Emigration av Goths

[Wilhelm Otto]

Hi Tore,

Goth’s heritage.

I have been pondering the answer I got from you 06 02 05. In that message
you refer to the same book as you referred to in an earlier answer to mine
06 01 29. I have given several leads to several threads to questions to be
pursued in this discussion. I have tried several approaches. But there is,
whatever I say, only one answer – Kaliff’s book. Thus Kaliff’s book contains
all the answers to the enigma of the Goth’s heritage! Still, Kaliff does not
answer how to bridge the gap between the archaeological findings and the
investigated culture. And how could he do that?

 

Your answer, that the Goths came from Gotland, is remarkable, to say the
least. Most scientists acknowledge that they don’t know from where the Goths
came. What we know is that that they surface in history a couple of
centuries AD in the area of the Donahue or north of the Black Sea. This is
what we think we know. That is what we have as a working hypothesis. Then
just to point at Kaliff’s book and say that there is your answers, is that
good science? I do not think so! Do not forget that there is a need for a
scientific discussion, a weighing of pros and cons in order to search for a
better answer than that we have? There is always a better answer. 

 

There is a danger in answering such a question with archaeology and a couple
of authors from a time when the truth had other claims then it does to
today. Peter Heather shows the difficulties with using archaeology as a
geographical positioner of a political force. On pages 15 and 16 he shows
two maps. One shows “Groups named in Tacitus’ Germania and their approximate
locations” and the other shows “Traditional archaeological cultures of the
earlier Roman Iron Age”. Pondering the two maps I figure that a negative
indication is in some cases fair. A certain culture is probably not
connected with a distant tribe if they do not have much in common, but a
positive identification seems very difficult. A searching process in this
manner, is it not the essence of the scientific culture which has given us
so much benefit and ultimately made this part of the world rich?

 

There is in our culture a dividing line between us who ask and those who
decree. And there is a dividing line between our itchingly curious learning
culture and those who know it all. There is a clash of cultures, in these
days seen every day on the telly, and we, who think ourselves as historians,
know that this is a long battle. The forces of ignorance and thus poverty
have through the centuries been pushed back. The battle is no longer bloody,
fought among the western countries. There, mostly, the battle is fought with
words of arguments and reason. But it is still a long battle we have in
front of us. And that battle is fought with asking questions.

 

And the frontline is there not only between us. It is in our own minds too.
At least is has to be in yours. You point out in a very good little book
about history from Gotland that Gotlands nearest point on the mainland is in
Curland and of a similarity of place names, duplicated in both places, both
in Curland and Gotland. I had thought that you would draw the conclusion
that a lot of people on Gotland descended from Curland. You did not. Great
people seldom derive from small islands, but rather the other way. Could you
just point to an exception? It would have been a very natural conclusion. It
would at least have been a natural conclusion to ponder and ultimately to
discuss. These similar place names could maybe have been dated. Thereby
their position in the development of Gotland could have been established.
And further there could maybe be analogies drawn from the importance of
Iceland. It is another island where property was claimed by fire as Tjelvar
did in Gotland. We could have gained some knowledge that way. Somebody else
could have done that too. So we all had come out of it better off. And so I
could go on.

 

It did not happen. But the essence of the scientific discussion is that
there is a process of persuasion; a sort of marketing of ideas if you got
any, and are prepared to give and take. Such discussion convinces. It makes
us believe that this or that is a clear cut case, or that the best questions
are not yet asked. You have at least convinced me that Gothic heritage is
not easily discussed. I can not see it as a matter of faith. I see it as a
yet unsolved historical problem.

Yours

Wilhelm

 


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/267 - Release Date: 2006-02-22
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






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/