Â
> > I disagree with the identification of Sithones with
> > Sidones/Bastarnians. Too far fetched.
>
> With no reasoning why this is just a restatement of your belief that
> there was no mid-1st cent. BCE Bastarnian penetration of Przeworsk.
> *****GK: There is not much "reasoning" required to reject an
> arbitrary assumption such as Sithones in Finland or thereabout =
> Bastarnian Sidones. As for the "Bastarnian penetration of Przeworsk"
> we are still waiting for evidence from you. You have provided
> absolutely nothing except restatement after restatement of your
> conviction. That is not proof. ******
Pekkanen's argument on the identity of the Sithones is very long, I'll try to sum it up.
Since we know from Tacitus, Germani 45
that
'Bordering on the Suiones are the nations of the Sitones.'
and bearing in mind that Tacitus lists the various nations from west to east, we know that the Sithones were the eastern neighbors of the Suiones, the ancestors of the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedes_(Germanic_tribe)
known later in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svealand
This people Pekkanen assumes lived on the *southern* coast of the Baltic:
pp. 32-33
'In c. 45, 2 Tacitus proceeds in his narrative to the Aestii living on the dextrum Suebici maris litus. After the passage on the Aestii he once again mentions the Suiones and defines the habitat of the Sithones in relation to them, not to the Aestii. Considering the consistent geographical order manifested in the Germania, I think it is most unlikely that Tacitus in his narrative would have turned again from the coast to the sea. Even Müllenhoff considered this quite impossible. However, since he wanted to place the Sithones in Scandinavia in order to identify them with the Kvaens, he transplanted the paragraph 45, 6 to the end of c. 44. This transposition involves the change of c. 45, 1 Trans Suionas to Trans Sithonas. The alteration of the text, which must be considered as most drastic and poorly motivated, has subsequently been unanimously rejected by scholars and all modern editors retain paragraph 45, 6 in the place given to it in the MSS. Nevertheless, the Suiones mentioned in c. 45, 6 have been located ever since as if the transposition proposed by Îüllenhoff had been unanimously accepted. However, if we accept Müllenhoff's well-founded opinion that Tacitus cannot suddenly have deviated from his consistent geographical order and at the same time reject the violent transposition, I do not see any other choice than to establish that Tacitus conceived the Suiones as living not only ipso in Oceano but also near the Aestii dextro Suebici maris litore. This conclusion is not contradictory to the other facts about the Suiones gathered from Tacitus, for the words Suionum hinc civitates ipso in Oceano do not imply that the author considered the Suiones to dwell only 'in the middle of the Ocean'.
Since Tacitus mentions the name Suiones in three connections, naturally each, of these three paragraphs must be taken into equal consideration when hying to establish the location of the communities in question. On the basis of the first of the paragraphs examined separately, we may conclude that the Suiones were living either in the middle of the Ocean or both in the Ocean and along the coast, depending on whether we translate the words ipso in Oceano 'in the Ocean itself' or 'even in the Ocean'. When the third of the three paragraphs, which is completely unambiguous, is also considered, it becomes quite clear that only the latter alternative is correct. In these circumstances it is easy to understand that in the first paragraph Tacitus used an ambiguous expression. He did not say that the Suiones were living on an island or islands, in insula or insulis, because he knew that there were also Suiones dextro Suebici maris litore.'
Tacitus goes on with his list in 46:
'Here Suebia ends. I do not know whether to class the tribes of the Peucini, Venedi, and Fenni with the Germans or with the Sarmatians.'
In other words Tacitus places the Sithones with the Suiones (on the Swina
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Awina
?) to the northwest and the Peucini, Venedi, and Fenni to the southeast, and as part of the Suebi domain.
Cf.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/66976
The
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribes_of_Widsith
are listed in the other direction, from east to west
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/66981
ie. in
'Wald Woingum, Wod þyringum,
Sæferð Sycgum, Sweom Ongendþeow,
Sceafthere Ymbrum, Sceafa Longbeardum,
Wald [ruled] the Woings, Wod the Thuringians,
Saeferth the Sycgs, Ongendtheow the Swedes,
Sceafthere the Umbers, Sceafa the Langobards,'
the tribe sequence is (might be):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vangiones
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuringians
Sithones / Sidones
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svear
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambrones
'Their name has been connected to the islands of Fehmarn, old name Imbria, and Amrum. If true, they may be the Ymbers of Widsith'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langobards
If the Sithones /Sidones were the eastern neighbors of the Suiones, the last four make a perfect geographical sequence east to west (partly) along the southern Baltic coast. As for the two first ones ... hm. But who knows.
Torsten