Point 1.
--- tgpedersen <
tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh
> <gknysh@...> wrote:
> >
> > --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > with Tacitus'
> > > > > information
> > > > > > we have a
> > > > > > migration
> > > >
> > > > GK: What "migration" would that be?
> > > >
> > > (TP) It takes some proximity to produce common
> > offspring.
> >
> > GK: The arrival of a certain number of
> > "Sarmatian" brides to be in Bastarnia (=basically
> the
> > area of contemporary Moldavia) at some point prior
> to
> > 98 AD has nothing to do, per se, with the concept
> of
> > "migration", which involves a fairly substantial
> > movement of people and ethna, and which leaves
> > verifiable historical, archaeological, toponymic
> etc.
> > traces.
>
> (TP) You're winging it again, aren't you?
*****GK: If I am "winging it" then what you are doing
is indescribable. You're certainly not "winging it",
since you haven't even grown a single solitary feather
on your "wings". So.. haplessly flapping your
extremities while standing completely still? Not much
of a breeze either (:=)))******
(TP)How do you know
> that what
> happened was the arrival of "a certain number of
> Sarmatian brides"
> and not a migration.
*****GK: Because Tacitus speaks of marriages, not of
population shifts or mixed settlements, and because we
have no archaeological evidence to indicate
otherwise.******
(TP)Don't forget that archaelogical
> remains of the
> Hunnic invasions wich were fairly substantial, I'd
> say, have only
> been found recently?
*****GK: Your mind works in mysterious ways, Torsten.
Nomadic cultures leave little evidence of course. Thus
all we know of the very numerous Sarmatian complexes
in the Eurasian steppes we gather from gravesites or
from occasional finds in the material of more settled
cultures. There was a bit of that available from
Hunnic times before more recent discoveries added some
more. But (try to follow, it's not that difficult),
there is an enormous difference between positing the
presence of Huns (and Sarmatians) in Eastern Europe
even in the context of archaeological "poverty" and
arguing Odinist fantasies. We have a substantial
number of historical documentation on Huns and
Sarmatians. And THAT, my good fellow, is precisely
what we do not have concerning the mythical "Odin"
migration from "Asgard". Now as to the missing
archaeological evidence of Sarmatian migration into
Bastarnia. (Pay attention) It has been pointed out to
you repeatedly (I did it, and most recently Piotr)
that it is not up to those who do not accept your
baseless contentions to "prove" them wrong: you are
methodologically not entitled to make them, and it is
up to you to advance at least something which might
back a hypothesis. You can't simply fantasize and then
proclaim "disprove this!". This is an infantile
approach. The sooner you realize this the better. But
I'm not holding my breath... We can speak of a
Sarmatian migration into Bastarnia in the 1rst c. BC
as soon as sites proving it are discovered. Until that
is done, we are not entitled to use this romantic
fantasy (and that's all it is at the moment)as part
and parcel of a serious scientific argumentation. Do
you understand what I'm saying? Strain the little grey
cells a little.******
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/