and wherefrom the runes

Wed Dec 18 08:44:57 UTC 2002

--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "Einar Gunnar Birgisson
<einarbirg at y...>" <einarbirg at y...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Einar,
> >
> > the Asa religion is not a Gothic heritage! We know very little
> about
> > Gothic paganism, but one thing is certain. The Goths were the
first
> > Germanic people to convert to Christianity, already from the late
> 3rd
> > century onwards.
> >
> > ### Hej Dirk.
>   Yes, but could not the pagan Heruli have been carriers of the
Goths
> former pagan traditions!At least partly.###

Hi Einar,

that is not impossible, but we have not the slightest evidence for
this and as such it remains speculation.

> >
> >
> > > As the Heruli were a Gothic people it must be assumed
> > > that their arrival brought some elements from Gothic culture to
> > > Scandinavia.
> >
> >
> > Again, the Goths of the 5th/6th century were Christians! In fact,
a
> > large part of the Heruls were likely also Christians, some of
them
> > even Catholocs as is suggested by tomb stone inscriptions from
> > Concordia (see Fibinger). Those Heruls who had retained paganism,
> had
> > likely nothing to do with the Asir gods, but from the
> archaeological
> > remains of the Hegykoe group likely followed a syncretic form of
> > steppe-nomadic Shamanism and Germanic and other paganism.
>
> ## That can well be right, but this "Germanic and other paganism"
> could have been the earlier form of Asatru as we know it and can be
> evaluated from Icelandic material. But even if not so the Asatru
> could have emerged in the 6th-7th centuries in Scandinavia as a
> result of the Heruli migration. Elements of Christianity, shamanism
> and even Mithraism (as far as I remember) can be found in Asatru.
> Asatru is centered around the ancestor-cult princip. That is food
for
> thought too.##

When you talk about Asatru, I suppose you mean modern neo-paganism
which is loosely modelled on the little we know about Germanic
paganism?

> >
> > Those Heruls who went to Italy after their defeat in 509AD, were
> > likely Arian Christians. They also must have included the highest
> > ranking members of the Herulic royal clan, because otherwise they
> > would not have been received by Theoderic. Similarly, those
Heruls
> > who joined the Langobards, may partly have been Christians. The
> > remaining group which wondered around, starving and suffering
abuse
> > and defeat by Gepids likely included those Herulic elements which
> > were composed of steppe nomads of ethinic
> > Hunnic/Mongolic/Turkic/Alanic origin. The non-germanic names of
> their
> > later federate kings like Grepes, Ochos, and probably Datius and
> > Aordos would support this view. We must not forget that the
Heruls
> > were a multi-ethnic group. The non-Germanic and non-Christian
> > components of the Heruls likely found it most difficult to seek
> > integration among Langobards and Ostrogoths, which would have
been
> > the normal course of action otherwise.
>
> ## What is unlikley is that these non-Germanics steppe nomads would
> have migrated north to Scandinavia. They would rather have migrated
> east.

That is my thought exactly. In fact, that is what some of them did.
Those who did not flee to Italy, or were intergrated into the
Langobards, suffered starvation in Rugiland and then moved east to
seek shelter with the Gepids.

> If they were so starving and suffering they would have sought
> shelter by the next nation wanting them into their ranks.

Yes, exactly correct! This is precisely what Procopius wrote. They
sought shelter with the Gepids, who mistreated them and abused their
women. Hence, they fled from the Gepids and sought shelter among the
Romans, asking the Emperor for land and protection.  These were
likely the least fortunate of the remaining Heruls who suffered the
most after 509AD, others had managed to escape to Italy, where many
Heruls lived already and again others joined the Langobards.

> Even to
> become Christians to get rid of their suffering.

Correct again. This was the bargain that the Emperor struck with
them. Those Heruls who settled in Illyria had to convert to
Christianity and provide military service.

> The last thing on
> their minds would have been migrating to a very far away countries.
> They would not have had the reasources anyway.

My thinking exactly. This is one of the many arguments that casts
some doubt on Procopius' Thule report.

> Probably Procopius account has to be seen in the light of that a
> pagan people lost battle with a Christian people and the result for
> the pagans: hunger and suffering! A good teaching lesson for them
who
> opposed the real God!

That is partly correct I think. However, even after the Heruls had
converted to Christianity, Procopius tells his readers that they are
the most disgusting of people, calling them traitors, drunkards,
notorious liars and even sodomites, who have intercourse with
donkeys. This would have spoiled his story completely, if it were
about a lesson in relgious rightiousness. Instead, Procopius' account
is about contemporary Byzantine 'barbarian policy'. I think
Procopius' view is that barbarians will always remain barbarians and
are not to be trusted. However, they can be useful for the empire as
soldiers to fight for the empire against each other. For the Heruls,
Procopius had nothing but contempt, regardless if they were
Christians or pagans.

cheers,
Dirk

>
> Cheers Einar##
> >
> > Cheers
> > Dirk

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/