From: tgpedersen
Message: 31647
Date: 2004-04-01
> --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:Correction: From Thuringia to Jutland and Fyn. Not Sjælland. Not the
>
> >
> > So what I would like to know is: in what way does
> > "the prevailing
> > view" construe a path of continuity from the
> > Przeworsk culture to the
> > later Germanic speaking ones
>
> I don't think it can
> > be denied that
> > Przeworsk was _a_ root of Germanic culture, but it
> > seems those roots
> > were widely divergent.
>
> *****GK: The argument seems to run thus (there are
> many sources for it; I have relied on the more recent
> Polish, Russian, and Ukrainian literature):
>
> The source of Germanicism in the east is the area of
> the Jastorf culture which existed in North Germany and
> Southern Scandinavia from the mid-first millennium BC.
> Many Jastorf groups migrated eastward beginning ca.Evidence? Not that I'm absolutely opposed to that; some of Kuhn's
> 300 BC, sometimes in conjunction with La Tene groups
> (Celtic) sometimes independently. They mixed with
> "local culture" groups there, and after a period of
> co-existence contributed to the emergence of new
> cultures most of which in the progress of time became
> preponderantly Germanic as to language.
>Przeworsk wasThat matches with the fact that the northern province of Jutland,
> one such culture. The early complex mix involved Celts
> (La Tene) Germanics (Jastorf) and "locals" (Late
> LUsatian, Pomorian etc.)of uncertain IE speech. By the
> period of the Roman Empire, Przeworsk can be
> associated with the historical Vandals.
>The claim isAccording to Peschel and Jan Derk Boosen: "Das Oder-Warthe-gebiet in
> not that P. is THE source of Germanic culture. It is A
> Germanic culture. So when P. backflows into Jastorf
> (as you say) it is as though one Germanic culture
> mixed with another.
>It is believed that the earliestNow that was a bad tactical move. Once you mention the Skiri, you'll
> attested name of a Germanic group in the east is that
> of the SCIRI (Skiroi of the Olbian inscriptions). This
> name was earlier analyzed on Cybalist. The date for it
> is "sometime prior to 230 BC".