Kicking Roman Butt

[Chariovalda]

Professor Kortlandt has some other articles on his site ( http://www.kortlandt.nl/editions/ and http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/ ), but no "Gothic stuff" online alas.

One possible source of info is probably the Journal of Indo-European Studies, any decent university library must have a subscription...

Then there's our resident Nordic expert, Tim O'Neill / Thiudareiks, he's probably the one most qualified on this Board concerning ancient Germanic languages.

As for the Jats, thanks, but the supposed link between Jats and Goths is a very old idea that was dumped on the rubbish heap of history well over 100 years ago, if not much earlier. One of the first (maybe the first) to suggest a link between the Jats (a Northwestern Indian caste) and the Goths was Colonel James Todd in his "Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan", based on a superficial similarity in the name and certain similarities in the religion, mythology and customs of northern India and western Eurasia (Europe and the Middle East). Todd thought that the Goths had been some "super-people" ranging from northern Europe to central Asia from which many other peoples had sprung, including the European Goths and the North Indian Jats. He wasn't entirely wrong, some of his ideas clearly foreshadow later ideas concerning the Indo-Europeans and the Indo-Iranians. However, most of Todd's ideas are now quaint at best and discredited early 19th century (pseudo-) scholarship at worst (though his books are still a great source for the northwestern India of his own lifetime). Unfortunately, as with more ideas long discarded in modern western scholarship, they cling on elsewhere, usually in the service of one nationalism or another...

That doesn't mean there weren't any Iranian elements in the "Gothic" people - there was spatial and temporal overlap with presumably Iranian-speaking tribes, so there must have been a degree of mutual influencing and intermingling going on - but I'm extremely wary of sites and forums like this Jat one.

[hoplite14gr]

I learned some very interesting things here.
I read a magazine article last that I couldn´t verify its sources but I hope people in the forum might enlighten me.
The author was claiming the the Gotland penisula in Scandianvia was the origin of the Goths.
He claimed that Ulfila or Wulfila was half Goth he could understand Latin and Greek from his mother´s side and he used the structure of Greek and Latin grammar to give or modify the stracture of the Gothic and late Germanic dialects. OK I am no linguist so I am keen to hear from the experts.

As for the baltic elements claimed in the Gothic language can any body claim that there is any language that has not infusion of other linguistic elements?
Goths could have traveled as mercenary war bands allong various armies before they became known under their own name this might expalins the import of foreighn words.

There is a tendency to reject the 19th century works but my opinion is not that all these things must be rejected out of hand.

Kind regards

[P. Lilius Frugius Simius]

I learned some very interesting things here.
I read a magazine article last that I couldn´t verify its sources but I hope people in the forum might enlighten me.
The author was claiming the the Gotland penisula in Scandianvia was the origin of the Goths.
He claimed that Ulfila or Wulfila was half Goth he could understand Latin and Greek from his mother´s side and he used the structure of Greek and Latin grammar to give or modify the stracture of the Gothic and late Germanic dialects. OK I am no linguist so I am keen to hear from the experts.

It may have been that way, we don't have (m)any "barbarians'" texts of any extent before Ulfila's "gothic" bible, (and not so many until much later) so I don't think there's a lot of surprises in here. Even nowadays latin grammar keeps creeping here in there in English grammar discussions :-) )

Latin was a very important language, and it's influence was far and deep in most of the known world by then (and was transported with the invaders to their colonies throughtout the whole world, think Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, all of them had enormous colonies all over the world; the other big colonial empires being of germanic origins). Greek was as important for the East as latin was for the West. The Oikumene's franca lingua was greek, and I think it remained so until the Byzantine empire went down.

That latin and greek affected Ulfila's bible, and even barbarians' languages, is a given. What is probably much harder to determine now is the way it affected them and the extent of this "affection".

On the other hand, in the past, History walked hand by hand with civilization, and the best way of not being a barbarian was to have a long History for your People. As presented in the discussion above, there are many that suspect that Cassiodorus's, Iordanes's and even Tacitus's accounts on the Goths and Germanic tribes in general were far from the Real Thing.

The problem is that we only have disconnected cultural artifacts and scientific disciplines to try to get a coherent idea of what was really happening by then, and christian historians having a very clear "agenda" isn't helping. (By this I mean that, unlike Greek and pagan historians that gave us precise (if often exaggerated) militar accounts, which may give us lots of information about them, as military was omnipresent those days even more than it is today), christians despised pagans, and tended to speak pejoratively; and battle descriptions are less precise, if present. This is something I am starting to discover only now, that I am studying CE Ancient History for my novel; it is really frustrating.)

As for the baltic elements claimed in the Gothic language can any body claim that there is any language that has not infusion of other linguistic elements?

Goths could have traveled as mercenary war bands allong various armies before they became known under their own name this might expalins the import of foreighn words.

I think the claims are different. If we didn't know English language history, proper, we would have to conclude that it is a germanic language with strong connections to latin (very strong!).

However, History shows that English was actually not even officially talked (Old French was) by "englishmen" for a long time, and that latin influence is actually that people was probably talking, for that long time, a kind of "pidgin" between Old English and Old French to the point where, when English gained official status, the French influence was intervowed with the fabric of the language in a way it couldn't be removed.

If germanic and baltic roots are present close to 50/50 proportion, it means that the Goths (if Germanic) talked Baltic languages for a long time; if Baltics, they talked Germanic for a long time; or that Ulfila did wrote in an obscure pidgin himself (which is perfectly possible, for all we know: he didn't write for himself, but for a small Goth-related tribe, we lack enough information to make generalizations, that were done nevertheless).

As for the mercenary idea, it would explain several things, but whole populations cannot be mercenaries, and the Goths were entire populations. I cannot see a way to reconcile all this, but it's perfectly plausible.

There is a tendency to reject the 19th century works but my opinion is not that all these things must be rejected out of hand.

Kind regards

I'd say that XIX historians had more "agendas" than nowadays historians; they had less tools, and less methodologies. I dunno if they are being rejected out of hand, but they should be carefully evaluated. The liar of today may be the "historian closer to the events" for 1000 years from now historians (with our current technology, those would probably be the press and books, and blogs, if they survived that long, instead of individuals, though). Closer to the events than fourth millenium historians? sure, but not to be trusted, anyway.

thanks for your thoughts!

[hoplite14gr]

Thank you for your enlightening reply.
I was thinking of Gothic mercenaries in the same manner like the later Varangians.
Your are right the church has been accused some times with good reason of meddling with the facts or with holding info. (Just try to read an authentic byzantine codex from a monastery!!!)

On language and national origin you have strong points and I will add some info not directrly relating to ancient times:
In north Greece in the late 19th early 20th century was a population speaking a dialekt mixing greek-slavic even albanian words. The were used to aid the teritorial claims by both Bulgaria and Serbia against the Ottoman empire.
No one asked these folks though, who claimed to be Greek. They came in the history books as Grekomani For those who enter in the bountaries of the Greek state it seemed to be OK. For those who stayed in the other side of the border well it was just another unmentioned Balkan tragedy.
I mentioned that to show that some time ethincity and language do not coinside. I can mention Austrians and Germans - Spaniards and Latinamericans.
The problem with some ancient people is that we cannot meet them and ask them waht they thought of themselves!!!!
OK hope this is not too far fetched!

Kind regards

[P. Lilius Frugius Simius]

Khairete!

Thank you for your enlightening reply.
I was thinking of Gothic mercenaries in the same manner like the later Varangians.
Your are right the church has been accused some times with good reason of meddling with the facts or with holding info. (Just try to read an authentic byzantine codex from a monastery!!!)

I bet it is close to impossible . . .

On language and national origin you have strong points and I will add some info not directrly relating to ancient times:

[...]

I mentioned that to show that some time ethincity and language do not coinside. I can mention Austrians and Germans - Spaniards and Latinamericans.
The problem with some ancient people is that we cannot meet them and ask them waht they thought of themselves!!!!
OK hope this is not too far fetched!

Kind regards

Not far fetched at all, thanks for sharing it. History is not just ancient times, and we should learn from all the times, ancient, past and, specially, present (who said those not knowing their History are damned to repeat it?).

I agree with you wholeheartedly. In the late Roman Republic, the gauls in the "Province" (a.k.a. Provenza, i.e. Narbonensis) conducted themselves in a very roman way, wore tunica and even toga, and also spoke latin, as well as their national celtic languages. The gauls in the Gallia Comata (the "Longhaired Gauls", the Free Gaul) often depised them for not being "true" celts, but they considered themselves gauls, and did so for a good while.

Anyway, the problem we have at hand (with the Goths, but it can probably be extended to many other Barbarian populi) is that historical accounts are very untrustworthy, even roman historians are dubious in their veracity, and linguistic considerations can only hint us some answers while giving us a whole lot of questions. I wish we could find some clear archaeological site, easily dated, that connected the Tervingi (a.k.a Visigoths) that crossed the Danube circa 376CE with previous populi in Europe. It would help us clear a bit of mist, and even to throw some healthier hypothesis about their origins. Simply connecting with some archaeological certainty the hypothesized connections between Scythes, Sarmatians and Goths would go a long way into clarification, I think. Tools, and weapons, can explain a lot about the life way and culture of those populi and how they managed to do their deeds in a time Europe was having massive migrations due to the Huns' pressure towards the West.

Anyway, I will get my hand at Wolfram's book in a month or so, and then I'll be able to explore the issue more deeply. Maybe then I'll be able to do a crossfire between linguistic, hoplological, and historical data and throw some plausible hypothesis that would allow me to go ahead with my novel. I'll let real Science to those who have the knowledge, the time and the means to do real investigation, "good enough" will have to suffice for my novel :-) )

thanks a bunch!

[Chariovalda]

Ah, it's for a novel!

I think I can get most of Kortlandt's reference works in the nearby Utrecht University Library, but much of it is in German...is that a problem?

Might Manczak's articles be useful? I could look them up and copy them... 8) (almost all of the publications are present in Utrecht) though right now I don't have much time for that...

Ah, btw, one of the books quoted by Kortlandt is Dennis Howard Green's "Language and history in the early Germanic world" (look here: http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/c ... 0521794234 ).
It's available through Amazon, has a chapter on the goths, and doesn't cost and arm and a leg...(£21).

Another recent book is Ingemar Nordgren's "The Well Spring of the Goths: About the Gothic Peoples in the Nordic Countries and on the Continent. Based on his PhD thesis, about the same price as Green's book and even available as an E-book for a paltry $6 here:
http://www.diesel-ebooks.com/cgi-bin/item/059578450X

Couldn't find a review, but I suspect it makes a (partly corrective?) case for re-establishing some sort of Scandinavian link for the Goths.

I assume you're also aware of Peter Heather's "The Goths"?

Valete,

Chariovalda

[Felix]

However, History shows that English was actually not even officially talked (Old French was) by "englishmen" for a long time, and that latin influence is actually that people was probably talking, for that long time, a kind of "pidgin" between Old English and Old French to the point where, when English gained official status, the French influence was intervowed with the fabric of the language in a way it couldn't be removed.

If germanic and baltic roots are present close to 50/50 proportion, it means that the Goths (if Germanic) talked Baltic languages for a long time; if Baltics, they talked Germanic for a long time; or that Ulfila did wrote in an obscure pidgin himself (which is perfectly possible, for all we know: he didn't write for himself, but for a small Goth-related tribe, we lack enough information to make generalizations, that were done nevertheless).

Of the top of my head, another possibility is that the Goths were analogous to the English: a group of Germanic people with a assimilated Baltic ruling class, or vice versa. Actually, Anglo-Saxon continued in some "official" uses for quite a while. The Anglo-Saxon chronicle ends around 1154, at the end of Stephen's reign.

Which brings up a rhetorical question: what ethnicity do the English claim? In a remote, linguistic-historical way the English could be considered Germanic, but judging by modern culture and politics, the English might easily be considered to be their own ethnicity.

[P. Lilius Frugius Simius]

Ah, it's for a novel!

Yup!

I want to write a historical novel telling the Visigoths deeds from Adrianople to Ataulf's death, concentrating on Alaric's figure, but also in the whole dramma involved in all sides: Visigoths and other barbarian populi, Romans, and "collateral" damages, as Germanic invasions after the battle of the Frigidus river, onto Gallia and Hispania (gotta check if they also entered into Britannia during this timeframe). Ever read Hannibal, by Gisbert Haefs? That's my reference, and my ideal. I know, I know, but you gotta aspire to something, so it better is good, uh? ;-) )

OTOH, I have a truly hoplological, linguistical and historical, overall, interest. But only from the amateurishm, not from a scientific or professional POV.

And, lastly, I fimly believe in the educative value and potential of historical novelling/fiction. I want to move people, to entertain them, but also to make them feel the History, the forces, feelings and thoughts of our forefathers, and how they can, if they work on it, translate the teachins of our ancients to nowadays, most of it is still 100% valid and current... Thus, I want to be as precise and true as I can w/o getting crazy or paralyzed. So it's historical, hoplological, humane, but also educative interests...

I think I can get most of Kortlandt's reference works in the nearby Utrecht University Library, but much of it is in German...is that a problem?

Unfortunately, it is. I tried German years ago, either the method wasn't good, or the language generates too long words for my memory :-P -) )

Might Manczak's articles be useful? I could look them up and copy them... 8) (almost all of the publications are present in Utrecht) though right now I don't have much time for that...

I dunno, let me check what they are about, and I'll let you know. I really appreciate your offer, and there's no rush, I'm planning on start writing this year's NaNoWriMo, November 1st. The truth is, my budget is really bleeding, I've already invested well over €200 in books (and all those I have had to leave behind!!!!). For an amateur writer with just The Itch, but no hope of being publised in the next decade (at least), it's starting to become a problem (with my spouse :-P P it's hard to justify yet another book about the Visigoths or the Late Roman Empire! And don't start me talking about the 7 grammar and syntax and translation books of Latin (and more that I need to really learn it), and the modern and ancient books in latin that I have bought to practice, just to be able to get access to some ancient sources I annot get in english or spanish or french or italian (maybe I could if I travelled, dunno...)

I'd reimburse any expense, of course... (but let me first check them!)

Ah, btw, one of the books quoted by Kortlandt is Dennis Howard Green's "Language and history in the early Germanic world" (look here: http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/c ... 0521794234 ).
It's available through Amazon, has a chapter on the goths, and doesn't cost and arm and a leg...(£21).

Another recent book is Ingemar Nordgren's "The Well Spring of the Goths: About the Gothic Peoples in the Nordic Countries and on the Continent. Based on his PhD thesis, about the same price as Green's book and even available as an E-book for a paltry $6 here:
http://www.diesel-ebooks.com/cgi-bin/item/059578450X

Couldn't find a review, but I suspect it makes a (partly corrective?) case for re-establishing some sort of Scandinavian link for the Goths.

I'll have a look, thanks!

I assume you're also aware of Peter Heather's "The Goths"?

Valete,

Chariovalda

No, not yet, at least... I'll hunt for it (I have just got Wolfram's Goths book, I got a smaller one by him, in a different collection, but it's not the same, of course...)

thanks a lot!
ave atque vale!

PS- I hope nobody's in London, or has any relative/friend/... affected in London... Today I revived a small version of Madrid's March 11th... It was pretty hard by then (not affected, but almost!) and it hasn't been easier today. Kallisti!

[P. Lilius Frugius Simius]

avete!

Of the top of my head, another possibility is that the Goths were analogous to the English: a group of Germanic people with a assimilated Baltic ruling class, or vice versa. Actually, Anglo-Saxon continued in some "official" uses for quite a while. The Anglo-Saxon chronicle ends around 1154, at the end of Stephen's reign.

Interesting hypothesis... For example, we know that the Galinda and Lubava were Baltic populi bordering the Northeastern side of the Vistula, in old Prussia. They shared the river with the Veneti, Aestii, Gotones (Goths?) and probably with the Silingae and Vandals. Galas means 'boundary' in lithuanian, thus they were the "frontier guys". If (big "if") the Gotones are really the Goths, we can hypothesize that a) there must have been tradde, military and other kind of contact between them, b) maybe they all shared similarities, or even the same culture, either by fusion, or through cultural/military conquest. We know that the Galinda survived until, at least, 1200CE, and they were basically Prussian (Baltic) by then (Prussia was Baltic until well into the XVIII Century). The Goths, obviusly, moved, but were they really *that* different (Ulfila's text aside)? Interesting question... Sometimes I wish Science was passionless, but it's just out of frustration, I wouldn't stand a passionless Science (but I wouldn't mind a less political one, though)

Regarding the English, I dunno, because, nowadays, English is really spreaded out, and mixed. The language is even fragmentating (and joining again, with fractures, thanks to global communications)... pidgin? spanglish? british and american? (what about the aussies? :-) ) I see German or Dutch and English and Latin, and I (out of ignorance) could get to draw a mix-in between them... scary, indeed...

thank you very much for your insights!

[hoplite14gr]

Since we got on the Goths adventures and someone will be writng something that I find very intersting...
The following is from a posting of mine on the Subject ISKANDER under Greek milítary history that I started promted by Comerus

"The Age is late Roman-early Byzantine. The guys are Goths of the Opsikion Regiment (Heavy horsemen). They were initialy stationed in Thrace and quartered in Adrianoupolis. Some Vitalianos mixed them up in a coup de etat against emperor Anastasios . The regiment was exiled in the Asia Minor province that later became the Opsikion Theme. The ring leaders were exiled in Phokis in central Greece. The place was called Lidorikion. As additional punishment they were not supported by the town but they had to cultivate their own fields. They married Greek women and they were slowly hellenized. Prokopius talks of the Thracian Goth voukkelarioi of Velissarios at the campagn in Italy. At the time of Velissarios they were called Thracean Goths. The Opsikion troops died in a blaze of glory in Mantzikert 1071. Opsikioi in the Greek language of the time means distinguished!
Michael Glykas and Nikitas Xoniatis talk about the "Gothogrekoi" that put hell of a fight against the Bulgarians of Samouel in the 10th century. "
They were also refered as Optimates -elite.
Sorry I do not know Latin to verify the trnaslation.
My sources are the above mentioned scholars and the Papyrous-La Rousch encyclopedia. The word "Gothograikoi" apears on old Encyclopedia but all my net searches have been unsuccesful so far...

Also a colleague of mine who went to univercity in Northern Italy claims that there are still villages in the Penines in Italy that speak Ostrogothic!!!!!
He was a no noncence guy so I take him by his word.

I agree with Lilius that science should be less politicized but in all cultures legitimacy is based heavilly on the past. Sometimes archeological findings open cans of worms or some finding are not mentioned to avoid opening cans of worms. Linguistics are not a panakea either but they make you wonder about lots of things.

Kind regards
Stefanos

[Chariovalda]

Also a colleague of mine who went to univercity in Northern Italy claims that there are still villages in the Penines in Italy that speak Ostrogothic!!!!!
He was a no noncence guy so I take him by his word.

I suspect he was referring to the Cimbri, who are not descended from the Cimbri of old but from medieval German settlers.

Italian "Cimbri" have nothing to do with Rom (Gypsies). This is the self-denomination of little minorities scattered throughout Northern Italy and coming from Austria or Southern Bavaria (XII-XIV centuries): the major Cimbre communities are the ones of the 13 Communes ("13 Comuni") on the mounts over Verona, the 7 Communes ("7 Comuni") in the mpuntains N of Vicenza, and a few villages in the Provinces of Trento (Luserna), Belluno (Sappada/Ploden), Udine (Sauris and Timau). Their peculiar dialects - directly deriving from Middle German are still preserved in some of the villages.
Though there are general conventions of all the Cimbri, I don't know of any flag common to all of them. They use the flags of their single villages or confederations of communes (Verona and Vicenza). The name "Cimbri" has nothing to do with the Cimbri and Theutones defeated by Marius in North Germany in the first Century BC. It is, on the contrary, to be tied with modern German Zimmer (room < hut made of wood) or with English Timber (wood for construction). These Germanic peoples were called to Italy because they were good wood-cutters and carpenters and especially because they knew how to obtain coal from wood and therefore how to get the high temperatures that were needed for smelting metals. As a consequence when a North Italian Lord wanted to open a mine almost always called Cimbri settlers.
Alberto M. Mioni, 13 April 2000
They call themselves Tzimbar, and they speak a Germanic language called "Tauch". The modern version of the origin of this mysterious people could be this: in 1287 Bartolomeo della Scala, bishop of Verona asked some families of woodcutter, "tzimberer" in german, to work in a wide forest, Lessinia. So They settled in this area, the so-called "die Dreizehn Gemeinden/Tredici Comuni". The names of the "thirteen communes" are (tauch and italian names):
1- Kalwein (it: Badia Calavena)
2- Nuagankirchen (it: Bosco Chiesanuova)
3- Silva Hermanorum (it: Cerro Veronese)
4- ? (it: Erbezzo)
5- ? (it: Rover?)
6- San Moritz (it: San Mauro delle Saline)
7- Prugne and Ljetzan (it: Selva di Progno)
8- Vellje-Feld (it: Velo Veronese).
The last 5 are no more indipendent communes, but the italian administration included them in the previous ones. They are:
9- Kampsilvan
10- San Bortolo
11- Tavernole
12- Porrental
13- Azzarino.
All in Verona province, Veneto region.

Tzimbar also live in the area of "Die Sieben Gemeinden/Sette Comuni" in Vicenza province, Veneto region. The seven communes should be:
1- Schlage (it: Asiago) - now a beautiful touristic village -
2- ? (it: Gallio)
3- Robaan (it: Roana)
4- Canove (?)
5- Vallorch (?)
6- Pich (?)
7- Pian Osteria (?)

Other little Tzimber "islands" in North italy in the previous comment.

So, no Goths these (although I suppose their South German ancestors may have had some Gothic ancestors included in the Bajuwarian mix)

Source:
http://www.allstates-flag.com/fotw/flag ... r.html#cym

[hoplite14gr]

THANKS Chariovalda!!!!!!! By ATHENA (godess of wisedom) I love this forum!!!!
Very enlightening! Well your explanation seems more plausible than what my friend told me. I agree with you 99%.
I reserve the 1% because in south Italy, Greek speakers managed to maintain their Language up to now, so I think "Ostrogothic" villages are not impropable but your answer is so far the best I saw on the subject.
Thanks again ,
Kind regards

[Daniel S Peterson]

I was under the impression that Danish archaeolologists have generally acknowledged that the Cimbri and Teutones were from that region and that they have found evidence for a great migration that conforms to the Roman histories. That said, I would think they would be of Germannic, rather than Celtic origin. I think the Bog People by P.V.Glob states this.
That said, and considering the final fall of the Empire, we may have to conclude that the Germans, ultimately kicked the most Roman butt, and also "lived" to talk about it.
Dan

[FAVENTIANVS]

Could we include the Turks conquering Constantinople A.D. 1453? Or the overall Muslim conquests over the Byzantines since A.D. 632...

[Anonymous]

Then there's our resident Nordic expert, Tim O'Neill / Thiudareiks, he's probably the one most qualified on this Board concerning ancient Germanic languages.

I've neglected this board a bit lately, so I've only just stumbled across this discussion. Firstly, I'd seriously question any assessment that Gothic was 50/50 Germanic/Baltic. There are, of course, some clear parallels, since both are continguous Indo-European language families.

There is also some definite borrowing, though it is most likely to be (later) Germanic influence on the Baltic languages rather than the artefact of any early intermingling of Baltic peoples and proto-Gothic/Germanic speaking settlers. While the 'origins' of the Goths is still a vexed question, there is something of a consensus that an aristocratic elite established itself on the lower Vistula from Scandinavia, forming a cultic and/or tribal core which attracted or annexed local peoples. These locals may have included some proto-Baltic groups, but more likely consisted of Germanic speakers and some Celtic speakers.

The linguistic fact remains that Gothic is a substantially and recognisably Germanic in every way. The main non-Germanic elements in recorded Gothic are Greek and Latin - a result of Wulfilas having to use Greek and Latin words when there were simply no Gothic equivalents. Any Baltic substratum is faint at best and uncertain at worst. To say that Gothic was 50% Baltic is bizarrely incorrect. It's Germanic to its bootstraps.