Re: [tied] Giebul/tów, another 'princely grave'

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

>
> --- On Mon, 9/14/09, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
>
> Since we agree in principle that Sarmatians were present in the
> flesh in the west, in particular in the Mus^ov princely grave,
> traditionally called Germanic,
>
> ****GK: Mus^ov is a Germanic and not a Sarmatian grave though it
> may contain Sarmatian objects. Just like the Pereshchypinskyj 7th
> c. grave, loaded with Byzantine objects, is not a Byzantine but a
> Bulgarian grave,

Do you think he knew that himself?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarians#Ethnogenesis
Do you think he would have stooped to take a word of Bulgarian in his mouth, if he was so preoccupied with his status?

> and just as the Kuban 1rst c. graves, loaded with Roman objects,
> are not Roman but Alanic graves.

Would they have thought of themselves as Alanic, not as Roman mercenaries? Why don't you claim they were pre-Slavic?

> You can't see what all scientific archaeologists see because your
> Snorrist "science" leaves you in cloud kookooland.****
>

Is there something wrong with those Slavs? I'm of course much too well-behaved to mention such things on cybalist, since I come from a home with a piano, but didn't they also have beer castles from which they heroically threw mugs filled with beer and other pottery (German: steins) on encroaching teetotallers, as I once read in cybalist? I googled 'Ukraine' 'cuckoo' 'magic' to find what this particular superstition was all about. 22,500 hits. That speaks volumes. About what I'm not sure, but I think it does.

> which you assign to a relative of the Sarmatian kings Pharzoios
> and Inismeios on the basis of the tamgas in the grave, which occur
> also in the similar grave in C^atalka which along with Vize is
> traditionally called Thracian, and thus also must contain a
> Sarmatian,
>
> ****GK: The conclusion is a non-sequitur.

The word you're looking for is 'insubordination'.

> Yatsenko has adequately explained the presence of tamgas on
> Germanic spearheads.*****

Yatsenko surmised that the tamgas on the spearheads showed that the owner, the deceased's grandmother was Sarmatian, ie. that he was ethnically partially Sarmatian. Since they used tamgas to signify clan membership (why else use it?) they were also culturally partially Sarmatian. And since there was no Germanic elite at his grandmother's time to marry into that part must have been large.

>
> but disagree only on the estimate of their relative share in the
> emerging upper class of the Przeworsk culture,
>
> ****GK: You have offered no proof other than Heimskringla... A 13th
> century euhemeristic fantasy which you misinterpret to be genuine
> popular tradition has no scientific standing compared to the
> analyses of professiona historians and archaeologists.*****

Rejecting Snorri as a source based on no particular argument except by fiat that all such sources, ie. North European, pre-Christian sources are false is a left-over from the forced Christianization of Northern Europe, which was a racket run to set up a foreign power elite. It amounts to calling the whole pre-Chriatianization population of Northern Europe congenitally mendacious. Ascribing negative properties to an ethnic group is racism by all definitions, and since it's about the ethnic group I happen to belong to, I take it as a personal affront.

> which became the upper class of the Germanic-speaking countries,
>
> *****GK: In the last eight years you have not offered a single
> adequate proof other than your interpretations of Snorri
> Sturluson's Heimskringla fantasies to back up the notion that the
> Przeworsk culture (the eventual Vandals) was the incubator of "the
> upper class of the Germanic-speaking countries".***

The homogeneity of the Germanic upper class is striking is all areas in Germania. Therefore if one part of it is Sarmatian, they all are.

> and since it doesn't matter much to you anyhow, I think I'll call
> you a Sarmatist and an Odinist. From now on all we'll have to argue
> about is percentages.
>
> ****GK: You're quite free to argue with yourself. I can't stop you.
> But don't confuse your unending Snorrist mantras with scientific
> argument. No ne else does afaik.****

You can't argue against racism. It's self-contained. It's part of the world image of those people. If those people have set their minds to believe that the people of Northwest Europe are history-less congenital liers, then nothing will stop them from ethnically cleansing them from their lands.

> Cf. besides, but about a later time
>
> ****GK: More unproductive scavenging... They have solid proof of
> Alanic etc. presence in the West and wonder what eventually
> happened to them there. You, othe ther hand, have no proof of
> Sarmatian presence in Przeworsk, and of Przeworsk expansion over
> Germania.****

As I said, homogeneity.

> from
> Vladimir Kuznecov
> A propos des Alains et des Sarmates
> en Europe Occidentale à l'Époque des Grandes Migrations
> in
> Michel Kazanski & Vanessa Soupault
> Les Sites archéologiques en Crimée et au Caucase
> durant l'Antiquité tardive et le haut Moyen-Age
>
> .'
>
> BTW, on another topic, later:
> 'Un autre groupe alain venu en Occident était sans doute d'origine
> caucasienne, comme le temoignerat Eusèbe qui parle de "loups du
> Nord", ennemis de l'Empire (les Huns et les Alains?), venus des
> roches du Caucase (Eusebius Hieronimus, Epistola LX ad Heliodorum). > '
>
> Ie. both people of As and of Van ethnicity.
>
> ****GK: Another one of your endless instances of trying to fit
> Snorri's ideas to genuine history. Alans and Huns indeed. Cloud
> kookooland forever****

Vanir, not Huns.


Torsten