[gothic-l] Re: Some alternative musings on Gothic origins

[faltin2001]

--- In gothic-l at y..., george knysh <gknysh at y...> wrote:
> Nothing cast in stone. Just some ideas running through
> my mind.
>
> 1.None of our early sources (Strabo, Pliny, Tacitus,
> Ptolemy) confirm that the Goths occupied the south
> shoreline of the Baltic as an "ethnic" or "tribal"
> community in the period 0-150 AD.Explicitly or
> implicitly these sources point to a residency further
> inland. An identification of Oksywie or Early Wielbark
> (phases A-B) with the original Goths thus becomes
> highly problematic, and perhaps illusory.
>
> 2.Strabo, Pliny, and Tacitus all place the Goths WEST
> of the Vistula. Only Ptolemy locates them east of the
> river. But Ptolemy is almost certainly garbled here,
> since he has the "Fenni" and "Phrungundiones"
> (Burgundians)even further south/east than the Goths.
> What is probably accurate is Ptolemy's relative
> positioning of the Goths with respect to ethna of the
> Germanic-Sarmatian borderland: the Goths are south of
> the Venedi,southeast of the Rugi, and east of the
> Burgundians (as "Burguntae" rather than
> "Phrungundiones").
>
> 3. Pliny considers his Goths to be a Germanic people
> of the Vandalic subgroup. This is in line with what we
> know of the pre-Wielbark status of Wolongiewicz's
> "phase C" in the basins of the Middle Warta and Notec
> rr. The area was Przeworsk territory prior to this
> phase C expansion of Wielbark (plus Scandinavian
> elements) from the 2nd half of the 1rst c. AD.
>
> 4. It would therefore appear that a somewhat complex
> ethno-political process was underway in northern
> Poland after ca. 50 AD. The original Vandalic Goths
> were progressively absorbed into the Wielbark culture
> where they co-existed with the descendants of early
> Wielbark (Venedi) and with Scandinavian newcomers. The
> resulting community of peoples retained the name
> "Goths" as an umbrella appellative. One can speculate
> about the reasons for this: perhaps the Scandinavian
> intruders (the new ruling class acc. to our later
> sources) were also called "Goths" or variants thereof;
> or possibly the powerful kingship of the community had
> its territorial center among the Goths of the west
> rather than among the Venedi of the north and east.
> And all this already before phases D-F.
>
> 4. Obviously this is a very rough sketch which
> requires polishing and emendation. The key point is
> that if the original Goths were a Vandalic people of
> the Przeworsk culture,then we must ask under what
> conditions the term "Goth" became associated with
> them.
>
> 5. In any case the Goths enter history as a component
> of the Marcoman Empire of King Maroboduus, which was
> constituted some time before 18 AD.
>
> Discussion?
>
>

Hello George,

that is certainly an interesting thought.
Rolf Hachmann (1970), also analysed the written sources of the frist
centuries and also concluded that the early Goths did not live at the
coast of the Baltic Sea, but further inlands. Other tribes that are
also believed to be constituent parts of the Wielbark culture like
the Rugi and Lemovii (I think) are specifically mentioned to have
occupied the coast, while the Goths lived somewhere further south at
the Vistula river.

A location of the earliest Goths further inlands at the Vistula might
also be supported by the fact (as you said) that they had contacts
with the Marcomanni. The fact that the Marcomannic prince Catwalda
fled to the Goths might indicate dynastic links or at least
presuppose some familiarity. Note that the names Catwalda and
Maroboduus are actually Celtic.

I don't see the necessity that the early Goths have to be carriers of
the Przeworsk culture, who are only later drawn into the Wielbark
culture. Firstly, there is appartently no archaeological evidence
that a Przeworsk group was incorporated into the Wielbark culture in
the first century AD or BC. Secondly, the early Goths might have been
dominated by or dependent of the Vandals or Vandalic groups, which
does not necessitate that the Goths shared the same material culture.

To come back to the connection with the Marcomanni: I think that the
custom of inhumation instead of cremation was initiated by the Celts.
Inhumation graves are sometimes called Heimstetten graves after a
place near modern Munich in the territory of the Vindelici Celts. The
contact that the early Goths had with the Marcomanni and their
seemingly Celtic or Celtised elites may have led to the adoption of
inhumations in the first century BC. My theory would be that at the
same time the Goths would have adopted the concept of warrior-
kingships (reiks) and warrior following (Gefolgschaften) from the
Marcomanni and their Celticised elites. This 'innovation' might have
allowed them to break free from Vandalic domination and to gain
supremacy among the other groups within the Wielbark culture.

cheers,
Dirk








------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Check Email & Transfer files - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/NxtVhB/3XkDAA/_ZuFAA/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/