06-02-2004, 04:33 PM
Quote:</em></strong><hr>Yep. I checked on a modern map and compared to the one drawn from Tacitus' "Germania". The province of Drenthe is East of what was known by Tacitus as the Frisii Maiores. According to good old Tacitus the province of Drenthe was then inhabited by the Chasvarii.<hr><br>
<br>
Antoninus, Tacitus is often pretty vague, placing peoples in relation to each other in very, very general terms. Other maps, equally based on Tacitus, place the Chasuarii east of Drenthe. The German re-enactment group of the same name would probably be surprised to discover that they are really Dutch...that doesn't mean the Chasuarii didn't live in Drenthe, it just means...we don't really know!<br>
<br>
Quote:</em></strong><hr>I have no sympathy or time for those who see Friesland as Frisian from the word go. There are those who would happily counter the first Beaker folk as Frisian, I'll not dwell on that any further.<hr><br>
<br>
Now what kind of answer is that? Didn't mention the Beaker Folk, or the Fuzziewuzzies, or Wadden seals...and I'm not Frisian either...<br>
<br>
Point is, we have Frisians in the same general area before, and after the period they are not mentioned in Roman sources. That requires an explanation. Is it because the sources are meagre and incomplete? Or did the Frisians really vanish?<br>
<br>
As for a partial depopulation, so what? That happened several times in history, doesn't mean that the people left stopped being Frisian. A change in pottery could be part of a general process of cultural change - Germanic peoples were NOT static, as you well know.<br>
As for the Frisians being part of another Germanic group for a time - or being counted as part by not particularly scientifically rigorous Romans - why is that implausible?<br>
Subgroups could have continued using the Frisian name, while part of a larger group with a different name. Ever heard of the term "subtribe", loose as it is?<br>
And why would that theory be more implausible than having the Frisians becoming (in a cultural-political sense) extinct but leaving their name in the land itself, to be adopted by later settlers?<br>
<br>
We simply don't know. My problem with your remarks about the Frisians is that you were presenting an opinion (one that can be defended scientifically, but is very far from certain) as a fact.<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>
<br>
Antoninus, Tacitus is often pretty vague, placing peoples in relation to each other in very, very general terms. Other maps, equally based on Tacitus, place the Chasuarii east of Drenthe. The German re-enactment group of the same name would probably be surprised to discover that they are really Dutch...that doesn't mean the Chasuarii didn't live in Drenthe, it just means...we don't really know!<br>
<br>
Quote:</em></strong><hr>I have no sympathy or time for those who see Friesland as Frisian from the word go. There are those who would happily counter the first Beaker folk as Frisian, I'll not dwell on that any further.<hr><br>
<br>
Now what kind of answer is that? Didn't mention the Beaker Folk, or the Fuzziewuzzies, or Wadden seals...and I'm not Frisian either...<br>
<br>
Point is, we have Frisians in the same general area before, and after the period they are not mentioned in Roman sources. That requires an explanation. Is it because the sources are meagre and incomplete? Or did the Frisians really vanish?<br>
<br>
As for a partial depopulation, so what? That happened several times in history, doesn't mean that the people left stopped being Frisian. A change in pottery could be part of a general process of cultural change - Germanic peoples were NOT static, as you well know.<br>
As for the Frisians being part of another Germanic group for a time - or being counted as part by not particularly scientifically rigorous Romans - why is that implausible?<br>
Subgroups could have continued using the Frisian name, while part of a larger group with a different name. Ever heard of the term "subtribe", loose as it is?<br>
And why would that theory be more implausible than having the Frisians becoming (in a cultural-political sense) extinct but leaving their name in the land itself, to be adopted by later settlers?<br>
<br>
We simply don't know. My problem with your remarks about the Frisians is that you were presenting an opinion (one that can be defended scientifically, but is very far from certain) as a fact.<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>
Andreas Baede
