[gothic-l] Re: Ravi and Sunny

Tue Jul 15 17:10:55 UTC 2003

--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "AElfric and Ursula" <amali at s...>
wrote:
> >neither me nor Francisc questioned your intentions. However, the
way
> >I see it, there are various ways to stifle debate on an online
> >discussion group. One is to post a relentless string of old and
> >utterly outdated quotes reflecting long outdated views and
outlandish
> >theories and ask or even demand others to comment on them. All this
> >is then justified by saying that you genuinely seek clarification
and
> >knowledge. Both Francisc and me did comment on your collection of
> >quotes, which, however, you did not respond to with discussion and
> >evidence, but with yet further quotes in the same vein and from
even
> >worse sources.
>
>
> Dirk, this is nonsense.  First of all, your claim that Ravi and
Sunny have
> "stifled" discussion is untrue, considering that there has been more
> discussion on this list since they began contributing than there
has been in
> quite some time.

I never said that Sunny or Ravi have stifled the discussion. I merely
pointed out that avoiding to provide any evidence, but only quotes
from outdated books does not make a discussion, instead this method
makes it a very tideous affair for those asked for information.

> Second, you are incorrect when you say that they have not
> responded to you with "evidence."  Everyone may have a different
idea of
> what valuable evidence is,

No, long outdated and superceeded quotes from books published in the
16th and 17th century are no evidence. Evidence are either original
historical or archeological sources, of which I have provided large
quantities throughout the existence of this list.

> but nevertheless, Sunny has cited many sources to
> support his perpsective,

Yes, but most of them are entirely irrelevant. In fact, he started
only to refer to more modern literature after I have pointed this
literture out to him.

>whereas you have cited none, as usual.

You should peruse the archives once in a while to get a better
perspective on things. I have cited all the standard works which
would easily have given Sunny the right answers to his comments about
links between Indian Jats and Goths. To evaluate whether or not this
strange list of Jat clan names, which Sunny provided claiming that
these were German names, contained genuine German names I don't need
a source. I can assess this on my own.

Your method
> seems not to be to cite evidence, but to find ways of devaluing
those who do
> no agree with you.

Since, you have not made many valuable contributions to this list as
long as I can remember, I find it difficult to evaluate your method.
Maybe I am misjudging this list a little. I thought we were trying to
stick to some sort of academic levels and standards of courtesy. Yet,
you are making false wholesale accusations. This is not what a list-
owner should do I think.

>
> >You give the impression that you deliberately avoid the modern
> >literature (or pick and choose quotes that suit your purpose)
because
> >you have already made up your mind that Goths are Indian Jats or
> >decended from Indian Jats, that probably most or all Germans are in
> >fact Indian Jats and at least some members of your own discussion
> >group seem to thing that most of European culture and history was
> >only made possible by Indian Jats (who are otherwise pratically
> >unknown to world history).
>
> Sunny and Ravi have been arguing not that the Goths were Jats, but
that the
> Jats and Goths are both descendents of the Getae.  Why have you
tried to
> twist their argument?

I have not. I have only simplified the view to make the point even
clearer that any debate about Goths beeing derived from Getae is
already completely out of place and long disproven. Do I need to cite
the standard literature again?

 Considering this, your accusation of them as
> "bordering on Nazism" was not only completely unfounded, but was
extremely
> rude, uncalled for, and unaceptable.

I did not make this accusation. This comment was refering to a text
by a different author which was copied from a different web-site and
which argued that William the Conquerer was an Indian Jat, because
William was related to the Jutes who were related to the Indian Jats
like the Goths were related to the Indian Jats. Hence, my comment
that this nonesense was borne out of national chauvinism or nazism
did not in any way refer to Ravi or Sunny. If you had read my comment
carefully, you would not have made your 'extremely rude and totally
uncalled for' accusation. However, I do admit that different
nationalities may have a different level of tolerance for this kind
of nationalistic nonsense. As a German I am perhaps more sensitive to
such claims of racial superiority and others can be more relaxed
about that.

> You give the impression that you do
> not wish to discuss anything with anyone who has a different
opinion than
> you.

That is not true. Ravi and Sunny posted quotes to this list asking
for comments. With hardly any response from other list members (you
included), I did comment on them pointing them to the modern
literature which had long superseeded their quotes and which would
have provided them with all the relevant evidence and argument. In
short, there is no point in discussing the relationship between the
Indian Jats and the Goths. Such a discussion can really not be held
in light of the evidence and argument we have at hand. At any rate,
such a discussion should only take place once both sides had a chance
to read the modern mainstream literature.

Dirk, you do have alot of valuable information to contribute to this
> list, which is a saving grace, but you do have a tendancy to be
> disrespectful and unreasonable in your dealings wih other
listmembers.
>
> I don't agree with Sunny and Ravi any more than you do, but at
least they
> deal with list members in a respectful and courteous way, whereas
you have
> recently also accused listmemebers who don't agree with you as "not
being in
> their right mind."  Tone it down a bit.

I would still argue that in light of all what we know about the Gothi
and Jutae, nobody in his right mind can still maintain the view that
these peoples have anything to do with an ethnic group in India (or
America or Africa as has also been claimed). This is a method of
speech, which underlines the impossibility of the proposition. If
somebody really felt insulted I ensure you that no insult was
intended.

>
> >All in all, we should not make too much of
> >this, but as a general recommendation, I think it would be nice if
> >you would provide evidence and argumentation for your views rather
> >than posting old quotes. That way we may even come to some form of
> >discussion, which after all is the purpose of a discussion list.
>
>
> The "old quotes," wrong though they may be, certainly are
fascinating.

I never questioned that. Yet, they should be discussed not as sources
of actual up-to date information but they belong to a discussion
about the history of scholarship on the Goths.

The
> widely varying claims that various authors have made for Gothic
origins and
> connections certainly could be a study in itself.

In fact, such studies already exist in large quantities.

I have not bothered to
> make a survey of the obsolete literature on the Goths, so I have
found
> Sunny's postings to be very educational about the earlier state of
Gothic
> studies.  Though I do not agree with Ravi and Sunny, I do admire
their
> spirit of open mindedness and their exploration of different
ideas.

I got the impression that they were not particularly open to the
basic premises of knowledge on the Goths, which by now are
established facts. In short, we know that the Goths were Germanic we
don't need to reestablish that again and again.

If
> there is only one right way to view things (Dirk's way) and
everyone who
> disagrees with Dirk is insane or a Nazi, as he claims, then what is
the
> point of discussion, or continued Gothic studies for that matter?

These are very unfair accusations. In fact they are unfounded and
false. I will certainly withdraw from this list and you can continue
debating Indian Jats and their relationship with the Goths.

I hope this has nothing to do with the grudge you once bore against
me when I dared to question the existence of elves or dwarfs or
something? Just kidding;-) but I clearly have a different view on
things and I do get frustrated with persistent claims against all
good evidence and knowledge. Nonetheless, if my responses were
somewhat harsh than only because of the introduction of what I (and
apparently Francisc) perceived as a 'racial superiority motive'. If
my harshness was unfounded  or seen as unfair I certainly
appologise.

>
> The latter perspective would no doubt fail to give a satisfactory
> explanation to this question: why is it that the Goths have
attributes that
> so many older authors have felt compelled to identify with so many
other
> disconnected cultures?  Goths have been identified as Germans,
> Scandinavians, Sarmatians, Lithuanians, Celts, Getae, Masagetae, and
> probably several others.  Such questions of origin do not surround
other
> Germanic tribes like Franks or Saxons the way it does the Goths.
Why is
> this so?

You will find an answer in H. Wolfram's 'Die Goten', but
particularly in R. Hachmann's 'Die Goten und Skandinavien'.

And why are there so many disconnected Indo-European tribes whose
> names have a *G*, vowel, *t*- formation?  Could it be that elements
of all
> of these cultures did at some point find their way into the Goths,
or could
> it be a reflection of some surviving common Indo-European tradition?
>
> At any rate, I look forward to the continued contributions of not
just those
> who maintain the status quo of the hour, but also Sunny and Ravi,
and all
> who would preffer not to see Gothic studies as a closed book about
which
> nothing different can ever be known.

Imagine if every mathematician would start his studies by questioning
the laws of linear algrebra we would not have much progress at all.

I leave you to your debate.

Dirk

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Free shipping on all inkjet cartridge & refill kit orders to US & Canada. Low prices up to 80% off. We have your brand: HP, Epson, Lexmark & more.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5510
http://us.click.yahoo.com/GHXcIA/n.WGAA/ySSFAA/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/