[gothic-l] Re: Accepting Elias Wessens Conclusion

[faltin2001]

--- In gothic-l at y..., george knysh <gknysh at y...> wrote:
>
> --- faltin2001 <dirk at s...> wrote:
> > --- In gothic-l at y..., "Bertil Haggman"
>
> > > RLK theories are based on the fact that in the 4th
> > century AD
> > > the Regnum Ostrogotorum stretched from the Baltic
> > Sea
> > > to the Black Sea.
> >
> >
> >(D) I think it is important to fill this high-flying
> > term 'regnum
> > Ostrogotorum' with some flesh. It likely meant that
> > a 'bunch of
> > Gothic (not Ostrogothic) thugs' appeared in these
> > areas from time to
> > time to extort tributes.
>
> ******GK: I confess to being extremely sceptical about
> "Hermanaric's Empire". The account in Jordanes
> (derived presumably from Cassiodorus and Ablabius) is
> full of inconsistencies and improbabilities, and reads
> like the sort of thing that might have been concocted
> in Ostrogothic Italy for the edification of
> Theodoric's court. Hermanaric was presented as the
> successor of Geberic, and if we focus on 345-375 AD as
> the outside dates of his reign (usually ca. 350-370 is
> preferred), supposedly did his empire-building between
> the ages of 80 and 110. Pompously described as "The
> Golden Scythian" by the "maiores" (C+A) Jordanes drew
> upon, he allegedly began by conquering "many warlike
> northern peoples". The list seems to be of populations
> from Karelia to the Middle Volga, and likely
> represents trading interests of early Scandinavian
> merchants, nothing more. This part is about as real as
> the contention at the end of Jordanes' account that
> Hermanaric dominated "all the nations of Scythia and
> Germania". It's as if these adulators used Attila as a
> model for H., though they preferred the classical
> analog ("Alexander the Great"). The only specific item
> (apart from the story of the Rosomoni)which seems
> plausible is the contention that Hermanaric defeated
> the Heruli, though their localization at the mouth of
> the Don is probably an anachronism (archaeologists
> have proved that a "Chernyakhiv" group existed here
> only in the period 425-450, probably moved there by
> the Huns.) The Aestii are almost certainly a tack on,
> but it is probable that Hermanaric dominated some
> Slavs (at least those which were contributors to the
> Chernyakhiv culture). All in all, what Ammianus
> Marcellinus writes about this is infinitely preferable
> to Jordanes. Hermanaric was a powerful Gothic King,
> ruler of an important complex of peoples, but he was
> certainly no Attila, and no Alexander.



Hello George,

that was exactly what I was trying to convey with my casual remark
earlier. Clearly, Cassiodorus must have been interested in glorifying
the Gothic past to make a Gothic king more acceptable to Roman
senators. Thus in this process geneologies became longer, histories
started earlier, and the number of peoples domintated was inflated.
At the same time embarrising facts like Ostrgothic submission and
cooperation with the Huns are omitted. The only surprising thing is
that people today are still being fooled by that.



The
> geographical boundaries of his "uberes pagos" are to
> be sought roughly: east of the Dnister, south of the
> Pripet marshes, north of the Crimean mountains and
> east of the Donetz river. *******


I notice that this excludes all of the Baltic Sea coast as far down
as southern Belorus, from which I assume that the 'myth' that
Scandinavian kings were subordinate to the Gothic king really is a
myth.

cheers,
Dirk



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Flexibility and Freedom - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/9WCYWA/5XkDAA/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/