From: tgpedersen
Message: 64300
Date: 2009-06-29
>Here is an alternative translation: 'He went first to the Western
>
> --- On Mon, 6/29/09, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
>
> > > How will you prove that no Iranian or otherwise hostile group
> > > arrived in the Zarubinian culture in the mid first century BCE?
> > >
> > > GK: If you want to involve Ariovistus it would have to be
> > > somewhat earlier?
> >
> > That would have to be in the beginning of the period 72 - 59 BCE,
> > as far as I can see. That qualifies as mid first century BCE for
> > me.
> >
> > > But no matter. I've studied the history of the Z. culture
> > > pretty thoroughly. (There is also a lot of relevant stuff in
> > > Shchukin for you).(I'm away from my notebooks till July 10 so
> > > what follows is from memory). There is no contemporary or
> > > near-contemporary evidence of any kind to prove or indicate
> > > that an "Iranian or otherwise hostile group arrived in the
> > > Zarubinian culture in the mid first century BCE". There is
> > > evidence that a series of Sarmatian assaults (probably by the
> > > Iazigi) were undertaken against Zarubinian fortresses sometime
> > > in the last decades of the 1rst c. BCE (arrowheads, signs of
> > > fire etc. The fortresses were later rebuilt).
> >
> > Aha. Tweak that by a few decades, and I'm in business.
> >
> > GK: How so? Apart from the war damages there is no record of
> > conquest nor settlement by the steppe nomads in any part of
> > Zarubinia (unlike the situation which developed after the Aorsan
> > assaults in the mid-1rst c AD.)
>
> Nor is there in Snorri's Ynglingasaga, according to which Odin took
> land in Saxland, no mention of landnam in Gardariki:
> http://www.snerpa.is/net/snorri/yngl-sag.htm
> 'Fór hann fyrst vestur í Garðaríki og þá suður í Saxland. Hann átti
> marga sonu. Hann eignaðist ríki víða um Saxland og setti þar sonu
> sína til landsgæslu. Þá fór hann norður til sjávar og tók sér
> bústað í ey einni. Þar heitir nú Óðinsey í Fjóni.'
>It's pretty obvious that you have very strong convictions what my
> Apparently they were repulsed.
>
> ****GK: In your terms they should have "broken through" (^^)****
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tisza
> > > Prior to this, the relationship between Zarubinians and the
> > > Scythian complex to the south had been amicable. There are
> > > Zarubinian burials in the Scythian Lower Dnipro cities, and
> > > Scythian burials in the Zarubinian Middle Dnipro fortresses.
> >
> > And then they weren't.
> >
> > > After the departure of large Iazigian contingents towards the
> > > basin of the Tisza,
> >
> > Aha, south to Saxland.Somewhere on the course of Tisza.
> >
> > GK: The Hungarians wouldn't care for that terminology, since
> > the Iazigi moved into the plains of Hungary.
> I don't think Snorri cared much for the feelings of the thenCould you explain to me what route they took in order to avoid
> newly-arrived Hungarians.
>
> ****GK: You're probably right. But then I don't think he would have
> used "Saxland" with respect to Hungarian territory in his time.****
>
> > The Romans knew them there simply as Sarmats, and fought manyThat means that in the interval 72 - 63 BCE, Ariovistus must have
> > wars with them.
> >
> OK.
> >
> > > amicable relationships were resumed (until a
> > > new Aorsan Scythian dynasty embarked on empire building in the
> > > mid-1rst c. AD. The Zarubinians do not appear to have been
> > > affected by the Getan expansion under Burebista in the mid-1rst
> > > c. BCE.)
> >
> >
> > > In the period ca. 150-110 BCE Iazigi and Roxolans had been
> > > Scythian vassals. The victory of Mithradates' generals over
> > > Palak son of Skilur destroyed this renewed Scythian power.
> >
> > When?
> >
> > ****GK: The dates usually mentioned are <110-106> BCE.****
>
> So the Yasigi would have been free to pursue own goals after that,
> as long as Mithridates held out.
>
> ****GK: But they could do no "S*** disturbing" on their own until
> 63 BCE****
> >An aspiring Ariovistus would have had interesting things to learn
> > > Scythians, Roxolans, Iazigi, and Bastarnians became autonomous
> > > under the King of Pontus' overall suzerainty. They retained
> > > this autonomy after the death of Mithradates. The Iazigi
> > > (located between Danube and Dnipro) were not well disposed
> > > towards Scythians. They had probably collaborated with
> > > Burebista (whose destruction of Olbia was a major blow against
> > > the economic interests of Scythia).
> > > The Zarubinians as old Scythian trading partners were a target.Horsey stuff?
> > > I should add that AFAIK that is also no evidence of any
> > > invasion of the Przeworsk area from the East in the mid-1rst c.
> > > BCE.
> >
> >
> > There is a sharp archaeological break (Zäsur) in Przeworsk with a
> > new upper crust with international, Roman grave goods. What
> > traces would Iazigi (= Yass, etc) have left?
> >
> > GK: The same they left everywhere else esp. their particular
> > burial rites and inventory.
> Could you mention a few characteristic features? I have a book on...
> Przeworsk archaeology I'd like to cross-reference with.
>
> ****GK: OK. But I won't have access to my books until 10 July.****
>
>True that. But since eg. Avestan has generalized sprirantization of
> > P.S. If you are leaning towards Jastorf as the source of
> > Germanic, that means you are doubting a major element of Snorri's
> > story.
>
> That must be because you assume that Przeworsk-talk would be
> identical to Jastorf-talk, and that Jastorf-talk was homogenous
> throughout the Jastorf territory. Give the time scale of both
> cultures, and the inevitable changes in their language occuring
> when Jastorfers settled in a foreign environment, both assumptions
> are wrong. Przeworskers arriving in Scandinavia would have spoken a
> tongue immediately incomprehensible to the natives, but learnable.
>
> ****GK: No what I meant is that since the Yazigi were Iranics, they
> could not, unlike Snorri's imagined "Asiamen" have been carriers of
> Germanic.
> And had they made it to Przeworskia (which of course they didn't)Would you take a look at the map again?
> they would have assimilated to the local Germanic speech.****Yes, and that unique language became the language of the Asiamen and
> > Since the rest is even more brittle, what's the point of hangingHow many postings is it ago you wanted me shut up?
> > on to it? (GK)
>
> We're getting closer now, aren't we?
> George clings on to his last hope ;-)
>
> ****GK: Kind George would prefer to have Torsten on board ship ,as
> an interesting contributor, than needlessly sinking in the Ocean
> for the sake of phantom ideals. But since George also acknowledges
> human autonomy
> he will regretfully let Torsten sink if that is his expressed wish.Sail on, Cap'n Smith. I think I'll stay on my iceberg.
> (:=)).***