Re: Przeworsk as the genesis of Germanic

From: george knysh
Message: 54121
Date: 2008-02-25

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

> >
> > GK: There is some evidence of Scandinavian
> arrival
> > in the area of an expanding Wielbark the
> second
> > half of the 1rst c. AD, though the initial phase
> of
> > Wielbark cannot be due to this, since the material
> > culture and esp. the burial practices differ.
> When is 'the initial phase´?


The Polish language site at,haslo.html

specifies "the end of the 1rst c.BCE" as the
transition date between Oksywie and Wielbark
("siægajàca poczàtkami schyùku I w.,"). We should,
however, note that the new Scandinavian influx of
ca.50 AD mentioned by Makiewicz, and probably
associated with the arrival of the "Berig Goths" is
hardly the first such. Anders Kaliff("Gothic
Connections. Contacts between eastern Scandinavia and
the southern Baltic coast 1000BC- 500 AD", Uppsala,
2001) has demonstrated that there were constant minor
population exchanges between Sweden/Gotland and the
mouth of the Vistula area(and constant cultural
exchanges) long before the 1rst c.AD. It is this
continuing "Gothic" contact (if you will) which
explains why Oksywie, while close to Przeworsk, was a
distinct archaeological culture. The term itself, or
similar ones, was/were perhaps shared by populations
on both sides of the Baltic (Kaliff). The Goths
participated in the destruction of the kingdom of
Maroboduus in 19 CE (cf. Tacitus, Annals, II,62)****
> > Scandinavian stone stelae are not involved in the
> > expansion of Wielbark into Ukraine (classical
> Gothic
> > period). Initial Wielbark develops from Oksywie,
> > which, like Przeworsk,was partly founded on
> Jastorfian
> > infusion.
> >
> You mean that elements of Oksywie are found in
> Wielbark? Small
> surprise; unless there is total expulsion or
> extermination of the
> former residents, elements survive.

****GK: The point is that Oksywie "organically"
developed into Wielbark (probably due to further
Scandinavian influence ("elements") which were felt as
of the mid-1rst c. BCE (it takes about 30/40yrs for
incremental cultural change to be noticeable
"archaeologically"), about a century before the
arrival of Berig and co. and the spread of Wielbark
into Greater Poland.****
> > > That means they left
> > > Scandinavia *after* the Germanic-speaking
> invasion,
> > > thus with Germanic speakers among them.
> >
> > GK: No doubt about that. The question is: was
> > Wielbark already Germanic-speaking when the Goths
> > arrived? The standard view is that it was.
> OK.
> >
> > > As for the name, note the g-/y- confusion in a
> parallel thread;
> > > I think Goth and Jute are cognate substrate
> words; Jutland
> > > was earlier Reidgotaland, and that it was some
> general term for
> > > original inhabitants.
> >
> > GK: Without getting into this (there were
> other
> > "Reidgotalands")
> Where?

****GK: Gotland, for instance. It was a "movable
term". Pritsak discusses the issue extensively in his
"The origin of Rus'", esp. pp.132f.(citing Kemp
Malone's "Studies in Heroic Legend..." (Copenhagen,
1959, p.178); and pp. 214ff.****

> > one obvious question would be: if
> > Germanic starts with Przeworsk, how and when does
> it
> > get to Scandinavia, and what is the
> archaeological
> > evidence for this?
> Ariovist's campaign in the Wetterau, later arrivals
> from the east into
> Thuringia (maybe I should ask permission to use that
> word), expansion
> down the Elbe (Jastorf is replaced by
> Elbe-Germanic), expansion into
> Denmark (Celtic or Pre-Roman Iron Age is replaced by
> Roman Iron Age),
> expansion to the Mälar area in Sweden (where I'm not
> familiar with the
> archaeology) and to the coasts of Finland ond
> Estonia.

****GK: But the Goths were in place before this
happened. Those active against Maroboduus in 19 CE
were pre-Berig Wielbarkers, and "Germani" acc. to
> > The "Wielbark area" Goths who mixed
> > with the original Wielbarkers brought with them an
> > archaeological culture which had existed in
> > Scandinavia since ca. 500 BCE.,and which was
> neither
> > Przeworsk nor originating in Przeworsk.
> > >
> And that is the one called here Celtic or Pre-Roman
> Iron Age, which
> was replaced by Roman Iron Age just before that
> (except Sj¿lland and
> Bornholm). So these would be refugees. I now have
> explain why they
> used the language of the conqueror.

****GK: Probably because it was already their
language? As well as the language of the
> Torsten

P.S. The difficulty with Przeworsk as "prime Germanic"
is not only associated with the Gothic issue, but also
with the Bastarnian issue. There is no Przeworsk at
Peuca, and we have the three Germanic names of
Bastarnian leaders of the early 2nd.C. BCE. Nor is
there any Przeworsk in the area of Moldavia (also
Bastarnian acc. to Strabo) whence the "Sciri" (first
historically attested Germanic term?) threatened Olbia
ca. 240 BCE. As you know, I think these early
Sciri+Galati "associates" mentioned in the Protogenes
Decree are the Bastarnians. Their culture is Jastorf+
Pomeranian (with later assimilation of local Getans +
Sarmatian elements), but not Przeworsk. Despite
cultural differences due to their local contacts,the
speech was still Germanic in the time of Tacitus.****

Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ