Re: The Early Germans


"Hayabusa" <peregrine@xxxxxxxxxxx> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:3pu9u1t1s1v6iakfvbkbdvh2hke9bepj99@xxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 21:59:21 GMT, "Alan Crozier"
<name1.name2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Thanks for that link, Peter.

Interesting that Todd on page 20 conveys an opinion on the
origin of the Gundestrup cauldron:
"a work of an eastern Celtic master based on the lower Danube in
the later secondor earlier first century BC".

AFAIK this is the standard interpretation, I have heard it a couple
times before.
Yes, it is. But, as Uwe has pointed out, there are arguments against
that interpretation.
Me ? I believe in the Danube - theory.

After all, somehow these elephants must have ended up on
the cauldron, and they weren't rampaging through northern Jutland at
200BCE. - Neither, of course, through Dacia. But it is far easier to
imagine that a Dacian silver smith knew about them than a Germanic
artisan at the end of the world.

Germanic tribes don't come into the play here.
Just as a reminder so as to not muddy the waters further.
It's Thracian against Celt.

Somehow it would be fascinating to find out just how much people knew
about each other in those times. For example, did the news of
Alexanders conquest of the Persian empire spread to northern Europe? -

Almost certainly not.
No Greeks north of Marsillia; gossip in harbour taverns ? Yes.
But as it didn't affext them and they didn't even know where persia was ...

I would assume that they did; big A's war affected the eastern Med,
and was probably taverne talk subject from Syracuse to the Atlantic.

Not in the Iron age. The tradenets seem to have broken down at the end of the
copper and bronze age.

Ok, I am just dreaming.

That's called speculating ... ;-P

Cheers,

Michael Kuettner


.

Loading