Thuringians = Tervingian Goths

Sun Aug 21 18:23:43 UTC 2005

The main questions I would have regarding this theory are:
-- why wouldn't anyone 400-600 have called the Thuringians "Goths"?  They
were allied to Theodoric's italian kingdom and generally appear as
themselves but no mention is made of Northern Goths.  the Gothic name at
this time would be far more prestigious and I would assume that it would
be much vaunted.
-- wouldn't this involve a major linguistic shift from East Germanic?  Is
there any evidence of this?

Tom

faltin2001 wrote:
>     Hello all,
>
>  I read the study „Stamm und Reich der frühen Thüringer nach den
>  Schriftquellen" (i.e. Folk/tribe and realm of the early Thuringians
>  according to historical sources) by Dr. Heike Grahn-Hoek,  in
>  Zeitschrift des Vereins für Thüringische Geschichte, Vol. 56 (2002).
>  The study comprises 87 pages in small print. It is extremely well
>  sourced and argued to the highest academic standards. As indicated by
>  the title, the author relies exclusively on historical sources and in
>  fact explicitly excludes archaeological evidence to avoid circular
>  arguments. As far as I can see, her study was well received by other
>  historians (e.g. H. Castritius in RGA).
>
>  The argument of key interest in my view centres on the origin of the
>  Thuringians. The author explains that the most common theory suggests
>  that the name was derived from an older tribal name Hermun-d u r e n.
>  However, she adds that this explanation has always been doubted by
>  linguists. Thus, the author re-examines the various name forms
>  provided in the earliest sources. Based on Malchus a Greek source of
>  the 5th cent. who provided the Greek form The-ou-r-ingoi (in Latin
>  The-u-r-ingi)  she argues that this name may be derived from The-r-u-
>  ingi the name of the Gothic Tervingi through a simple switch of ou/u
>  and r. She states that there are other examples in antique sources
>  where such an `u - r switch' occurred.
>
>  The author states that the time frame for the emergence of
>  Theuringoi/Thuringians and the disappearance of Theruingi/Tervingi
>  around 400 AD matches perfectly. The Theuringi are first mentioned in
>  400AD (Vegetius), but the source implies that at this time they were
>  already very well known throughout the empire. Thus, the
>  identification of Theuringi with Theruingi would fill a gap in the
>  sources.
>
>  Next, the author moves to the main part of her examination, the study
>  of historical sources in order to see whether a link between
>  Theuringi/Thuringians and Theruingi/Tervingians can be postulated. In
>  shortest possible terms, she takes the events surrounding Athanaric's
>  Tervingi as the starting point. Faced with the Hunnic onslaught, in
>  the 370s the Tervingi were beset by a crisis with a pro-Roman, pro-
>  Christian faction led by Fritigern which sought settlements within
>  the Roman empire and a pagan anti-Roman faction led by the Athanaric.
>  Athanaric had at one stage vowed never to set food on Roman soil.
>  Yet, for whatever reason he was later compelled to seek refuge with a
>  small following in Constantinopel. His part of the Tervingi was taken
>  over by `proximorum factione' (ie. relatives), who according to
>  Marcellinus Comes sought refuge "far away in lands (domicilium
>  remotum) unknown to the Huns". The author's argumentation here is
>  extremely detailed and suggest that these Tervingi were located
>  further north than often believed at that time.
>
>  Next, the author discusses the campaign of Radagaisus in 405/06. She
>  explains that his attribution to Greutungi (Ostrogoths) or Tervingi
>  (Visigoths) is uncertain. Since he is described as a pagan in
>  contrast to the Christian Tervingi under Alaric some scholars argue
>  that he must have been a Greutungian Goths. However, the sources call
>  him simply a rex (basileus) Gothorum, i.e. a king of the Goths.
>  However, Radagaisus is not listed among the ancestors of the
>  Ostrogothic Amals. Thus, other scholars argue that Radagaisus was a
>  Tervingian and possibly even the one who succeeded Athanaric. Thos
>  who believe that he as a Tervingian successor of Athanaric usual
>  place him in the so called Caucaland, i.e. the Carpathian region.
>  Yet, most interestingly, Zosimos provides evidence for the
>  geographical origin of Radagaisus by stating that he had come from
>  the lands between Danube and Rhine. This is exactly the description
>  for the geographical location of the Thuringian kingdom and it would
>  make no sense if he had started out in the Carpathian mountain
>  region.
>
>  The author points out that the name Radagais appears later in the
>  Thuringian/Warnian royal family with a prince Radagis. The component
>  Rada- is found in royal Thuringian names like Rade-gundis (two
>  princesses) and a 7th century Thuringian duke/king Radaulf. The `–
>  gais `component of Radagais is used again in the name of the
>  Thuringian prince Arta-gais/Arta – chis.
>
>  As mentioned earlier, the author deliberately excluded archaeological
>  evidence in order to avoid circular argumentation. One a footnote in
>  her study refers to supportive archaeology. However, the
>  archaeological evidence available already is in my view a key support
>  for the theory that Theuringi/Thuringians are identical with
>  Theruingi/Tervingian Goths. Berthold Schmidt has shown already in the
>  1980s and 1990s that substantial groups of carriers of the
>  Cheryhakovsk/Sintana-de-Mures culture (which is associated with the
>  Goths) arrived in middle Germany and settled at the centre of the
>  later Thuringian kingdom. These groups are known under the technical
>  terms Grossbadegaster and Niemburger groups. They arrived in middle
>  Germany in the 370/380s just at the time when Athanaric's Tervingi
>  disappear from the sources. Following Grahn-Hoek's argument these
>  would have been the Athanaric-Tervingi probably under the leadership
>  of Radagais.
>
>  Overall, H. Grahn-Hoek's study is extremely well argued and provides
>  a wealth of information. I think it is particularly important not
>  only for its contribution to Thuringian history and in particular the
>  ethnic/political origin of this people, but also because of the
>  contribution to Gothic history. It now seems likely that besides the
>  various creations of historically important Gothic kingdom on the
>  territory of the Roman empire, there was also one historically
>  important Gothic kingdom founded outside the Roman empire `
remotum
>  ab omni notia barbarorum
' which, in line with Zosimos, was located
>  between Danube and the Rhine centring on an area that carries its
>  name to this day.
>
>  Cheers
>  Dirk
>
>
>
>
>
>

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
<font face=arial size=-1><a href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12h722kjp/M=362335.6886444.7839734.2575449/D=groups/S=1705297328:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1124751433/A=2894362/R=0/SIG=138c78jl6/*http://www.networkforgood.org/topics/arts_culture/?source=YAHOO&cmpgn=GRP&RTP=http://groups.yahoo.com/">What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good</a>.</font>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>. 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gothic-l/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    gothic-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/