[gothic-l] Greutung, Terving, Rus

[M. Carver]

griut- (*griuts or griut) in Gothic means grit, sand rather than stone (which is stains). this could be sand-sized or somewhat coarser or larger than dirt or sand grains. Sand or gravel or grit, because of its nature, is usually only found in a restricted set of geological phenomena: plains, strands, dunes, fairly flat areas of mass wasting or deposition.

Matt?aius


«œ“œ* ˜Ã¡ƒ
Õ
“ wrote:

> I didn't expect my questions regarding history of ancient Russia and origins of the ethnonym Rus to provoke a "ping-pong play". I mean the lively dialog between Francisc Czobor and George Knysh.
>
> First of all I have to thank Francisc for his explanation of Greutung and Terving. The explanation looks exhaustive and persuasive but - it is inadequate. Let's start from the result. The result is that Greutungs were "dwellers of the stony plains" meaning Ukrainian Steppes (I guess, more exactly "plains along the northern coast of the Black Sea" should be referred). But where do plains come in? With Francisc's explanation, only stones (from *greut) are of concern. Francisc, did you ever see Ukrainian Steppes along the northern coast of the Black Sea? I did. A lot of plains and none of stones! Well, these are only emotions. More essential are the following questions. Whence do we know the word "Greutung"? To which time does the first reference relate? What is its original source? Is this source actually Germanic (e.g. not a reference in a Roman text)? The same of Terving. Why Jordan does not know Greutungs and Tervings? Sure, you may consider me as a bore. I don't mind, but all these
> questions must be answered if we really want to find truth.
>
> My position on origins of the ethnonym Rus was stated in brief in the previous message. And I'd like to stress once more that I'm researching Gothic origins of the ethnonym - not Etruscan, nor Scandinavian, nor Alanic. (By the way, why George decided rosomoni by Jordan were Alanic? The same story with the same personages is represented in Hamdir Saga but as if from "another side", and this "another side" is explicitly Scandinavian!)
>
> Continuing polemics with George, I'd like to correct his obviously erroneous affirmation:
>
> "The first state ("knyazhenie") on contemporary Russian territory was that of the Slovenes (in the area of later Novgorod), and this is clearly stated in the Primary Chronicle".
>
> The first known state on contemporary Russian territory was Bospor Kingdom (since VI century B.C.). The second known state was Hermanaric's Empire (by Jordan) in IV c. A.D. Then there were Western Turkic Khanate, Bulgar Khanate, Khazar Khanate, Hungar Khanate, and so on and so forth. Of course, it's only a joke. Not to mention that all of them weren't "knyazhenie".
>
> As a matter of fact, history of formation of Russian state remains obscure. Even Russian historians don't take seriously at present the so-called Primary Chronicle referred to by George. It is worthy of trust not more than Scandinavian sagas. The first "knyazhenie" reliably proved by narrative sources and archaeological data was Kiev's Rus' at the end of X century ruled by Vladimir I (St Vladimir).
>
> Also Vladimir (but not a governor)
>
>
> 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/


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Posters and Prints @ Art.com with state-of-the-art Custom Framing!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/eB6_FD/h3AFAA/_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/