Re: Morimarusa

--- On Fri, 1/15/10, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:


From: Torsten <tgpedersen@...>
Subject: [tied] Re: Morimarusa
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 8:36 AM


 





--- In cybalist@... s.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- On Thu, 1/14/10, Torsten <tgpedersen@ ...> wrote:
>
>
> > > Finally: there is no plausible explanation as to how Germanic
> > > would have spread from a Przeworsk heartland to Scandinavia,
> >
> > Udolph and several others argue on the basis of placenames that
> > Scandinavia can't been part of the Germanic-speaking heartland
>
> ****GK: The same problem exists with the "Slavic-speaking
> heartland", and other "heartlands" . Which suggests that placenames
> are not automatic indicators in such issues.****

It's not very clear what you're saying here, unless it is that you want to downplay a criterion that doesn't work your way.

> Ulla Lund Hansen
> Die Sarmaten aus südskandinavischer Sicht
> "As an archaeological concept the 'Sarmatians' appear rarely in the
> Scandinavian and/or North European archaeology, and finds from the
> Danish, Swedish or Norwegian Iron Age - and here in particular the
> Roman Imperial Period - are only rarely seen in connection with the
> Sarmatians in the archaeological literature, interpreted as from
> Sarmatian influence or even Sarmatian provenance. Although some
> Scandinavan finds are occasionally seen in relation to
> 'Southeastern Europe', this 'Southeastern Europe' is only rarely
> made specific geographically or ethnically-cultural ly. In spite of
> that the evaluation results of the archaology of the late Imperial
> Period in Europe and Scandinavia (middle 2nd to end of 4th cent.)
> offer good prospects for analyzing southeastern connections and
> thus doing also to consider further the Sarmatian culture.
>
>
> The settlement archaeology of Scandinavia flows through all of the
> Iron Age as a continuous development without striking external
> influences. The analyses of burial customs, grave inventories and
> weapon sacrificial finds have however helped bring about a number
> of new observations which must be interpreted in a European
> context. Here it might at the present time be difficult to
> determine whether the innovations are due to influences from
> Western Europe, from Eastern Europe or from both areas, or whether
> the recognizable influences from west and southeast in many cases
> have combined on the continent south of Denemark and arrived in
> Scandinavia as a unitary foreign conglomerate. "
>
> ****GK: How putative "Sarmatian" influence from the South proves a
> "Germanic" exodus from Przeworsk to Scandinavia remains opaque if
> not altogether beyond the realm of standard logical analysis.*** *

You mean the machinations of George's brain? The one scenario I find bumps into the fewest factual obstacles is one where the Germanic language arrives in Scandinavia as part of the Sarmatian-influence d 'unitary foreign conglomerate' .

Torsten

****GK: Of course (:=)). You have no proof for any of your theses, and so you substitute your usual ad hominem deflections mixed up with vague promises and misunderstandings. Where your source states that there might be something to look at you advance unfounded conclusions. You would make a good politician.****