[gothic-l] Goths in the East

[george knysh]

--- Bertil Haggman <mvk575b at tninet.se> wrote:
> The question of the rise and development
> of the East Slavic kingdom has been researched
> and debated for almost 300 years and there
> are no final solutions.

*****GK: In history there are no final solutions to
anything. But within the available (and constantly
shifting) evidence there are better, worse, much
better, much worse, and terrible solutions to any
given problem. It is an elementary obligation of
scholars, I think, to avoid propounding the worst
solutions. Time is at a premium and should not be
wasted.*****

 (BH)There is an extensive
> literature. The views of Dr. Soederlind and others
> present a solution to the great historical
> enigma regarding the rise of the kingdom
> of the Rus in the 9th and 10th centuries AD.

*****GK: Soederlind's is one of the worst solutions of
the issue I have ever encountered. It focuses on
highly speculative philology, and completely ignores
historical, archaeological, linguistic (!yes indeed),
folkloric, and any other evidence you care to name.
The only "theory" which is even worse, in my opinion,
is that of a scholar whose name escapes me for the
moment, and who argued that the "Rus" were Khazar
"rasha" (outcasts)******

>(BH)Anyone who attempts to present his own
> views as the only ones existing, cannot support
> that.

****GK: As far as I know practically no one "presents
his own view as the only one existing". Serious
scholars are quite aware of diversities. Their options
are based on consideration of probabilities and on
attempts to incorporate within the framework of their
hypothesis as much if not all of the multifarious
available evidence. Ignoring the evidence disqualifies
a "theory". The more evidence is ignored the weaker
and less relevant the theory. From this perspective
the Soederland "Gothic theory" is extremely weak
indeed. Even Shelukhin's ridiculous notion of the
"Rus" as being Celtic Rutheni from Southern France has
more to commend it.*******

 (BH)There are probably hundreds of different
> theories since G.F. Mueller in 1749 presented the
> result of his research on the discovery of
> the etymological similarity between Rus and Ruotsi.

*****GK: Quite. Including serious rejections of this
etymology as noted earlier.Of these "hundreds" of
theories most have bitten the dust, and are of mere
antiquarian interest today. Like the medieval
discussions of how many angels can fit on the tip of a
needle.*****
>
> (BH)The Gothic hypothesis and the theory of the
> Red-Blonde
> People of Dr. Soderlind fits well into the
> wideranging
> and often heated debate on the origins of the Rus
> kingdom.


*****GK: It doesn't fit at all within the context of
the available evidence which it completely
ignores.*****

>(BH) The account of three brothers from Scandinavia
could
> be
> regarded as a later counterpartof the native
> emigration saga
> of the Goths preserved by Jordanes.

*****GK: I'm sorry but this ignorance is becoming hard
to take. You are obviously unaware that the Rurik
legend (and that of his two brothers) is a calque of
the traditional Kyivan Foundation Legend. It has
nothing to do with Jordanes.******


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/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/