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

[faltin2001]

--- In gothic-l at y..., "einarbirg" <einarbirg at y...> wrote:
> --- In gothic-l at y..., "Oskar Andersson" <o.andersson at g...> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > although not adressed to me personally...
> > 
> > *snip*
> > 
> > > > Once again, East Scandinavians have nothing to do with East 
> > > Germanic 
> > > > people.
> > > 
> > >   Hæ Dirk.  Would you then call the Heruli going to 
Scandinavia; 
> > > North Germanic people?? If so, then the Ostrogoths were North 
> > > Germanic people too??
> > 
> > Einar, what do you base such an opinion on? We lately had the 
> discussion 
> > on this very list that we really can't establish an ethnogenesis 
of 
> the Ostrogoths 
> > until just prior to the conquest of Italy under Theodoric in 
> 488/89, and there's 
> > no way of connecting that one to Scandinavia! Go check the 
archive 
> for more information! 
> > This very question is of crucial importance as many an author 
seems 
> to be referring 
> > to Visi/Ostro prior to their real ethnogeneses.
> > Look especially for Andreas Schwarcz posts on POLITICAL 
> ethnogenesis rather than 
> > a "biological one"!
> 
>   Einar; Hæ Oskar..I think you misunderstand me.I was not 
expressing 
> my opinion but asking Dirk a question.  Are you saying that the 
> Heruli and Ostrogoths are not classified as East Germanic people? I 
> was not connecting the Ostrogoths to Scandinavia. Just saying that 
> part of the Heruli who were East Germanic people seem to have 
> (according to Procopius) settled among East Scandinavian people. It 
> is rather obvious that the migration was to an area populated by 
East 
> Scandinavians but not to Norway. With this I am answering Dirks 
claim 
> that East Scandinavians had nothing to do with East Scandinavian 
> people.  






Hi Einar,

when I wrote that East Scandinavians had nothing to do with East 
Germanic I meant of course in the sense of the  'ethnic' and 
linguistic distinction of Germanic people in North, West and East 
Germans, not with respect to cultural or commercial contacts.



                                                             
> We have historical sources about this migration though some 
> scholars 
> have made it their mission to discredit that information.



Nobody has made it his or her mission to descredit this source. 
Scholars like A. Cameron or W. Goffart and others have pointed to 
inaccuracies, exaggerations, and mistakes in the source which is a 
valuable contribution to our understanding of this period.





> They have 
> not proved Procopius was wrong,manipulating or lying about that  
> matter.



To prove anything beyond doubt is often impossible in these matters. 
There is also no proof that Procopius was accurate in this passage 
either. In many instances Procopius's shortcoming as a writer are 
obvious, in this case there are only indications. Textual analysis 
reveals that Procopius' writing about the Heruls was not balanced and 
matter of fact, but influenced by a strong dislike coupled with 
ethnographic stereo-types. 





> > Einar, would you please put forth the names of the scholars 
> advancing this theory, except 
> > Tore and Troels? I am interested in studying their works for a 
more 
> complete appreciation 
> > of th matter! Moreover, there seems to be no scholar specialised 
in 
> the history of Heruls... or 
> > am I wrong? From where do you draw this inference from?
> 
>   Einar; There might be no scholars advancing or promoting the 
theory 
> but if scholars do normally accept that Procopius was right about 
the 
> migration then they must too accept that the Heruli settled in the 
> place they migrated too. Is that not obvious? 


No, please see my earlier answer to this claim. 

Also, can I ask you where exactly Procopius said this group of Heruls 
migrated to? Yes, he speaks about 'ultima Thule' and 'the end of the 
world'. This place is usually identified with a number of localities 
ranging from Iceland over the Orkneys, Shetlands to Norway. But then 
he locates them in an area which would point to East Scandinavia. 
There was obviously some unclearity about this and I would suggest 
that he combined his desire to express that these barbarians went 'to 
the end of the earth' with some ethnographic knowledge that he had 
obtained from other sources. Yet, from these descriptions people jump 
to debates about specific Swedish provinces were they think they 
identify Herulic settlement places, build hitheto unheard of Herulic 
genologies and build even an entire early history of Sweden on it. It 
is the latter attempts which I criticise. 

Overall, what is interesting is that this (in historical terms) very 
insignificant episode keeps coming up again and again, and is debated 
from very immovable positions. I think it is partly the relative 
insignificance of the episode which causes many scholars not to 
challenge this bit (plus what Cameron called the desire not to forego 
other information). Yet for some people, this supposed Herulic 
migration seems to be of greatest importance and value, causing the 
investment of large amounts of investigatory energy and fierce 
opposition to anybody who dares to challenge it. 

cheers,
Dirk











------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
FREE COLLEGE MONEY
CLICK HERE to search
600,000 scholarships!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/vf6MrB/4m7CAA/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/