Re: Categorial collapse

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

>
> [Moeller]but I have a problem with Bastarnae. Jordanis doesnt
> say a word about them and there are rumours the Bastarnae
> werent at all germans but more likely they should have been
> celts.I even ask myself why Jordanes did not say a word about
> them. Normaly he should do, if they were germanic at all. He
> tells us about a lot of folks , even abbout carpians but
> nothing about bastarnae. (just a remarque here: if the goths
> should have been indeed the getae how once on this list was
> discuted, Jordanes shoud have had mentionated more about carps
> too, showing somehow the relationship between goths and carps.
> But he didnt.)
> Anyway, the bastarnae lived a lot and long with the thracians,
> fought with-and-against dacians; in the last time in the III
> century AC they withdrawed themself on the Peuce-insel and
> from that time in 2- or 3 cases as oft they were rememebered
> in the history, they were known as "peucini".So, there is
> questionable when did they went back in north, if they did it
> at all?

I wouldn't listen to rumours. Since Tacitus is not sure whether
Bastarnae are Germanic, Procopius might have felt the same. As I read
somewhere the Bastarnae are almost always mentioned as being together
with other tribes. Therefore, I thought, their language might have
been the one that all these peoples spoke, in a pidgin version, to
communicate with each other. Therefore, the "Odin" people or army
might have used it, when they travelled north. That would also make
all present Germanic languages descendants of that army's language,
which means that the original Bastarnian language is an aunt, not a
mother of the Germanic languages. Therefore it sounded to Tacitus as
a distant relative to the other Germanic languages. And as you can
see, it was the Bastarnian language (in a pidgin version) that
travelled north, (most of) the Bastarnae themselves stayed.

Torsten