[gothic-l] Digest Number 650

Wed Oct 9 23:34:10 UTC 2002

>  Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2002 04:14:47 -0000
>    From: "konrad_oddsson" <konrad_oddsson at yahoo.com>
> Dear Konrad,

You wrote:

> Greetings my fellow students!

...
> I am as yet undecided in these matters. There are certainly parallel
> forms in a number of alphabets. Given that the "viking" age Goths in
> Scandinavia attributed the origin of the runes to Óðinn/Wóðins, I
> think it highly likely that their migrant cousins in the south did
> likewise. Nevertheless, religion and alphabetic history are two
> different things. Given the distribution and period of the extant
> inscriptions in the older form of the futhark, however, it seems
> highly likely that some migrating Scandinavian group/groups had
> something to do with the alphabet´s adoption. The fact that runic
> inscriptions later became a phenomenon almost exclusively peculiar
> to Scandinavia proper also suggests that the older alphabet was
> somehow closely connected to one or more Scandinavian groups abroad.
> The alphabet could also have originated in Scandinavia. Such an
> origination would, however, suggest that some group/groups from
> abroad travelled to Scandinavia for trade purposes. Given close ties
> between Scandinavians and their descendants abroad, such traders
> might well have been every bit as Gothic as the relatives back home.
> What are your thoughts in these matters, my fellow students?
>
> Regards,
> Konrad.
I can indeed agree with you that this is a possibility however hard to prove.

>    From: "faltin2001" <dirk at smra.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: Turkish Runes/Etruscan Runes and Skandza-merchants
>
> --- In gothic-l at y..., "konrad_oddsson" <konrad_oddsson at y...> wrote:
>
>> Greetings my fellow students!
>>

>> Given the very close phonological relationship between old Gothic
>> and its younger Scandinavian descendants,

>
> The East Germanic language of Gothic has no younger Scandinavian
> descendants. Have a look at the O. Dahl's book 'The Origin of the
> Scandinavian languages'. Dahl shows that Gothic is not closer to any
> Scandinavian language than it is to all other Germanic languages.

In Dirks opinion, yes. Wessén among else thinks diffrent.

> What are 'viking age' Goths in Scandinavia. Are you talking about
> north Germanic Gauts? These are completely different people!

We discusssed this before. Hachmann for one agrees the Gauts were also
Goths. Same goes for professor Th. Andersson and for that sake Svennung.
Andersson says they  were all Gothic folks  and so I say in my
dissertation too. Different  folks in a sense but definitely related in
namegiving and most sure having been in continuing contact. Cf the very
sharp comments of George Knysch holding the  same position as myself.

>> Scandinavia attributed the origin of the runes to Óðinn/Wóðins, I
>> think it highly likely that their migrant cousins in the south did
>> likewise.
> >
> There is a recent discussion with one of the leading experts on
> Gothic history over on the Germanic list. From this you can learn
> that the Gauts had no migrant cousins in form of East Germanic Goths
> in the south. Also, a casual reading of some of the standard works on
> Gothic history may help you to get a clearer view on the difference
> between North Germanic Gauts and East Germanic Goths. (e.g. P.
> Heather, H. Wolfram, W. Pohl etc. )

As Tore has shown  Pohl does not definitely deny a connection and nor
does Wolfram - on the contrary. Wolfram was one of my best contacts when
writing my paper.

> Nevertheless, religion and alphabetic history are two
>
>> different things. Given the distribution and period of the extant
>> inscriptions in the older form of the futhark, however, it seems
>> highly likely that some migrating Scandinavian group/groups had
>> something to do with the alphabet´s adoption. The fact that runic
>> inscriptions later became a phenomenon almost exclusively peculiar
>> to Scandinavia proper also suggests that the older alphabet was
>> somehow closely connected to one or more Scandinavian groups abroad.
>> The alphabet could also have originated in Scandinavia.

  The younger could have originated there - yes - but the old seems to
have originated elsewhere but, as you say, Scandinavians might well have
been involved. The old runic coiné is the same everywhere with few
exeptions according to Makaev.

>
> The earliest runic inscriptions appear in southern Denmark and
> northern Germany.

Indeed

> Such an origination would, however, suggest that some group/groups from
>> abroad travelled to Scandinavia for trade purposes. Given close
> > ties > >> between Scandinavians and their descendants abroad
> > > such traders > >> might well have been every bit as Gothic as the relatives back home.
>> What are your thoughts in these matters, my fellow students?

As stated above - yes.

> My thought is that you are in dire need of some reading on Gothic
> history, dated post 1970. Perhaps a few essays on
> Scandinavian 'Gothicsism' would also help.

Dear Dirk, you should read some still not translated papers of Swedish
universities and you should also give a closer regard to Anders Kaliff.
There is work  in prgress to publish some material with at least English
summaries - long ones - in a new magazine where I am involved. Within a
year I hope this can be realised but till then the material is the
property of the authors.

Best

Ingemar
-------------------------------------------------------------

Ingemar Nordgren, Ph.D.
Sjögrässtigen 15
SE-533 73 KÄLLBY
Sweden
46-510-541851

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Sell a Home for Top $
http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/MVfIAA/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/