03-17-2014, 02:50 PM
The question of Ptolemy and the Aviones is not so clear cut, I think..
Schutte argues that 'Saxon' is the correct demonym and that the two other names in the manuscript versions (Axiones and Aviones - the latter referred to by Tacitus) are examples of apocope (loss of an initial letter or syllable):
http://archive.org/stream/ptolemysmapsof...2/mode/2up
This still leaves the issue of the reason for naming these Germanic tribes as Saxons to the extent that Ammianus, Julian, and others refer to them as such while the Roman military command designates an area of coastal authority as the Comes Litoris per Saxonici as opposed to Francia (excuse my cod Latin!). As there is some debate about the function of that command (was it a military defense or an area overseeing settlement, for example), it nevertheless refers specifically to 'Saxons' in what I would take to be a tribal rather than the generic name. By that I mean that these Saxons are distinct from Franks and other Germanic tribes to warrant a title in both the vernacular and the official language of the day. If the word was used to describe pirates in general then why was it not used also at a broader level so that the Franks would be subsumed into it rather than conjoined? I am speculating here as this is an area far outside my knowledge, I have to admit!
So we seem to have two separate lines of enquiry here which may not actually connect:
The rise of the Saxon demonym deriving from the word for knife in general (out of curiosity, how does the word 'cniva' for a knife relate here?) placed upon a tribal movement of sea raiders distinct from Franks.
The introduction of the seax later which some posters here suggest is perhaps a Hunnic importation and which was then subsequently called a seax by the native Germanic tribes.
At some point (much later?), the seax is also labelled a semispatium; a word who first recorded instance is by Vegetius. This is a word which most people have in the past understood to refer to a shortened spatha or a gladius by another name. The suggestion has arisen however that in fact it is a word distinct from the spatha and may therefore refer to a different weapon entirely.
Phew!
Schutte argues that 'Saxon' is the correct demonym and that the two other names in the manuscript versions (Axiones and Aviones - the latter referred to by Tacitus) are examples of apocope (loss of an initial letter or syllable):
http://archive.org/stream/ptolemysmapsof...2/mode/2up
This still leaves the issue of the reason for naming these Germanic tribes as Saxons to the extent that Ammianus, Julian, and others refer to them as such while the Roman military command designates an area of coastal authority as the Comes Litoris per Saxonici as opposed to Francia (excuse my cod Latin!). As there is some debate about the function of that command (was it a military defense or an area overseeing settlement, for example), it nevertheless refers specifically to 'Saxons' in what I would take to be a tribal rather than the generic name. By that I mean that these Saxons are distinct from Franks and other Germanic tribes to warrant a title in both the vernacular and the official language of the day. If the word was used to describe pirates in general then why was it not used also at a broader level so that the Franks would be subsumed into it rather than conjoined? I am speculating here as this is an area far outside my knowledge, I have to admit!
So we seem to have two separate lines of enquiry here which may not actually connect:
The rise of the Saxon demonym deriving from the word for knife in general (out of curiosity, how does the word 'cniva' for a knife relate here?) placed upon a tribal movement of sea raiders distinct from Franks.
The introduction of the seax later which some posters here suggest is perhaps a Hunnic importation and which was then subsequently called a seax by the native Germanic tribes.
At some point (much later?), the seax is also labelled a semispatium; a word who first recorded instance is by Vegetius. This is a word which most people have in the past understood to refer to a shortened spatha or a gladius by another name. The suggestion has arisen however that in fact it is a word distinct from the spatha and may therefore refer to a different weapon entirely.
Phew!
Francis Hagan
The Barcarii
The Barcarii
