--- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
As I read Snorri, Asgard would be placed immediately
on the eastern
bank of the Don.
*****GK: Snorri says that the Vanir are �on� the Don,
but that the Aesir are �east� of the Don. I prefer my
interpretation to yours, but it doesn�t really matter
as to the key issue, which is, that as a matter of
fact, there were never any �Vanir� or �Aesir� either
�on� or east� of the Don. This is a fantastic 13th c.
concoction which has no basis in either archaeology or
historical documentation. You have not produced a
single persuasive argument to back up Snorri�s
tale.*****
(Torsten) Let's assume for the sake of argument that
you're right and Snorri
(or his source)
*****GK: What source would that be? Snorri knew
nothing of �Asgard� east of the Don when he was
composing his Edda. The closest thing to him would be
al-Idrisi, but the latter did not speak of �Asgard�
but of �Troy�. And once we�re in this context, there�s
not much need to go on is there? Unless one is into
kookery (:=))*****
made up the Aesir/Vanir-on-the-Don story out of
vanity.
*****GK: Where did I say that Snorri made this up �out
of vanity�? Unless you think that �Asgard�= �Troy�. If
so there�s no need to continue�*****
Why is it, then, that there actually are a people
calling
themselves 'As'
******GK: A good example of the complete uselessness
of discussions with you. It was shown quite
convincingly here a long time ago that �As� has
nothing whatever to do with �Aesir�. But to an
opinionated true believer such as yourself, that�s
like water off a duck�s back isn�t it?*******
and a kingdom of Vani in the general vicinity of the
places Snorri ascribes to them?
*****GK: Unbelievable� The Lower Don is not �in the
general vicinity� of Georgia. They are separated by
hundreds of kilometers and by large mountains� Georgia
is not �on� the Don�But of course this means
absolutely nothing to a proterviens.*****
> >
> > >(GK) As I've already said any number
> > > of times, you can't just pick bits and pieces
out
> > of
> > > Snorri's account and reshuffle the lot according
> > to
> > > your liking.
I see. It is as with Herodotus: either you reject it
wholesal or you
believe the whole thing? Is that what you mean?
*****GK: No. What I mean is that after the total
historical and archaeological irrelevance of Snorri�s
account has been demonstrated, you, instead of doing
the right thing, which is to admit this and move on,
insist on continuing to argue, endlessly, and to no
coherent or visible scientific purpose. Don�t drag
Herodotus into this. Whatever one may think of this or
that aspect of his history, he was a contemporary when
writing about events of the 5th c. BC.******
> >
> >
> > >By the time of
> > > Almgren VI, the territories around the lower Don
> > and
> > > in the Crimean interior were predominantly
Alanic.
> > So
> > > is that your most recent reshuffle? That the
"Odin
> > > people" were cultural Alans? But what evidence
do
> > you
> > > have for the arrival of substantial numbers of
> > > cultural Alans in Germany in the 2nd c. (there
is
> > none
> > > for your earlier preferred date of the mid- 1rst
> > c.
> > > BC). Nothing in history and archaeology "matches
> > well
> > > with a united Asir-Vanir people later moving
into
> > > Northern Europe".
> >
> > (Torsten) For one thing, there's the Sarmatian
> ring-pommeled
> > swords in Vimose
> > on Fyn, which you dismissed as a "stray find".
>
> GK: Quite. These swords do not prove your claim.
> They are not part of the inventory of an
identifiably
> Sarmatian gravesite.
> >
Well, how do you think they got there? Flew? Should
the Sarmatians
have built a city with cemetary next to the bog to
prove their
presence?
*****GK: They could have been brought north by
warriors who fought on the Danube, as war booty. They
could have been taken there by Sarmatian associates of
the locals. There are any number of other
explanations. One thing these bog swords do not even
begin to prove is the �Odin migration� story. This
�big event� would have left plenty of traces, not just
a few bog swords.******
> >
> >
> > >(GK) You keep repeating this, shuffling
> > > and reshuffling poor old Snorri. But when asked
> > for
> > > evidence, you seem unable to produce anything at
> > all.
> > > Almgren VI is not associated with a specific
> > cultural
> > > group. The appearance of such fibulae in widely
> > > different contexts is the best possible argument
> > > against some identifiable people migrating.
> >
> >(Torsten) I wonder what archaeological remains a
> migratory
> > avalanche would
> > leave behind, if it wasn't a number of similar
> > objects appearing in
> > widely different contexts?
>
> GK: Something more than scattered and
> disconnected finds which may be explained as trade
> objects or war booty.
>
If they were trade objects, they wouldn't end up with
weapon
sacrifices in a bog.
****GK: Non sequitur.****
If they were war booty, they would have parted
with their previous owner in the vicinity of the bog.
****GK: Non sequitur.*****
> >
> > >When a
> > > people migrates it leaves signs other than just
> > > fibulae: gravesites with specific inventories,
> > > settlements (sometimes).
> >
> > (Torsten) Mention some Hunnic settlements in
Europe.
>
> GK: The Huns were nomads. You didn't know
> this?
>
> (Torsten) Mention
> > traits about
> > Hunnic gravesite that allow us to identify them as
> > Turkic.
>
> GK: The point is that we do have many datable
> Hunnic gravesites, and a great deal of additional
> historical information which enables us to identify
> them as basically Turkic.
(Torsten)Let me see if I understand you here:
The Huns were nomads and therefore would leave few
traces.
*****GK: The Huns were nomads and therefore would not
have left many �settlements�*****
(Torsten) Sarmatians would have left many traces
because they were not nomads?
*****GK: Sarmatians left no �settlements� either. But
both Huns and Sarmatians left gravesites.
Capish?******
>We have no "Odin people"
> gravesites, and no reliable historical information
> confirming Snorri's fanciful stories about Aesir and
> Vanir.******
(TOrsten)It seems 'reliable' is the operative word
here.
*****GK: It is a good word.*****
> >
> > >You are unable to provide any
> > > such evidence for your mythical "Odin
> > people".******
> >
> >
> > (Torsten) In spite of your protestations that
there
> is
> > absolutely no connection
> > between the two areas,
>
> GK: I don't say that there are "absolutely" no
> connections. That's what you say I say. I say that
> there is no evidence to prove that these fibulae
> demonstrate the migration of "Odin people" from east
> of the Don into central Europe.
>
No evidence to prove that they demonstrate...? Your
epistomology
confuses me.
*****GK: I�ll make it simpler for you. The Almgren
fibulae cannot be used to prove that an �Odin people�
migrated from east of the Don into Central Europe,
because these fibulae are not ethnically specific
objects. They were originally manufactured in Olbia,
Panticapaeum etc.. for �the barbarian market�, and
they found their way into many different ethnic
hinterlands, Sarmatian, Germanic, Thracian, Baltic,
Slavic. None of the actually existing gravesites where
these fibulae were discovered can be associated with a
group that would fit the characteristics of �the Odin
people�.******
Torsten
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Domains � Claim yours for only $14.70/year
http://smallbusiness.promotions.yahoo.com/offer