Re: German population in Europe after fall of Roman Empire.
From: Inger E Johansson (inger_e.johansson_at_notelia.com)
Date: 07/02/04
- Next message: David B: "Re: more about Range Creek"
- Previous message: Franz Gnaedinger: "Re: Did the Trojan war really happen the way Homer said it did?"
- In reply to: Seppo Renfors: "Re: German population in Europe after fall of Roman Empire."
- Next in thread: Seppo Renfors: "Re: German population in Europe after fall of Roman Empire."
- Reply: Seppo Renfors: "Re: German population in Europe after fall of Roman Empire."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 07:20:16 GMT
Seppo,
No people migrating into Götaland AFTER Late Stone Age before 1100 AD. No
group ever conquered the Goths who definitely with 100% certainty origined
from Östergötland and Västergötland.
There are techniques of iron production only used in Östergötland,
Västergötland, Öland, Småland and Gotland on larger scales. That techinque
were more than 100 years older here then when used in other Iron production
areas. The owens of this type have only been found in minor scales(=a few)
and later in Poland and on North Jutland. It's more to it than that.
Same group -observe continuity found only in this one larger area in Europa-
close to Europe Area - Please observe that the names are today's names but
many of them are 'old'= Pre-Viking names.
Draw a line from Motala along Lake Vaettern's eastern shore to Braaviken(I
didn't look north of Braaviken but included the land between Braaviken and
Slätbaken in my study) draw an other line from Motala down to Hästholmen
half way down to Gränna. Draw one line from Hästholmen down to Gamleby(I
included the land south of that line in my study) and let the Baltic Sea's
western shores of each time (back to the Yoldia Sea's days) be the eastern
border of my survey area.
The part which might be of interest to this debate but hasn't been discussed
here is that the map I drawed from waterlines of year 1000 AD on which I
plotted each single 'fornborg' ancient castle, ancient
defend-stonghold(except one I missed and one found later) in 'my' area and
surrounding areas - that map gives two additative information:
* It confirms that this area had more defense in it's outher regions and
that each period from early Bronze Age on forward had it's strongest defense
set on the 'best' waterway inlands for each period. That's interesting.
Isn't it?
* It show directly when compared of maps of known 'hålvägar' Ancient roads
and or Ancient horse paths, when and where the importance to change the
defense from mainly seaway oriented defense to defense against attacks over
sea with men, horses etc happened. The later didn't come about in major
scale until during Viking Age. That's interesting as well. Don't you agree.
As an extra information gained from that study one also can predict with
relative certainty that up to the days of Götavirke(earlier called
Östgötavirke) 8th-9th century.
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%F6tavirke
for photos and information about excavations:
http://www.archaeology.su.se/arklab/gotavirke/bilder.html
in some ways alike Danavirke. Götavirke is about 3500 meter long
defense-wall in the outher ends the terrain helps stop introduers.
The land west of Götavirke has up to Modern Age mainly been owned or ruled
by same families with tight ties to each other and their relatives on the
western side of Lake Vaettern. We know this families as Royal Families of
Sweden - Folkunga Dynasty, Sverker's Dynasty and so on. Both closely linked
to the so called Old Royal Dynasty of Sweden and from 11th century(at least)
with the Danish Royal Nobilty. But that's an other story.
Inger E
"Seppo Renfors" <Renfors@not.com.au> skrev i meddelandet
news:40E4B1C5.4A3A2F0@not.com.au...
>
>
> Inger E Johansson wrote:
> >
>
> [snip very interesting references]
>
> > Some has also been found in Östergötland and in Tjust/Teuste but since
> > neither of them can be found on net you will have to send me private
mail
> > for more information and ref.
> >
> > * direct contact has been shown to have existed due to two rare species.
> >
> > I proved this in my own C-essay. For maps showing the distribution in
> > Europe(and in at least one island in the Sargasso Sea) as well as full
> > proof, please send me a private mail.
> >
> > * Continuety in settlements, graveyards etc.
> > I proved this in my own C-essay. For proof, maps showing major artifacts
and
> > settlements from Stone Age up to 1000 AD resp correct waterleve for the
peak
> > of each period, list of artifacts found etc.... Please send me a private
> > mail.
>
> You have my address already Inger, sent it to you (finally) a couple
> of weeks ago.
> >
> > * 'a' -sound the origin 'a' sound in among other places Östergötland.
Which
> > show above everything else that it's almost completely impossible that a
> > group ever conquered this area given the fact that the settlements and
the
> > graveyards have been shown to have a continuity and not show any kind of
> > hard battles except from later Medieval and Modern time when twice a
Danish
> > army walked thru and burnt a few farms before they were thrown out.
> >
> > That's more to add to this. It's all in my manuscript the Gothic Mosaic.
>
> One of the things I believe may be confusing the overall issues here
> is the naming convention of a people. They are named on arrival at a
> place, where their unique culture can be identified - till then they
> are usually unnamed or part of some other people. They had to cross
> Europe to get to Scandinavia in the first place - therefor their
> language, whatever it is called, came with them. This is pure common
> sense and needs no further evidence.
>
> For some to again migrate back, obviously they also take their
> language with them - they can do nothing else. Their culture and
> identity as a people at that stage are "Goths" where the name
> originates from "Götland", the name of their home. IF they are able to
> dominate the cultures existing and impose their own on the populous of
> the place they move to, they retain the name - else it changes to
> another culture and name. If they then cross country that their
> unnamed, or differently named ancestors have trodden centuries before,
> or partly even settled doesn't make those ancestors back in time
> attain the name "Goths". Only it does make it easier for the Goths to
> impose their culture on a people - specially if they are the "ruling
> class".
>
> It is for this reason the first century AD is the "starting point" for
> "Goths". Those on Götland couldn't retain their culture and lost it to
> become Norse over the next millennia. This doesn't change the origins
> of the Goths in any way. At the same time it doesn't preclude the
> identification of the people TO Scandinavia in the first place - but
> they were not called Goths at that time, they only became that on
> arrival - it is due to that naming convention.
>
>
> --
> SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
> misled.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
- Next message: David B: "Re: more about Range Creek"
- Previous message: Franz Gnaedinger: "Re: Did the Trojan war really happen the way Homer said it did?"
- In reply to: Seppo Renfors: "Re: German population in Europe after fall of Roman Empire."
- Next in thread: Seppo Renfors: "Re: German population in Europe after fall of Roman Empire."
- Reply: Seppo Renfors: "Re: German population in Europe after fall of Roman Empire."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
