"Victovaloke" (was: Re: Name of the Goths)

Mon Aug 7 11:02:02 UTC 2006

Dear D. Ciurchea

Sorry for the words I used, but I don't like argumentation built on 
errors.
I repeat once again: there is no "Valoke" there.
There is written "victovaloké", what in Hungarian means "of the 
Victovals", thus a genitive plural form.
For your better understanding, I will analyse it now for you:
Victoval (tribe name) + -ok (plural suffix) + -é (genitive suffix).
To extract from here a word "Valoke" and to speculate on it is thus 
obviously an enormous error.
And who are the Victovals? (in Latin: Victovali, in Hugarian: 
Victovalok, where -ok is a  plural suffix, like the Latin -i). They 
are generally considered an eastern Germanic tribe, their name being 
spelled also, in different sources, as Victoali, Victobali, 
Victophali, etc.
As I already mentioned in a previous message, they are mentioned by 
Roman authors like Eutropius (Breviarium ab urbe condita, Book VIII: 
http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/eutropius8.html) and Paulus Diaconus
(Historia Romana, Book VII: 
http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/pauldeacon/histrom8.shtml).
If you make a Google search using the keyword "Victoali" 
or "Victophali" or "Victovali", you will find a lot about them.
Regarding the Hungarian etymology for "Tauti", this concerns the 
modern place names, not Jordanes' "Tautis", which obviously could not 
be derived from Hungarian (and you should know that I hate those 
Hungarians that would try, violating both science and common sense, 
to make everything Hungarian; but this is valid also for the Romanian 
equivalent too...)
BTW: I searched through Jordanes' "Getica", both in Latin 
(http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/iordanes1.html) and in English 
translation 
(http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/Courses/texts/jordgeti.html), 
but I didn't find any "Tautis". Where did you get it from? Or it is 
your invention? (I could expect this
)

Now I return to a former message of you (no. 9073 of Aug. 3, 2006):

<< Let me explain the names by using the thracian connection:

Thaurisind = Taurus sunt -I am a Bull ( both like in Latin)
Taurismund = Taurus mânz - The colt of the Bull (Taurus like in
Latin, mânz=colt laike in Dacian)
Malasuentha=Mala sunta - The saint Mala - Sunta means saint

Please note that Jordannes clearly specifies that "gepidae and gets
are related" (XVII);

In thracian the suffix -ic denotes a diminutive(conserved in
Bulgarian : Balc-ic Romanian: Bas-ica, mam-ica, tat-ic and Turk:
ishl-ic). (Small Balc=Balcic. Small Theodosie becomes Theodosic.

Now, the monk in charge of manuscript copy observed the peculiar
shape of S and assumed it is greek Rho and thus Theodosic became
Theodoric. >> [end of quote]

I hope that these are just jokes, or did you mean it seriously?
Theodoric (as appears in Jordanes) or Theoderic (in other sources) is 
mentioned in too many sources in order to suppose that his name is 
due to a singular missreading.
For instance, a gold medallion of Theodoric the Great, discovered at 
Sinigaglia, Italy in the 19th century, is inscribed "REX THEODERICVS 
PIVS PRINCIS", with clear roman letters, there is obviously R, 
nothing ressembling to S; likewise, on a brick with the emblem of 
Theodoric is clearly written "THEODERIC" (see these at: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodoric_the_Great). And he was not the 
only to bear this name: the name was born also by 2 Visigothic kings 
and (in the form Theuderic) by 4 Frankish kings.
Another argument against your missreading theory:
Theodoric the Great was such an hero for the Germanic world, that his 
figure entered soon in the oral tradition of other Germanic peoples 
(I underline: oral tradition, where missreading by a certain monk is 
excluded). And he appears as Diotrich (modern German form: Dietrich) 
in the Niebelungenlied and other Middle High German heroic poetry, 
and as Thjodrek in the Old Norse/Old Icelandic sagas. Everywhere 
with "R", not with "S"!!
The second part of his name, -ric (from Gothic reiks "ruler, lord, 
prince") is very frequent in names of Gothic leaders/kings, such as 
Ermanaric, Athanaric, Alaric, Athalaric, Euric, Roderic, etc.
The first part of the name Theodo- or Theode- (from Gothic thiuda-
 "people, nation") also appears in other Gothic names, as in that of 
Theodoric's father Theodemir (Jordanes: Thiudimer; German: Dietmar: 
Old Norse: Thjodmar).
"-suentha" in feminine names like Amalasuentha, Mathesuentha (in 
Jordanes) has nothing to do with "saint": it is the Gothic adjective 
swintha, the feminine form of swinths "strong, powerful".
Regarding Jordanes' specification that "gepidae and gets are related" 
(Getae Gepidasque sint parentes), this means only that the Gepidae 
are related to the Goths. It is obvious for everybody that Jordanes 
used the words Getae and Gothi interchangeably, starting from the 
phonetic ressemblance of the two words and therefore mixing the 
histories of two different peoples. This is excusable and 
understandable for the 6th century, but not for the 21st century, I 
think!
You should know that some years ago two fellows from India showed up 
on this list, trying to convince us all that the Goths, the Gets, the 
Jutes (who named the Jutland paeninsula) and all others with similar 
sounding names are nothing but Jats (an Indian ethnic group or 
caste). But, believe me, even their argumentation looked more 
serious, more scientific-like, than yours.
Regarding the article indicated by you 
(http://www.gandirea.ro/linguistic_history_errors.php), please see 
the comments of  David Klitz and Konrad Oddsson, to which I subscribe 
100%.
Let me take only one sentence:
<< Showing clearly that there was no Gothic literary language, i.e. a 
normed lan¬guage, having a definite, system of rules and conventions, 
Wulfila could not trans¬late the Bible in Gothic and, in fact, he 
translated it in "Wulfila's language", a lan¬guage unknown up to that 
moment and never repeated since. >>
This assertion is a monument of stupidity (or, even worse, of  
intentional distortion of the reality). The very same language 
appears also in Skeireins and in the well-known Gothic minor texts 
(deeds of Naples and Arezzo, Vienna manuscript, Gothic calendar 
fragments) and is also quoted as a _spoken_ language in "De conviviis 
barbaris" ("Inter eils Goticum scapiamatziaiadrincan non audet 
quisquam dignos educere versus.")
It would be much more to add, but I think it is enough for now.

Francisc

--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "dciurchea" <dciurchea at ...> wrote:
>
> Dear Francisc,
> Thank you for reading the indicated link. Now the question : what 
> tribe is this ? Why Valoke is not spelled ? Why german ? 
> 
> "In conclusion, all the reasonings about "Victo Valoke - The Romans 
> vainquished the Wallachians" are just aberrations caused by reading 
> a Hungarian text without knowing the language.". 
> 
> Sorry, my geography, interpretation and reading was correct. No 
> conclusions, mister, please.
> 
> I believe I have pointed out the precarity of the data concerning 
> the presence of Germans in Transylvania in 168 AD and the 
> unreliability of the Hungarian interpretations on archeological 
> finds in Transylvania. 
> 
> Why are these guys mistyfing data and inventing german tribes for 
> every event which actually does not regard or involve germans at 
> all ? :):)
> 
> I mostly love your ethymology of "Tauti" of Jordannes from 
Hungarian.
> 
> Concerning the stream of the Romanian linguists, there is no 
> established line to rely on. There is no God in science anyway.
> Please refer for a good article on that at:
> http://www.gandirea.ro/linguistic_history_errors.php
>

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/