Re: Taurisci and Przeworsk

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

> > --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> >
> > > We know from Ptolemy that in 160 CE the
> > > Teuriochaimai were somewhere in Bohemia
> > > http://tinyurl.com/3dmufs
> > > (this author is led to move Ptolemy's placement
> of them from
> > > 'north of the Sudeten range', ie. in today's
> Czech lands,
> >
> > GK: Actually, "north of the Sudeten range" in
> > Ptolemy (2.10) points towards southeast Germany
> > (Zwickau, Dresden, Bautzen)
>
> Nope, the mountain range that's north of is the
> Erzgebirge.

*****GK: That's today, and not entirely. But let's
assume that Ptolemy's "ta Soudeta ope" is what is
called "Sudety" by Poles and Czechs. It is a series of
mountain ranges that extends for 300 kilometers along
the border of Poland, Czechia, and Germany. "North"
points to an area including southeastern Germany and
southwestern Poland, between Elbe and Oder. Not
Bohemia.*****

>
> > > to 'north of the Erzgebirge', ie in Saxony or
> Thuringia, by his
> > > desire to explain the name of the
> Hermunduri/Thuringi; let's stick
> > > to what Ptolemy actually says.
> >
> > GK: Let's by all means
> >
> > > Now, if Boiohaim- is the now Germanic former
> home of the Boii,
> > > then Teuriochaim- must be the now (160 CE)
> Germanic former home of
> > > the Teuri-. Which means at some time before that
> we would have the
> > > Taurisci in Bohemia
> >
> > GK: According to Ptolemy the "Teuriochaimai"
> NOW
> > live where they live, "north of the Sudetes".
> > According to your logic the former home of the
> "Teuri"
> > is wherever the "Teuriochaimai" came from.
>
> No, *Teurio-chaim-, Germanic "Teuri home", the
> toponym that the
> ethnonym Teuriochamai is formed from, which is north
> of the Sudetes,
> must be a place where some *Teuri- once lived.

****GK: Not necessarily "north of the Sudetes" . It
may indicate that the "Teuri-homers" came from
wherever the Teuri-home was, not that the Teuri-home
was north of the Sudetan range where they were placed
by Ptolemy. They could have been (by 160 CE)
Germanized elements pushed from the old Tauriscan
haunts south of the Danube by Burebista. They could
have come from elsewhere also. We just don't
know.*****

>
> > We don't know where that is.

>
> > and the Przeworsk in Silesia.
> >
> > GK: And what does this have to do with the
> Taurisci?
>
> I was wondering if the indirectly documented *Teuri-
> in the Czech
> lands might possibly be the same people as the
> Taurisci in Carinthia?
> If so, those Taurisci were the nearest Celtic people
> to Latènicize
> Przeworsk.

****GK: Polish archaeologists think it was the Celts
of Silesia.****

>
> > >
> > > The first we hear of Ariovistist is his
> encounter
> > > with Q. Metellus Celer in 62 BCE.
> >
> > GK: Wrong. Pliny only speaks of a "king of the
> > Suebi" in Germania, who has dealings with the
> Roman
> > governor of Gallia Cisalpina.
>
> Ariovistus at that time had been without a roof over
> his troops
> consisting also of Suevi, ie on a war footing, for
> ten years, he was a
> Suevi, and so was his wife. I think we can safely
> assume he was the
> guy the Romans wanted to do business with.

****GK: You're avoiding the issue. The "king of the
Suevi" who contacted the Roman Governor of Gallia
Cisalpina (in northern Italy) was in Germania,
according to Pliny. His name is not given. It is this
individual who allegedly approached the Romans. There
is no recorded reaction.****

>
> > > That is four, not fourteen years before he meets
> > > Caesar. It seems unreasonable to assume that he
> > > became the ally of the Sequani and Arverni much
> before that time,
> > > there is no reaction from the Romans before that
> >
> > GK: Why should there be? They only reacted
> when
> > the Aedui approached them for help.
> >
> Oh, come on. The Aedui controlled an area important
> to northern trade.
> The Romans would have reacted sooner.

****GK: Torsten, the point is that the Romans did not
react until approached by their Aedui clients after
the Helvetian affair. Your imagination is not a
substitute for recorded historical facts. No sense in
getting irritated at history is there?****

>
> > > and fourteen years seems an excessive time for
> > > Ariovistus to have run his racket in Gallia,
> >
> > GK: But that's what he says: "fourteen years"
> with
> > "no roof over his head".
>
> But he doesn't say: "as an ally of the Sequani and
> Arverni", or "in
> Gaul". He has been on the warpath for fourteen years
> is all he tells
> Caesar.

****GK: With not very much success if so. There is no
intimation in Caesar that Ariovistus had any
territories under his control except his Gallic
settlements. Only "home" which he had left 14 yrs. ago
is mentioned. The mercenary activities with the
Arverni and Sequani were repeated and of long
duration. The big victory came rather late. And only
subsequently was he even recognized as "king". Dio
Cassius also points out that Ariovistus had nothing to
fall back on except his recent accomplishments in Gaul
(38.45.1-4).*****

>
> > Probably constant skirmishes
> > as a mercenary on behalf of the Arverni before his
> > "big break". A "no roof" leader seems hardly
> implied
> > in the Pliny tale about the Indian merchants.
>
> Exactly. The colonies he left behind in Thuringia
> and the Wetterau he
> probably still was the master of.

****GK: There is no proof either historical or
archaeological that these colonies existed before
Caesar came to Gaul.****

>
> > > after so long time, colonization would have
> forced the Arverni and
> > > Ardui out.
>
> > *****GK: But that started after Ariovistus won his
> big
> > victory. The Romans did not yet view him as a
> threat
> > in 59 BCE when they established friendly relations
> > with him.****
> >
>
> You can keep an army on the march with a promise of
> a reward for four
> years. You can't keep an army on the march with a
> promise of a reward
> for fourteen years. After less than half a dozen
> years they want their
> reward, so they can settle down and procreate.

****GK: Well they WERE mercenaries for 14 years. And
they did get some rewards and were pleased with their
lot (DBG 1.31), so that service with Ariovistus in
Gaul became quite attractive to more and more. After
the big win the rewards were even greater.*****

>
>
> > > So I think, given the also small timespan of the
> appearance of
> > > the Thuringia (Central Germania) and Wetterau
> Przeworsk expansions
> > > that
> >
> > GK: All we can say is that these sites were
> > occupied in the latter half of the 1rst c. BCE by
> > Przeworsk culture populations. In 72-58 BCE
> > Ariovistus' people (the original 15,000 plus those
> > invited shortly before 58 BCE) were in Gaul.
>
> No, that is your interpretation. They might have
> been colonizing the
> path through the Wetter valley.

****GK: Not very likely. Their traces are far more
tenuous there than in Western Thuringia.****

>
> > In 58 BCE masses of Suevi were at the border. None
> of this left
> > a trace in terms of material remnants.
>
> Unless that was the Wetterau Przeworsk culture?

****GK: The Przeworsk culture peoples were Vandilic,
and are not known to have become "Suebian" in a very
loose sense before the time of Maroboduus. The
Marcomanni were not Suebian in Ariovistus' time.****

>

Alternatively, I

> recall reading somewhere in Peschel, I think it was,
> that sites had
> been found which pointed a habitation with a very
> limited timespan,
> say, an overnight camp.

****GK: Let's have specifics.****

>
> > The Przeworsk settlers were likely Marcomanni, in
> the period after
> > Ariovistus, when they became "Suebi"
>
> Why would Marcomanni become Suebi after Ariovistus,
> when they already
> had separate identities in his army?

****GK: They are so recorded. Either before Maroboduus
or earlier. We know the Romans struggled with the
"Suebians" constantly in the latter part of the
century.****

>
> > and pressured the Romans constantly until
> Maroboduus led them into
> > Bohemia.
>
> They did? The Marcomanni were with Ariovistus in
> Gaul, says DBG.

****GK: Maroboduus became the leader in 8 BCE and led
them out of territories subsequently occupied by the
Hermunduri with Roman permnission (Thuringia).****

>
>
> > > it is a reasonable assumption that Ariovist led
> the Suevi
> > > etc all the way from Przeworsk to Thuringia to
> Wetterau to Gallia.
> >
> > GK: He may have taken that route (though I
> think
> > he was rather an Elbe Suebian). His trek was a
> fast
> > one, sometime around 72 BCE. It left no
> archaeological
> > traces.
>
> So Ariovistus came from Lower Saxony and assiduously
> avoided

=== message truncated ===



____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ