Re: Clueless roolz...

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:

>
>
> --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh
> > <gknysh@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > the suddenly emerging upper crust of the Przeworsk culture
> > > > were deserters from the Mithridatic war, thus of rather
> > > > heterogenous Black Sea extraction.
> > >
> > > GK: Am I right in surmising that you consider the
> > > Lubieszewo princely graves to be "Przeworsk upper
> > > crust"? Say yes or no before I continue.
> >
> > Yes (but now you're going to tell me otherwise?).
>
>
> ****GK: I already have (in part). The 6 L.type graves
> of Lubieszewo itself are clearly a part of the Gustow
> group, which is NOT PRZEWORSK but something
> intermediary between Wielbark and Elbe. This is the
> conclusion of professional archaeologists.

They ARE SITUATED in the Gustow group.
Are you beginning on the capital letter thing too now?
Tell me what's wrong in this paragraph then (from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland_in_Antiquity ):
'The evolution of the power structure within the Germanic societies in
Poland and elsewhere can be traced to some degree by examining the
"princely" graves - burials of chiefs, and even hereditary princes, as
the consolidation of power progressed. Those appear from the beginning
of the Common Era and are located away from ordinary cemeteries,
singly or in small groups. The bodies were inhumed in wooden coffins
and covered with kurgans, or interred in wooden or stone chambers.
Luxurious Roman-made gifts and fancy barbarian emulations (such as
silver and gold clasps with springs, created with an unsurpassed
attention to detail, dated 3rd century CE from Wrocław Zakrzów), but
not weapons, were placed in the graves. 1st and 2nd century burials of
this type, occurring all the way from Jutland to Lesser Poland, are
referred to as princely graves Lubieszewo type, after Lubieszewo,
Gryfice County in western Pomerania, where six such burials were found'

>
> There is apparently nothing in the L.type graves of
> other areas which can allow us to construe them as a
> unified archaeological culture, let alone a
> development of Przeworsk, EXCEPT IN THE AREA OF
> PRZEWORSK ITSELF.

That's not what I read in the sources. They say there was a remarkably
uniform upper class (relatively to the local culture) but that it was
heterogenous within itself.

> If the situation of the standard
> area (Lubieszewo) is repeated elsewhere, then the
> "local element" would be defining in each particular
> area. This can be checked.

I don't understand that paragraph. Could you rephrase?

> We already know the answer
> for Lubieszewo proper (to repeat myself).
> Your universal Przeworsk scenario is simply not true.

It's a universal upper crust scenario.

> But here is something for you, says the devil's
> advocate:
>
> "in Siemiechów [Central Poland GK]a grave of a warrior
> who must had taken part in the Ariovistus expedition
> during the 70-50 BC period was found; it contains
> Celtic weapons and an Alpine region manufactured
> helmet used as an urn, together with local ceramics."
> (Poland in Ant. website)
>
> This is a convincing argument for Przeworsk
> participation in the Ariovist saga, of course, but the
> "return" of the participant is to Przeworsk itself.
> Can you find such graves in the other areas where the
> L.type ones later emerge?*****
>

I am not sure I can save a putative 'Ariovistus goes to Denmark'
scenario, given the time frame of the appearance of those graves, but
I might save something like 'An Ariovistus successor goes to Denmark
with the northern part of the upper crust a century later'. I recall
vaguely we dicussed the provenance (eastern or western) of Rome-origin
grave goods of princely gravces in Denmark; some pointed east, some west.


Torsten