Re: [tied] Re: "Odin of Asgard"

--- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

> >
> >
> > (TP)Jordanes says something similar,
> >
> > ******GK: Like what exactly?******
>
> XI (67) Then when Buruista was King of the Goths,
> Dicineus came to
> Gothia at the time when Sulla ruled the Romans.

******GK: "Buruista" (usually the name is spelled
Burebista) was never "King of the Goths" but of the
GETAE [he reigned ca. 82-44 BC], a Thrakoid people
living principally on the territory of contemporary
Rumania. It is accepted that Cassiodorus (Jordanes'
source) confused his Goths with similar sounding names
(Getae, Massagetae), and was thus able to give them a
better "classical" pedigree. This is not very serious
stuff of course.******

> Buruista received
> Dicineus and gave him almost royal power. It was by
> his advice the
> Goths ravaged the lands of the Germans, which the
> Franks now possess.

*****GK: Since you later mention Strabo I think you
should reread the relevant passages there (cf. 7.3.11
and 7.5.2). Now Strabo of course knew much better than
Jordanes or Cassiodorus who Burebista and his
entourage were. "Decaeneus" was Burebista's "deified"
wizard. The "lands of the Germans which the Franks now
possess" would seem( in Strabo) to be those of the
Boii and Taurisci (Celtic tribes then) whom Burebista
manhandled severely. Probably the areas of
contemporary Czechia and Austria. All part of his
fleeting empire-building which collapsed in 44 BC.
Nothing to do with "Odin" I'm afraid.******

> (68) Then came Caesar, the first of all the Romans
> to assume imperial
> power and to subdue almost the whole world, who
> conquered all
> kingdoms and even seized islands lying beyond our
> world, reposing in
> the bosom of Ocean. He made tributary to the Romans
> those that knew
> not the Roman name even by hearsay, and yet was
> unable to prevail
> against the Goths, despite his frequent attempts.
>
>(TP) That the Goths ravaged Germania at Caesar's

time.

*****GK: The Getae (not the Goths who at that time
were still in "Scandzia") ravaged what later (not in
Caesar's time) became a part of "Germania". At any
rate from the time of the arrival of the
Marcomanni.*****

> And I'm wondering
> whether that Dicineus (Strabo: Decaeneus) wasn't
> "Odin".

*****GK: Nothing fits.******

>(TP) As I've said several times, what I'm proposing

is

> the
> following: Let's assume for the sake of argument
> that
> what Snorri and Jordanes are saying is true, and
> then
> see where this takes us. Is it possible to
> (re)construct
> a (hi)story including these two sources which
> doesn't
> contain contradictions?

But of course if you

> proclaim
> a priori that Snorri's account necessarily contains
> nothing but falsehoods, then we don't have much to
> discuss.

*****GK: I think Pritsak's interpretation is at least
defensible even if highly uncertain. As are other
suggestions. But Snorri at face value is a dead end.
And Jordanes' confusion (in this context) hardly saves
him.******

> > >(Torsten): Based on aerchaeology?
> >
> > ****GK: No Torsten. Based on what we know of the
> > history of the area from chronicles and
> inscriptions
> > much closer to the Augustan age than the Icelandic
> > Pompeius Trogus fantasizing twelve hundred years
> > later.******
>
>(TP) Inscriptions, George? Proclaiming that they had

no

> common ruler?
> And why resort to name-calling w.r.t Snorri?

*****GK: That's quaint. You think that comparing
Snorri to Pompeius Trogus is "name calling"?
(:=)))*****


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com