Fwd: Re: [tied] Re: That old Ariovistus scenario.

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

>
> A Yazigian postscript.
>
>
>
>
> --- On Mon, 6/29/09, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@> wrote:
>
>
> Could you explain to me what route they took in order to avoid
> infringing upon the territorial integrity of Przeworskia/ Saxland?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Przeworsk2.PNG
>
>
> GK: Along the north shore of the Danube, then across the mountains
> into the Hungarian plain. The same route later taken by the
> Roxolans and the remaining Yazigi. The same "contact" route the
> Romans guaranteed to the Roxolans after their conquest of Dacia.
>
>
> ****GK: For particulars cf.
> http://www.kroraina.com/sarm/jh/jh2_1.html
> Harmatta's views on the Sarmatians are not always right, but he's
> quite on target as to the time and route of the Yazigian migration.
> Some 70 years posterior to the Ariovistus saga. Door closed.****
>

We are talking of two different things.
My question was: where did the Yazigi go after they were repulsed by the Zarubinians? And:
How do we know that the new upper crust, which is suddenly in place in Przeworkia *and* in Jastorfia in the mid-1st century BC, isn't Yazig?


Torsten