[gothic-l] Re: Tracing the Eruli

[Dr. Dirk Faltin <dirk@smra.co.uk>]

> > 
> > 
> > We will likely never know, but there are hundreds of
> > reasons one 
> > could come up with
> Maybe the Varnians did not want
> > them?
> 
> *****GK: More likely the Varnians accepted the Eruli
> of Varnian origin. The rest then moved on.*****




George, we have absolutely no evidence that their where Eruli of 
Varinain origin or that the Varnians accepted any Eruli. I don't know 
where you got that from.





> 
>  Maybe they 
> > tried to settle there, but were expelled
> > (unknowingly to Procopius)?
> 
> *****GK: This is based on nothing at all.***** 



True. 




>  
> > Maybe, the Gautr had deliberately invited the Heruls
> > as mercenaries 
> > to fight against the Svear?
> 
> ****GK: This does not fit the better interpretation of
> the Eruli settling "next to" the Gauts. But then again
> perhaps some Eruli were of Gautish origin.****
> 


Perhaps they were, perhaps they where not, we don't know that, and 
that is exactly the point I was making. 






>  Maybe the Gautr had
> > provided them with 
> > the resources for the journey?
> 
> *****GK: Possible with respect to some of the Eruli. A
> side thought: perhaps the "Illyrian" Heruls suffered
> famine in Rugiland because most of the stocked
> supplies were taken by the groups which trekked
> northward.*****



You will admit that this is based on absolutely nothing either. My 
point is that most of what has been presented is speculative at best. 
The sources are simply too slim for deducting a more detailed history.




> 
>  Maybe they stayed
> > with their former 
> > allies the  Varni, and Procopius confused
> > placenames, as he did so 
> > often north of the Danube?
> 
> ******GK: What would the confusion consist in?*****



That is the problem with confused names, we never really know what 
was meant. At some stage Procopius was unclear whether there was one 
Brittain or two. If I remember correctly, there he relates one of the 
Britains to the island of Thule which is often interpreted as Iceland 
or Norway in this context. 







> 
>  Again, we will never
> > know, but whatever we 
> > make of it I cannot see how the report by Procopius
> > can be read as a 
> > mass migration of tens of thousands of well
> > organised Heruls.
> 
> *****GK: After further discussion the numbers at the
> start were reduced to ca. 20,000, with the further
> assumption that they diminished as the trek proceeded,
> so that only a few thousand may actually have settled
> "next to the Gauts", including many of "the royal
> blood". 


Well, this is now already much closer to my original suggestions. 
Note, also when you argued that Procopius would never have bothered 
writing about a 'puny' force of 500 to 1000 warriors. Yet, in the 
Gothic war he reports at length how a Gothic force of up to 1000 men 
held two cities and two Italian provinces. 

According to Thompson's (Romans and Barbarians) estimate, the Sueves 
of Spain numbered only 25,000 people in total at their greatest 
strength. There is nothing to suggest that the Heruls were as 
numerous as Goths, Alamanns or Vandals. There total number before 
509AD was probably comparable to that of the Suevic kingdom of Spain. 




The larger number ("Tens of thousands")was
> posited earlier on the basis of the second fantastic
> claim by Procopius, viz., that "most" of the initial
> Herulian contingent which crossed the Danube was
> subsequently slaughtered by the Romans.***** 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > This really, is a guess as you say yourself and as
> > such it lacks any 
> > foundation in the sources. I just hope you are not
> > using this guess 
> > for further analysis.
> 
> *****GK: You may not have noticed that Troels contends
> that you are also guessing. I agree with him, and feel
> that his guess has more substance than yours.***** 



Well I am content that you have greatly reduced your original 
estimate to 'a few thousand' Thule Heruls, which is roughly in line 
with my own estimate. Revising once view in light of better arguments 
is an honorable thing to do. 

Cheers
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/