[gothic-l] Re: Tracing the Eruli

[Troels Brandt <trbrandt@post9.tele.dk>]

Hi Einar and Dirk

I do not intend to join your discussion, but please read the 
translated Procopius before you discuss – both of you: 

"For this reason the Eruli were no longer able to tarry in their 
ancestral homes, but departing from there as quickly as possible they 
kept moving forward, traversing the whole country which is beyound 
the Ister River, together with their wives and children. But when 
they reached a land where the Rogi dwelt of old, a people who had 
joined the Gothic host and gone to Italy, they settled in that place. 
But since they were pressed by famine, because they were in a barren 
land, they removed from there not long afterward, and came to a place 
close to the country of the Gepaedes. And at first the Gepeades 
permitted them to dwell there and be neighbours to them, since they 
came as suppliants. But afterwards for no good reason the Gepeades 
began to practise unholy deed upon them. For they violated their 
women and seized their cattle and other property, and abstained from 
no wickedness whatever, and finally began an unjust attack upon them. 
And the Eruli unable to bear all this any longer, crossed the Ister 
River and decided to live as neighbours to the Romans in that region"

...  Pages later in the Mierow translation ...

"When the Eruli, being defeated by the Lombards in the above-
mentioned battle, migrated from their ancestral homes, some of them, 
as has been told by me above, made their home in the country of 
Illyricum, but the rest were averse to crossing the Ister River, but 
settled at the very extremity of the world; at any rate, these men, 
led by many of the royal blood, traversed all the nations of the 
Sclaveni one after the other, and after next crossing a large tract 
of barren country, they came to the Varni, as they are called"


Remember that this was 40 years ago. The secretary of the general 
described the contemporary wars in details – but was never exact with 
events taking place long time before his own.

Procopius knew a lot of details about the Illyrian soldiers, but not 
about the past migration to Scandinavia. You can probably regard the 
Heruls escaping first from Moravia, then from Rugiland (that was 
where they starved because there were no one to plunder) and then 
from Dacia to be demoralized refugees when they knocked at the doors 
of the Romans, but you are not able to conclude their number 
hereunder where the northgoing Heruls left their kinsmen. Did this 
group really first go west and then back and far south along the 
Danube until they turned around once more and went on all the way to 
Thule. Why did they not find a place on their way between the Slavs 
and Varni if they were so weakened? The description of their 
departure is not strong enough to convince that Procopius really 
knew. He was unclear and the "picture" he used was maybe just 
symbolic in order to hide his own lacking knowledge. Therefore I 
GUESS they separated already in Moravia trying first the Moravian 
Gate against the Vistula, where they were surprised by so many 
westgoing groups of Slavs that they preferred to follow the western 
route through barren country instead – and guessing is what you are 
doing too.

Troels  





--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "Dr. Dirk Faltin <dirk at s...>" 
<dirk at s...> wrote:
> 
> > ####Hunnic form... etc. Were do you have this info from? As far 
as 
> I 
> > remember then Procopius states that the Heruli army was more 
> > numerous than the Langobards when they went to war, but they lost 
> > anyway. If I am remembering right, then how does that fit with 
> > the "Hunnic..etc"?#####
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Einar,
> 
> I strongly recommend you read the recent book by Walter Pohl, 
> called 'Die Voelkerwanderung', and his monograph-type publication 
> about 'Voelker an der Mittleren Donau' ( I can give you the full 
> reference if you like). This would safe me from reproducing the 
> research done by various scholars over several decades, and knowing 
> the nature of the Danube Heruls would probably be of great interest 
> to you too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > > 
> > 
> > And even because of losing a war and many of their 
> > > > warriors beeing slain then the tribal structure was still 
> > intact. 
> > > So 
> > > > intact that they could effectively split themselves up into 
two 
> > > > seperate tribes( in reality so) and there were still other 
> > groups 
> > > of 
> > > > Heruli that has to be accounted for. 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This is speculation. The split up may just as well be outward 
> > signs 
> > > that the tribal leadership structures had collapsed. Authority 
> was 
> > > weak, as would be expected from a group that was just chased 
away 
> > by 
> > > the Gepids.
> > 
> > ####  +++ No, it is not speculation. This migration could not 
have 
> > taken place without a well functioning tribal structure and 
> > sufficient resources######
> 
> 
> 
> We know from Procopius that they had just suffered famine and were 
> abused and attacked by the Gepids before asking Rome for shelter. 
If 
> they were still able to master a 1000 km migration to Thule, this 
> shows that they were desparate and few.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > > 
> > 
> > > That was because they were 
> > > > strong and numerous before the war with the Langobards. 
Without 
> > > > reasources and a relatively intact tribal structure, the 
> > migration 
> > > > to Scandinavia could not have happened. So simple is that.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > No, it is not so simple I am afraid. You presented a circular 
> > > argument. Procopius tells us that they were weak, but some of 
> them 
> > > migrated to Thule. You conclude that a migration to Thule can 
> only 
> > > have been conducted by a strong, well organised tribe, ergo 
> > Procopius 
> > > was wrong and the Heruls were strong. 
> > 
> > #### No, I never said they were "strong...etc" There are no 
> circular 
> > arguments. Read the above. See +++ ####
> > > 
> > > In reallity, you need the Heruls to be strong so that they can 
> > become 
> > > the elite of Scandinavia, the scholars and warriors of the time 
> > who 
> > > eventually would migrate to Iceland. Einar, you should not 
> rewrite 
> > > history to fit your theories, the weakness of which have been 
> > > displayed by Linda Richters.
> > > 
> > #####You must be joking. Politely I want to say that I feel that 
> > Linda has not presented any arguments bringing down my arguments. 
> > Nor showed any arguments supporting her hypothesis (the 
Icelanders 
> > being overwhelmingly Norwegians) .Why dont you join the 
discussion 
> > then and tell us which weaknesses?
> > Rewriting history? As you have a doctoral degree then it is 
amazing 
> > how often I have to explain this for you; there were no Heruli 
> > migrating to Iceland...etc-you should remember the rest. I was 
just 
> > explaining this (for you) a few days ago.####
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, I was not aware that you had abandon this idea of Heruls (or 
> their decendents) migrating to Iceland. Good move!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > > Ochus was killed around 548 AD. After that event a embassy 
was 
> > sent 
> > > > to Thule.. So there are at least 40 years between the Heruli 
> > > loosing 
> > > > the war and the return of Datius and the others from Thule. 
And 
> > it 
> > > > was obvious that the Heruli about 40 years after the war with 
> > the 
> > > > Langobards had safely established themselves in Scandinavia. 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Again, you are speculating. All that is said by Procopius is 
that 
> > > Heruls were still living in Thule. Procopius says no word 
> > > about 'safely established'. In fact, he mentiones no kings or 
> > > independent leadership. The fact that the Thule Heruls vanish 
> from 
> > > history, with no source outside Procopius ever mentioning them 
> the 
> > > assumption should be that they were integrated and absorbed.
> > 
> > #### Oh, who said they were not integrated? They were safely 
> > established and integrated into the local population and their 
> > aristocratic families also. #####
> > > 
> > > So 
> > > > they traveled relatively slowly and send a messenger to 
> announce 
> > > > their arrival within a few days.
> > > > Then Suartuas wanted to make war with the group from Thule 
and 
> > > > destroy them.  So he demanded the Heruli to destroy the men 
> from 
> > > > Thule and took of in the direction of the Thule group with 
the 
> > > > intention of destroying them(or subjugating them) .
> > > > Then Procopius says( VI,xv. 27-36) " But when the two forces 
> > were 
> > > > one day´s journey distant from each other....."   
> > > > So Procopius says: TWO FORCES. It would be interesting to 
know 
> > if 
> > > > this can be translated in any different way. But such it is 
> > > > translated from Greek by Dewing. A force ready for battle 
does 
> > not 
> > > > have to be a big force but such a description in the context 
of 
> > > this 
> > > > text indicates that here we are talking about a reasonably 
big 
> > > > groups of warriors ready for battle. No just a few tired 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
travellers.                                                          
> > > >        
> > > > Using common sense, reading the whole chapter about this 
> > > > events,seeing things in perspective and evaluating these 
events 
> > in 
> > > a 
> > > > neutral manner, then it is safe to assume that this entourage 
> > > coming 
> > > > with Datius and Aordus was an impressive one as Procopius 
says.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The forces, mentioned by Procopius included those of the local 
> > > Herulic supporter on both sides. To assume from the use of the 
> > > word 'force' that we are dealing with large scale armies is 
pure 
> > > speculation. 
> > 
> > #### Are you trying to waste my time or make a fool out of 
> > yourself??? Just a few sentences above, I talk of "a reasonably 
big 
> > groups of warriors". In your brain, then I am saying; large scale 
> > armies?? Interesting.########
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > > Taking everything into account that Procopius writes about 
this 
> > > > events shows that beyond any reasonable doubt. His writings 
> > about 
> > > > TWO FORCES should  expel all doubts in our minds about that 
> > > matter.. 
> > > > Procopius account of these events are coherent,detailed, 
sound 
> > and 
> > > > not contradictory.
> > > > We can safely make a guess that this entourage could easily 
> have 
> > > > included about 200-300 men.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > So even more than Procopius says?
> > 
> > #### Maybe, as I can also evaluate from your info. In the 
beginning 
> > of the letter#####
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No you did not understand the argument in the first place, I'm 
afraid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Nobles,warriors and other men with 
> > > > different duties.
> > > > Already in 529 AD a group of at least 1500-3000 Heruli 
> > mercenaries 
> > > > were in the service of Justinian. According to Procopius then 
> > 3000 
> > > > Herulian warriors joined the Gepids when Aordus was killed, 
> > while 
> > > > 500 Heruli joined the Byzantines sent by Justinian in order 
to 
> > help 
> > > > the Lombardian king Audoin. And here we are just talking 
about 
> > > > warriors. These warriors had sisters,younger 
> > > > brothers,parents,relatives,grandparents. There is no reason 
to 
> > > > belief that the Heruli in Scandinavia were less numerous than 
> > the 
> > > > Illyrian Heruli.###########
> > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > *****GK: But we also have many examples of large
> > > > > > groups migrating with women and children at various
> > > > > > moments in the history of Germanic populations. There
> > > > > > is no reason to assume this would not be the case with
> > > > > > those Heruli who trekked northward.*****  
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, but those groups had massive armies, which were able 
to 
> > > > plunder 
> > > > > at will. Procopius tells us that the Heruls were keen to 
> avoid 
> > > any 
> > > > > conflict on their move to Thule. 
> > > > 
> > > > ##### No, he says no such thing, but naturally they avoided 
> > > > conflict. Would you think it was wise to make war with kids 
and 
> > > > women around? And why make war for no good reasons? Why would 
> > they 
> > > > have made war with nations on their way?###
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Because if a mass migration of tens-of thousands of people 
would 
> > move 
> > > through your country you would not be very happy if you were 
one 
> > of 
> > > the locals who feared for their harvests etc. In other words 
they 
> > > would have tried to keep you out by force.
> > 
> > ####### Whom are you answering, me or George? Just a few days ago 
I 
> > came with the hypothesis, they could have been 3-8 thousands. You 
> > have maybe forgotten, that I have stated clearly, that I dont 
agree 
> > with George here. And said it more than once.####
> > > 
> > > > Some scholars have argued that they 
> > > > > took an eastern route to avoid running into Thuringians and 
> > > > Saxons. 
> > > > > Procopius tells us that they 'suffered no harm from the 
> > Danes'. 
> > > > > Hence, these people were unable to take what they needed by 
> > force.
> > > > 
> > > > ### This is unvalid argumentation. Drawing such conclusions 
> does 
> > > not 
> > > > really hold water. Probably the Dani were the most powerful 
> > tribes 
> > > > in Scandinavia, and doubtlessly Procopius were aware of that. 
> > And 
> > > > you forget he uses plural. The Dani was an umbrella term over 
> > many 
> > > > tribes.#####
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The passage is clear, the migrating Heruls were happy not to 
> > suffer 
> > > more harm, after beeing defeated by Langobards, starving in 
> > Rugiland, 
> > > suffering rape abuse and attacks by Gepids, the Heruls were 
lucky 
> > not 
> > > to suffer any more. Remember, Procopius writes that the 
> > Heruls 'were 
> > > unable to take any more suffering' when they decided to move to 
> > > Illyria and Thule.
> > > 
> > 
> > ###### What ever you want me to remember then your argument I was 
> > responding to is still invalid. I think actually that as you 
repeat 
> > the rape,abuse part in almost every letter I should remember.####
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Einar, in the previous letter you stated that my interpretation 
that 
> the Heruls who had fled from the Gepids were refugees was 'an 
> incredible statement'. Hence, you clearly had forgotten all about 
> Procopius' report about 'abuse, rape and famine'. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > > Like the Gepids of 523AD they needed substantial own 
> resources 
> > to 
> > > > > support themselves. The Ostrogoths gave the Gepids 3 Solidi 
> > for 
> > > > > household unit. If the 'tens of thousands' of Heruls needed 
a 
> > > > > similar amount for a much longer destance they must have 
been 
> > > > > extremely rich indeed, which of course does not square with 
> > the 
> > > > fact 
> > > > > that they were starving refugees.
> > > > 
> > > > ##### Starving refugees! This is an incredible statement. You 
> > are 
> > > > like implying that the Heruli migrating to Thule were 
starving 
> > > > refugees?. Use you common sense.#########
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > No Einar, please read Procopius carefully. The Heruls fled from 
> > the 
> > > Langobards, starved in Rugiland, were abused, robbed, raped and 
> > > attacked by the Gepids. 'Unable to take any more abuse' says 
> > > Procopius, they decided to move again. If you don't regard this 
> as 
> > a 
> > > report about suffering refugees, I cannot help you.  
> > 
> > #### Okay then. This is your final statement then. You really 
think 
> > that the Heruli migrating to Thule were starving refugees. Which 
of 
> > course is a totally unfounded hypothesis, but that is fine with 
> me###
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think this is hopeless indeed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > Curiously, Procopius, who 
> > > > > was very interested and who claimed to be informed directly 
> > from 
> > > > > people who had come from their and from Heruls makes no 
> > > mentioning 
> > > > > that the Heruls had once come from there, or that the Thule 
> > > Heruls 
> > > > > were returning to ancient homelands. If he had held such a 
> > view 
> > > he 
> > > > > would most likely have mentioned it. The fact that he 
doesn't 
> > > > shows 
> > > > > that he thought that the Heruls did not come from Thule 
> > > originally.
> > > > 
> > > > ##### Oh, was not Procopius keen to show that northern 
> > barbarians 
> > > > could return to Thule! but now the Heruli were not from 
> there??. 
> > > > This is a rather interesting logic and reminds me of the 
logic 
> > of 
> > > > Goffart who seems to be able to know somehow what Procopius 
was 
> > > > THINKING!#####
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Your cynisism is not helpful Einar. You may regard yourself a 
> > greater 
> > > expert on late antique sources than Goffart, but you should 
> > support 
> > > your arguments. 
> > 
> > ##### Naturally I respect Goffarts knowledge, but 
> > he has like all others to bring forth arguments for his claims 
> > (regarding the Heruli) ####
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe sometimes 'all others' are right and the maverick theory is 
> wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > Goffart and others state that the origin of all 
> > > northern barbarians from Thule/Scandza was a topic of that 
time. 
> > Yet, 
> > > the fact, that Procopius, who will certainly have believed that 
> > all 
> > > barbarians came from there at one stage finds no confirmation 
> from 
> > > his own sources for such an origin. Had his sources confirmed 
> this 
> > he 
> > > would clearly have mentioned it. 
> > 
> > #### I dont think you have the slightest idea of  what 
> > Procopius "will certainly have believed" As the Heruli were multi-
> > ethnic it is futile to speculate of their exact origins. Some of 
> the 
> > Moravian Meruli might have been able to trace their ancestry to 
> > Scandinavia, others not######
> 
> 
> 
> That is speculation. This cannot be surpported by the sources. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > > But there were "settlements" (confirmed by
> > > > > > both Procopius and Jordanes) for nearly two
> > > > > > generations, there was independence, and then a
> > > > > > catastrophic war with the Dani, the "best of the
> > > > > > northerners".******
> > > > > >
> > > > > Again, the 'Dani driving out Heruls' sentence may refer to 
a 
> > > > period 
> > > > > around 500 before the supposed arrival of Heruls in Thule. 
It 
> > was 
> > > > in 
> > > > > my view included for contemporary political reasons and 
does 
> > not 
> > > > > reflect real events. 
> > > > 
> > > > ### What contemporary political reasons would that be???? 
#####
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > At the time, the court of Ravenna was busy setting up a network 
> of 
> > > allied states in the north. With many Heruls still living in 
> > Italy, 
> > > it was politically opportune to demonstrate a common origin of 
> > Goths 
> > > and Heruls to strengthen those ties and especially placating 
the 
> > > Roman senatorial elites. 
> > 
> > #### Yes, but you did not answer my question. What political 
> reasons 
> > for making up a story that the Heruli in Scandinavia were 
expelled 
> > by the Dani?? Were the Heruli or the Dani involved in the 
> > contemporary politics of Ravenna! Of course not.####
> 
> 
> 
> Of course yes, the Heruls were part of Theoderic's system of 
> alliances. Giving them a common origin from Scandza like the Goths, 
> would make such an alliance more acceptable for the Roman 
senatorial 
> elites, who had suffered under Heruls in the preceeding decades.  
> 
> 
> Dirk


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/