Emigration av (some) Goths

[akoddsson]

Hi Tom and all.

> Names can stick around after peoples move on (or those left behind
> transform into something else). 

Sure. The problem, however, is that not everyone moves on. Some stay 
behind. Gotland, for instance, has been continuously populated, and 
the island can only hold so many folk, at least as a traditional 
agricultural society (one man one farm). Logically, folk who didn't 
inherit farms would be inclined to seek other employment. 

> Just looking at the peoples of the Volkerwanderung, we also find 
Rugen as the homeland of the Rugi and Bornholm as the Burgundian 
homeland. 

Yes, but there are also modern Rugi and Burgungians, and these land 
have also been continually populated. I, for instance, work with 
several folk from Rogaland, who mostly claim to be descendants of 
Rugi as far back as they can trace their descent. I found this out 
after I asked. Thus, there certainly are Rugi, like there are Goths, 
even if times have changed. 

> Other names left behind include the several Burgundies  in France 
and the "Homeland of the Boii", a Celtic people, giving the name to 
a Slavic area (bohemia) and a German area (Bavaria) as well as a 
name in French for a group ultimately from India (the 
Romany "Bohemians"). 

Yes. 

> "Frank" meant a Germanic people now but "French" means a romance 
speaker.  And so on.

Yes, but France is, admittedly, a rather large nation. Perhaps one 
should look at provincial populations more closely, as several 
groups in France would seem to exist as smaller cultural groupings, 
common language aside (Basks an exception here). Consider, for 
instance, the Gaelic population of Galitia (wrong spelling, no 
doubt ;) From what I understand, they still speak a kind of Gaelic. 
I discovered on a radio program that they also play some fierce and 
beautiful Gaelic music, closely related to Irish. There are likely 
numerous other links. Thus, I don't believe that cultures simply 
disappear due to emigration by some members. 

> Similarity of names may indicate a historic link but doesn't prove 
it (if one reads Jordanes literally, one would assume that the 
Sarmatian "Getae" were Goths rather than just similarly named; if 
he'd known about them, I'm sure Jordanes would have tossed in the 
Guti, 'barbarian' raiders of ancient Mesopotamia).

But a simple survey of major European 'tribal' names would seem to 
suggest, emigration aside, that most groups still live in areas 
where they once lived. Obviously, folk move, but those that remain 
often have descendants as well, as so on.  

> As the names of bavarians and French suggest, there probably is a
hoistoric link between Gotland and the Goths but it may be much less
straight forward.

Probably complicated, like most issues involving human populations, 
I agree. However, as there is still a Gotland and a Gothic folk, I 
think it important that cultural sensitivity be shown. No one will 
deny the existance of England, simply because Americans, Canadians, 
Australians and others speak English, or because academics deeming 
English highly important wish to locate its origins in Canada, for 
instance. That would be absurd. Likewise, while Goths would seem to 
be highly important to certain Germanic academics (no doubt largely 
due to a fluke attestation of a portion of their language via a 
Bible translation), this hardly gives them the right to fleece the 
Gotlanders of their culture and history. A fluke is a fluke, not 
something planned. Earlier Gotlanders could hardly have known that 
Goths would become such an important and hotly debated topic in the 
future, raising by extention questions and controversial debate on 
the topic ad infinitum. Gotlanders are, after all, regular folk and, 
as history would have it, Goths. Not that it matters, or should even 
matter. Denying it, I think, could only be based on romantic ideas, 
whereby an historical folk cannot be allowed to exist in any form in 
modern times, especially not an historical folk deemed important by 
academics. Thus, if anything, we academics probably owe Gotlanders 
an apology for dragging their culture and history through the mud 
for personal gain and academic agendas. 

> I'm inclined to leave it in the "Unprovable speculation" category

What I would say is that, like other populations, Goths experienced 
emigration. How many left and how many stayed is not the point. The 
point is that while academia may be highly interested in the remains 
of their 4th century language, or in the historical activities of 
later continental Goths, this hardly gives us the right to simply 
remove Gotland and its Goths from the map or erase them from the 
history books. Folks change, but they don't thereby loose membership 
in their culture. Thus, I will grant the Gotlanders the same rights 
as other folks to define their own culture and see it as they will, 
without too much interference from the rest of us. Stating things 
like 'you are not a Goth' or 'this list has nothing to do with your 
culture' to living Goths would be like telling an Irish person that 
he need no apply to a list about ancient Irish or Celts, as he is 
neither Irish nor Celtic. Therefore, I simply offer these words in 
the hope that academics, and others, interested in Goths, show the 
living the same respect as the dead. 

Sincerely, 
Konrad

> Tom
> 
> 
> akoddsson wrote:
> >     Hi Wilhelm and Tore.
> >
> >  > 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.
> >
> >  Two things seem obvious to me in connection with the Goth's 
homelend.
> >  The first is that there is a land, Gotland, that is called the 
land of
> >  the Goths. As far back as sources go, the land appears to have 
born
> >  this name. As parallels we have Sweden (the land of the Swedes),
> >  Ireland (the land of the Irish), and likely thousands of other 
such
> >  names from throughout the world and in numerous languages. This 
makes
> >  me wonder why Goths should be such an exception, emigration 
aside. The
> >  second is that as one specializing mostly in Germanic 
linguistics, and
> >  as one who has studied both Gothic and Gotlandic, it seems 
painfully
> >  obvious that Gotlandic, while absorbed into North Germanic, 
deviates
> >  from it, especially phonologically but also in other matters, 
in ways
> >  which agree with Gothic. As a non-specialist in Gothic history, 
and as
> >  a layman in Gothodemia, I still see no reason why the Goths 
should not
> >  have a homeland in Gotland, where Goths still live, emigration 
aside,
> >  and even if their original territory was wider, as it likely 
was.
> >
> >  Sincerely,
> >  Konrad
> >
> >
>






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/