From: george knysh
Message: 59863
Date: 2008-08-25
--- On Mon, 8/25/08, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
--- In cybalist@... s.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- On Sun, 8/24/08, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@ ...> wrote:
>
> > > > > They [GK: the Vandals] spoke an East Germanic language, so
> > > > > they were not LINGUISTICALLY Veneti,
> > > >
> > > > Nope. The only reason their language, of which we know
> > > > nothing, is classed as East Germanic, is that they lived in
> > > > the eastern part of the later Germania.
> >
> > GK: What is missing in the wikipedia article on the Vandals is
> the data from Pliny and Tacitus. According to the former (NH IV.99)
> the "Vandili" were a group of Germanic tribes "quorum pars
> Burgodiones, Varinnae, Charini, Gutones". According to the latter
> (Germania, 2), the Germani celebrated the "Vandalios" as their own
> in "carminibus antiquis", and Tacitus concluded that the designation
> (Vandilii/Vandalii) was among the "vera et antiqua" Germanic
> "nomina". As we know, Tacitus also made a clear distinction between
> Vandals and Venedi.
****GK: So that, in the first c. CE, not only were the non-Germanic Venedi something different from Vandali (for Tacitus no less than Pliny), but the term "Vandali" was considered both Germanic and ancient.****
> >
>
> That's not quite accurate.
>
> http://www.sacred- texts.com/ cla/tac/g01000. htm
>
> 'Celebrant carminibus antiquis (quod unum apud illos memoriae et
> annalium genus est) Tuisconem deum terra editum, et filium Mannum,
> originem gentis conditoresque. Manno tres filios assignant, e quorum
> nominibus proximi Oceano Ingaevones, medii Hermiones, ceteri
> Istaevones vocentur. Quidam autem, ut in licentia vetustatis, plures
> deo ortos pluresque gentis appellationes, Marsos, Gambrivios,
> Suevos, Vandalios, affirmant; eaque vera et antiqua nomina. Ceterum
> Germaniae vocabulum recens et nuper additum; quoniam, qui primi
> Rhenum transgressi Gallos expulerint, ac nunc Tungri, tunc Germani
> vocati sint: ita nationis nomen, non gentis evaluisse paulatim, ut
> omnes primum a victore ob metum, mox a se ipsis invento nomine
> Germani vocarentur.'
> In other words, there are two schools of thought among the Germani.
> According to one, the 'Marsi, Gambrivii, Suevi, Vandilii' are not
> part of the Germani,
>
> GK: Typical Torsten non-sequitur. They would in fact, according
to one view, be listed among descendants of the three sons of
Mannus("the coast tribes" + "those of the interior" + "the rest"): for
instance, Pliny accessed a source where the Suevi were Hermiones...
Nope. Argumentum e nihilo. The fact that Pliny finds someone who
thinks the Suevi were Hermiones does not mean that everybody of the
Germania Parva school thinks that.
*****GK: The "Germania Parva" and "Germania Magna" schools are figments of Torsten's Snorrist imagination. Tacitus neither says nor implies any such thing. What he is saying is that for some, all the Germani of his time are descended from the sons of Mannus, while for others they are not, since Tuisco allegedly had "other sons" than Mannus...
> GK: The dispute among these views is not about whether tribe or
> complex of tribes A,B, or C is or is not "Germanic", but whether it
> descends or does not descend directly from the god...
Same thing. Whichever tribe descends from Tuisco is Germanic.
Whichever tribe doesn't, isn't.
****GK: The point is that all tribes descend from Tuisco, Torsten.(:=))) "plures deo ortos" in Tacitus' text.****