Re: Indicia of Danubian Origins

--- In cybalist@..., x99lynx@... wrote:

> I wrote:
> > The evidence Kossina used is still there, it just
> > doesn't say Scandinavian.
> > And it doesn't say "autochtonous" either.
>
>
> As far as I am aware no "professional field archaeologists"

currently claim

> that Kossina's "proving elements" - serpent-headed bracelets,

characteristic

> pear metal pendants, the s-shaped clasps, inhumation, etc. - are

autochtonous

> to Wielbark.
>
> They may call Wielbark in general of local origin. But those "key

elements"

> as Heather calls them are NOT autochtonous.
>
> So, once Kossina and a whole generation of your "professional field
> archaeologists" used these items to establish Scandinavian origins

for

> Wielbark. Now - what? - these former major measures of origin mean

nothing?

> Just because they now point in the opposite direction?
>

> Steve Long

I wonder how Kossina or anyone else could have claimed inhumation as
sign of Scandinavian origin given that that custom was introduced
(most likely by invasion from the South, says Albrectsen) to
Scandinavia in the period 50 BCE - 0, before which time cremation was
used exclusively?

But it would fit in nicely with that elite in Scandinavia trying to
reopen the trade routes to their old homes?

Torsten