[gothic-l] Re: Goths, Eruli in the East and Pritsak

[faltin2001]

--- In gothic-l at y..., "Bertil Haggman" <mvk575b at t...> wrote:
> Thank you for providing the list with more information
> on Professor Pritsak's book. It is a great pity that
> the rest of the volumes have not so far been published,
> but it is my hope that they will be eventually.
>
> Professor Pritsak also wrote about the Eruli and how part
> of that people remigrated to Scandinavia. I think what he
> wrote about the Goths and the Eruli is of great interest in
> the approach to the Gothic question.



But you did heard that Pritsak is not an expert on the Goths nor the
Heruli, but relied on outdated literature for this part of his work,
didn't you?



>
> What I admire most in _The Origin of Rus_ is the profound
> analysis of the transmission of epic and mythic lays from
> the migration period to Old Norse literature and especially
> the importance of the Eruli in this transmission. But they were
> probably not the originators of the material, only transmitters.
> The originators were most likely the Goths.


What makes you think the that the originators of Old Nore literature
were the Goths?




>
> Yes, I remain unimpressed by the work of Wolfram and
> Heather, which doesn't mean that their works are
> of interest depicting one theory. The question of the
> origins of the Goths is a complex one and they have of
> course not provided the final answer. It is possible the
> answer cannot be found but there is much material and
> research pointing to a south Scandinavian origin. Much
> of this material has been provided on this list and as you mention
> the archives provide an excellent source for those who
> want to study the complexities of the enigma of the origin of the
> Goths.
>
> New aspects and angles appear all the time and it is
> of interest, I think, that listmembers are given the
> opportunity to make themselves familiar with a variation
> of theories. If one is believing that Wolfram and Heather
> are presenting the solution, there is of course no
> need for further information.


Unfortunately, you don't seem to accept any new aspect or angle, but
instead insist on your old literature. You made it clear to everybody
that there is no evidence in the world that could convince you that
your theories are wrong. Also, You can assume that the modern
authors, which you reject are aware of most of the writing of earlier
authors and have considered their findings carefully. We don't need
to repeat disputes that are long over and resolved, because you like
reading in old books, that is boring and a big burden to this list.

Dirk







------------------------ 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/