+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Allies & Enemies of Rome (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics (/showthread.php?tid=21233)
Pages:
1
2
Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Nathan Ross - 08-17-2012
At the battle of Chrysopolis in 324, the contending Roman armies were each supported by barbarians: Alica and his Goths fighting for Licinius, and the Frank Bonitus and his men on Constantine's side.
These groups of barbarians came from different ends of the empire - but what would the differences between them (beyond language) have been? Do we know of any particular features that would distinguish a Frank from a Goth at this date?
How about other Germanic peoples? There's a note in Ammianus about Alemannic tribesmen dying their hair red - is this supported elsewhere? Would there be anything to distinguish a Saxon, say, from a Frisian, or a Burgundian from one of the Alemanni?
Re: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Flavivs Aetivs - 08-17-2012
Quote:At the battle of Chrysopolis in 324, the contending Roman armies were each supported by barbarians: Alica and his Goths fighting for Licinius, and the Frank Bonitus and his men on Constantine's side.
These groups of barbarians came from different ends of the empire - but what would the differences between them (beyond language) have been? Do we know of any particular features that would distinguish a Frank from a Goth at this date?
How about other Germanic peoples? There's a note in Ammianus about Alemannic tribesmen dying their hair red - is this supported elsewhere? Would there be anything to distinguish a Saxon, say, from a Frisian, or a Burgundian from one of the Alemanni?
Have you read Peter HEather's Empires and Barbarians? I think it provides some good examples of distinguishing between them. I think one was brooches and other decorative metallurgical items.
Also, If I'm correct the Franks didn't reach the capacity to Form Supertribe status until Chlodio (and then Chlodomar and stuff) in the 440s-460s. The goths, however, had already achieved that capacity, which can be evidenced by the Campaigns over the danube by Constantius II. (And of course their raiding accross the Black Sea around 258). Not 100% sure there so correct me if I'm wrong.
Another thing - The Frisians are recorded to have been allies of Rome since the 1st Century AD after they defeated a Roman Army in the area (Around AD 30) so it's likely they were heavily Romanized.
(I'm writing these things as they pop into my head) Another distinguishable thing about the Goths may have been that they were along the Amber Route, so it's likely they had Amber Decorations on their Equipment, while the Franks wouldn't have. I'm hypothesizing there so correct me if I'm wrong.
Also, considering the word Burgundy derives from Burgundian, I think there was something about the Burgundians that had to do with Burgundy Dies. That may be from a later Era though.
Re: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - john m roberts - 08-17-2012
Chlodio? They had rappers back then?
Re: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Nathan Ross - 08-20-2012
Quote:Have you read Peter HEather's Empires and Barbarians? I think it provides some good examples of distinguishing between them. I think one was brooches and other decorative metallurgical items.I haven't actually. From what I read about it, the book seems to concern itself more with post-Roman developments in the 5th-10th centuries. Is this not so?
Brooches might be a way of distinguishing these people, but I'm sure there must have been something more immediately apparent? :-?
Quote:Also, If I'm correct the Franks didn't reach the capacity to Form Supertribe status until Chlodio (and then Chlodomar and stuff) in the 440s-460s. The goths, however, had already achieved that capacity, which can be evidenced by the Campaigns over the danube by Constantius II. (And of course their raiding accross the Black Sea around 258)Although the 'Franks' themselves perhaps didn't see themselves as one people until much later, the Romans habitually did. There were some category confusions - were the Bructeri 'Franks' or not? Who were the 'Salii' before they moved to the seacoast? And so on.
But the Franks (or whatever they called themselves) were certainly able to mount massive and coherent attacks - they raided Spain by sea in the mid-late third century, and a group of them, resettled on the Black Sea, stole a fleet of ships and sailed them back to the Rhine! This was, I believe, shortly before the Goths emerged as a united people (although evidence for when this actually happened is a bit cloudy...)
Re: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Robert Vermaat - 08-21-2012
The Romans (and we as well) have a way to look at such groups as if they were one. They weren't. The 'supertribes' were not a tribe at all, but political confederations that no doubt waxed and waned. Look at Alaric and 'his Goths', who apparently weren't ethnically homogenous nor a fixed coalition at any one time. I'm not sure if Ammianus referred to an ancient custom or a contemporary one, either. I've read that the Franks had a distinctive hairdo, but if they already had that around the 5th c. or if it develeped later I can't tell.
Re: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Flavivs Aetivs - 08-23-2012
Quote:I haven't actually. From what I read about it, the book seems to concern itself more with post-Roman developments in the 5th-10th centuries. Is this not so?
It does focus a lot on that era, yes, but the first few chapters explain a lot about the migrations of the 3rd century, and onto the 4th century and how they tie together. It's basically a modern version of migration thery - without the ethenic cleansing and stuff of it's 19th century counterpart. The book basically says that as tribes moved, it was a matter of sgregation and intergration with small confederations or something.
It also gives some notable differences.
Re: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - starman2012 - 09-02-2012
Quote:But the Franks (or whatever they called themselves) were certainly able to mount massive and coherent attacks - they raided Spain by sea in the mid-late third century,
The Franks are supposed to have raided deep into Gaul and Spain c 257 CE, but hardly by sea; they had to reach Africa that way. :wink:
Quote:and a group of them, resettled on the Black Sea, stole a fleet of ships and sailed them back to the Rhine! This was, I believe, shortly before the Goths emerged as a united people (although evidence for when this actually happened is a bit cloudy...)
The incident with the stolen ships occurred during the reign of Probus IIRC, or well after the Goths first raided into Roman territory en masse c 250.
Re: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Nathan Ross - 09-03-2012
Quote:The Franks are supposed to have raided deep into Gaul and Spain c 257 CE, but hardly by sea; they had to reach Africa that way. :wink:
Haywood (Dark Age Naval Power) believes that the Franks raided the coasts of Spain and Lusitania across the Bay of Biscay, prior to their later land invasions. But the chronology and detail of events in the mid third century is hazy at best!
Quote:The incident with the stolen ships occurred during the reign of Probus IIRC, or well after the Goths first raided into Roman territory en masse c 250.
Yes, you're quite right - the 'great escape' from Pontus was c278-279. The Goths are first mentioned under that name in c269, but we can assume that they were the same people referred to under various other names in preceding decades.
Re: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - starman2012 - 09-03-2012
Quote:Haywood (Dark Age Naval Power) believes that the Franks raided the coasts of Spain and Lusitania across the Bay of Biscay, prior to their later land invasions.
Franks or Saxons? IIRC the latter are supposed to have begun attacking even settling in Britain in the third century. I suppose some might've raided farther.
Re: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Nathan Ross - 09-03-2012
Quote:Saxons... are supposed to have begun attacking even settling in Britain in the third century.
It's a bit uncertain, I think, quite when the Saxons first appeared. The earliest definite mention of them is mid 4th century - but, like the Goths, they were probably referred to by other names before this. Perhaps the 'Franks' mentioned in earlier literature were actually Saxons (or vice versa :? )
As for their attacking Britain, or not, I asked about this a while ago here:
Germanic Pirates and the Saxon Shore?
Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Marja - 09-03-2012
Quote:At the battle of Chrysopolis in 324, the contending Roman armies were each supported by barbarians: Alica and his Goths fighting for Licinius, and the Frank Bonitus and his men on Constantine's side.
These groups of barbarians came from different ends of the empire - but what would the differences between them (beyond language) have been? Do we know of any particular features that would distinguish a Frank from a Goth at this date?
How about other Germanic peoples? There's a note in Ammianus about Alemannic tribesmen dying their hair red - is this supported elsewhere? Would there be anything to distinguish a Saxon, say, from a Frisian, or a Burgundian from one of the Alemanni?
Language, cultic leagues, pottery types, burials, and doubtless economic considerations.
The Chernyakhov culture includes elements from many earlier cultures, and it's an open question just how it did so: Were there Gothic and non-Gothic areas sharing the same material culture? Was there a Gothic ruling class and non-Gothic subject classes? Was there a tendency to fusion and shared 'Gothicness' or exclusion and subject villages? I think there was a tendency towards fusion, because Wulfila himself was the descendent of captives from Asia Minor, but had a Gothic name and Gothic identity.
The Goths would have lived on the wooded steppe, some on the open steppe, and some in the Greek cities of the Black Sea. The Franks would have lived in mostly wooded areas. The Goths made wheel-made pottery and glass beads. The Franks traditionally buried important males with weapons, the Goths did not.
The Franks rarely used bows in war. The Strategikon is quite clear here. The Goths often used bows in war, as have other agricultural peoples on the edge of the steppe. The Franks were probably similar to the Alamanni in this regard, so we can contrast Ammianus accounts of the battles of Argentoratum and Hadrianopolis. Ammianus states that Valens was mortally wounded by a [presumably Gothic] arrow. Vegetius and Orosius also emphasize Gothic missiles, including arrows.
Re: Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Robert Vermaat - 09-06-2012
Quote:Franks or Saxons? IIRC the latter are supposed to have begun attacking even settling in Britain in the third century. I suppose some might've raided farther.I think 'Franks' was used as a generic name for tribes from what's now Belgium and The Netherlands. Any tribe can hide under that name. Take e.g. the Chauci, who were also sea-borne raiders by the 2nd c.
Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Robert Vermaat - 09-06-2012
Quote:Were there Gothic and non-Gothic areas sharing the same material culture? Was there a Gothic ruling class and non-Gothic subject classes? Was there a tendency to fusion and shared 'Gothicness' or exclusion and subject villages? I think there was a tendency towards fusion, because Wulfila himself was the descendent of captives from Asia Minor, but had a Gothic name and Gothic identity.It may have been something that developed during the 3rd c., but as to the exact nature of 'Gothicness'I think we can but guess. What consituted for instance the 'Gothic identity of Wulfila exactly? The most (in)famous king of the Huns, Attila, also had a Gothic name!
Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - authun - 09-07-2012
Eutropius wrote that Armorica and Belgica were infested with Saxons and Franks at the time of Carausius, ie late 3rd cent.
"During this period, Carausius, who, though of very mean birth, had gained extraordinary reputation by a course of active service in war, having received a commission in his post at Bononia, to clear the sea, which the Franks and Saxons infested, along the coast of Belgica and Armorica, ..."
Franks, Goths and Other Germanics - Alanus - 09-07-2012
Quote:Do we know of any particular features that would distinguish a Frank from a Goth at this date?
How about other Germanic peoples?
Hello, Nathan
Several features separate the Goths from the Franks, Alemanni, etc. First, Goths spoke an Eastern Germanic tongue. For instance the Frankish nomen "Thiudebald" becomes "Thiudebalth" in Gothic. Also, the Goths were heavily influenced by neighboring steppe cultures, primarily the Alans, Taifali, and even the Huns. They used different swords than the Franks, narrower blades, yet not long after the beginning of the 5th century, the Franks were influenced by the Gothic-Alanic swords, especially the be-jeweled hilts with cloisine. Finally, Goths were a society in flux, not entirely Germanic but including Greeks and disenfranchised Romans, plus people with Sarmatian and Cappadocian blood. Bishop Wulfilas came from Cappadocian stock. :grin: