From: Torsten
Message: 67461
Date: 2011-05-03
>BTW is the name 'Baltic' for that zone from before the realization that the Balts migrated to the Baltic 2000 years ago, replacing Veneti and Aestii?
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> /message/66953
> > Personally I think Galindi is a Germanic name
> > http://tech.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/66904
> > which meant the same as the Iranian name 'Bastarnae' "the bound
> > ones" ie. "the (sons of) slaves". That would identify the Galindi
> > as Bastarnae.
>
> ****GK: At any rate the Galindi were in the Baltic sphere
> culturally.
> I wonder if the Iranic solution (if acceptable) might in fact be aIn think that in the derogatory exonym 'Bastarnae' is a racial taunt: "sons of slaves", a reminder of that event which would have been remembered. The intention of the insult is the connection with the Scythian slaves. I also think that that is the reason it is sometimes hard to determine whether Bastarnae proper or some other 'bastard' people was meant.
> later Sarmatian "popular etymology" for the hated Bastarnae. The
> real Bastarnae were obviously not connected with the people of
> Herodotus' story, i.e. the original "Scythian slaves"
> [as a matterThe most extreme 19th century German ideologues thought of Scandinavia and England as, although brother peoples, naturally subservient to Germany. Compensation for a vague notion of being a 'bastard, mixed with something low'?
> of fact even the Herodotus story is a bit ambiguous, since it
> mentions at some point (I paraphrase) that the Paralatae considered
> all other "Scythians" as their slaves (this would include the
> descendants of the first two brothers?), though elsewhere the
> impression is that it is the non-Iranic population which is in that
> category, and maybe its aristocracy was also exempted].
> The historical Bastarnae of Roman times were clearly distinguishedThere is a possibility that *bast- itself is a loan into Germanic from Iranian, in which case there would be no difference between a Germanic and an Iranian explanation.
> from "Scythian slaves" (and the "Scythae degeneres et a servis orti"
> of Pliny were evidently a different group from his Bastarnae or
> Peucini). So all in all I still tend to favour some sort of Germanic
> explanation a la *bastjans for the original term.
> And surmise thatThat was the first ten years. Hm.
> it would have been a kind of alliance of Germanic and Celtic groups
> (with the former increasingly predominating linguistically) in a
> Getic environment. Or it might have referred to a symbiosis of
> Germanics (Yastorf) and Illyrians(Venets) with Celtic associates. I
> don't think one will stop talking about various possibilities here
> any time soon.