Yes. There was a Celtic culture in Germany, quite an advanced one at that, which was then destroyed and replaced by more backwards Germanic peoples.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Yes. There was a Celtic culture in Germany, quite an advanced one at that, which was then destroyed and replaced by more backwards Germanic peoples.
Germanics came from southern Scandinavia (plus Jutland and Sjaelland). That is where the Proto-Germanic language formed, before then they would be more properly considered "Indo-Europeans".
Then they weren't Germanic yet, but Indo-Europeans. Indo-Europeans came from the east into Europe; amongst others, some went to Italy and became Latins, others went to Central Europe and became Celts, and others went up to Jutland, then to Sjaelland and to southern Scandinavia. After some time, they diverged culturally enough from other Indo-European peoples to speak a new language, Proto-Germanic.
Scandinavia was populated approximately as soon as the ice started to withdraw, about 9000 years ago. 4800 years ago a material culture that is believed to correspond to the indo european migrations entered Scandinavia (a branch of the Corded Ware Culture refered to as the battleax or boataxe culture in English or Båtyxekulturen in Swedish), that is when Scandinavia is believed to have gotten it's first indo european speakers, speaking a more or less common indo-european language that at that time was spoken from Frisia to the Caucasus. In time this language evolved into proto-Celtic, Latin, Vedic, Scythian and proto-Germanic in different localities. Proto-Germanic is commonly believed to have evolved out of the indo-european spoken in Scandinavia and spread out of there in a series of migration waves, displacing mainly Proto-Celtic speakers inhabiting Germany (as a result of earlier migrations of Proto-Celtic speakers believed to be connected to the spread of the LaTène culture from the northern slopes of the Alps).
Last edited:
Very much correct, sir. I wonder though if the Central European Celts were "pushed out", or if they were assimilated by the Germanics (likely a combination of both, but to what extent of each?).
By the way, somewhat surprisingly, the Germanic traditions of how Scandinavia came to be settled by them is pretty similar to the story modern archaeology and linguistics tell us: according to the tradition mentioned in the Ynglinga saga, they came from where nowadays is European Russia, then established a realm in "Saxland" (probably the area of Holstein, where later Saxons lived), from where they settled Sjaelland and established halls in southern Scandinavia. This is pretty similar to what we know today due to archaeology and linguistics, that the Indo-Europeans that migrated to Scandinavia (and there diverged into Germanic culture) arrived there by moving from modern European Russia and the Baltic countries to northern Germany, and from there into Scandinavia/Jutland peninsula/Sjaelland.
Last edited:
I agree on your first point of the previous "Celtic" inhabitants. Seems all the data points to the same thing in England.
Dude, just great fantastic fact filled post!
The Goths are actually very problematic to trace. It has so far been impossible to link Gothic conclusively to either North Germanic or West Germanic. That basicly leaves us with written accounts about their origin, which may or may not be true, and archeology. No sane scholar would try to use a semi mythical account as their main evidence these days, especially when the writer of that account mentioned that there were competing stories at his time, which leaves us with archeology. Making life even more difficult is the fact that material culture does not equal ethnicity.
Now the only archeological culture that conclusively can be linked to the Goths is the Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture since it dates from the time we know the Goths were in contact with the Romans. This is a composit culture, mainly based on older local culture, it does however have the same burial practices as the Wielbark culture has, that is a combination of cremation and inhumation in addition to graves without weapons (which is pretty much unique). So it is possible to conclude that a group most likely moved from the area covered by the Wielbark culture to the area covered by the Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture. The main problem is that the Wielbark culture continue uninterupted well after the creation of the Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture. This argues against a massive migration from the areas covered by the Wielbark culture since a large scale migration should lead to abandonment of a relative large number of settlements.
So some kind of migration from the area covered by the Wielbark culture to the area covered by the Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture is very likely. It is however not possible to know from which area inside the Wielbark culture they came from, or their ethnicity, or the the size of the migration. So even if one were to establish a link between Scandinavian culture, Wielbark culture and Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture it does not automaticly follow that an ethnical group actually moved the whole way.
Trying to get a connection between the Wielbark culture, and the Goths, and Scandinavia is however a lot more difficult. If we are to belive Tacitus the Goths had established themself roughly in the area covered by the Wielbark culture before 100 AD. Now here we run into a very serious problem. The burial practices in the early Wielbark culture are very different from the burial practices in Scandinavia at the time, only some time after 100 AD does Scandinavian burial practices (with some modifications) come into use. This means that the Wielbark culture, and the Goths if Tacitus is rigth, has been established without a direct migration from Scandinavia. There is simply no logical reason why Scandinavian migrants should have abandoned their burial practices for 3-4 generations and then reverted back to them.
As for the scholary debate on this topic the invasion/large scale migration from Scandinavia into the Wielbark culture went out of fashion in the 1960's when Kmiecinskis pointed out the change in burial practices. People like Wolfram, Noble and Halsall for the most part has argued for a no migration from Scandinavia and only a small migration of Goths south from the Wielbark culture theory. Heather argues a no migration from Scandinavia and a relatively large Goth migration south theory. Hansen argues that most of the connection is due to small mercenary bands (if I don't remember wrong), Stoorgard argues for exogamy as an explanation for some cultural exchange. Olsen argues for cultural exchange due to mercenaries and exogamy, and Anders Kaliff has put forward a theory where he argues for a small migration of Scandinavian elites into the Wielbark culture combined with trade, exogamy and a mutual exchange of craftsmen. Hachman went for the slightly more exotic theory of an invasion north into Scandinavia by Goths. Kokowski is as far as I know one of the few who really has argued for the invasion/large scale migration theory the last 20 years or so. Kokowski has however not really been able to explain the changes in burial practices. There is most likely a couple of theories that I have managed to forget here, but it should at least cover the most used theories at the moment. The conclusion would as far as I can see be that 1. it is hard to talk about an academic consensus on the origins of the Goths, and 2. it's even harder to talk about an academic consensus for them coming out from Scandinavia .
Oh, and all of the scholars mentioned above does to my knowledge accept that the name Goth comes from the meaning "to pour"/"outflow of river". That does actually seem to be the only thing that scholars can agree on at the moment.
Now the only archeological culture that conclusively can be linked to the Goths is the Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture since it dates from the time we know the Goths were in contact with the Romans. This is a composit culture, mainly based on older local culture, it does however have the same burial practices as the Wielbark culture has, that is a combination of cremation and inhumation in addition to graves without weapons (which is pretty much unique). So it is possible to conclude that a group most likely moved from the area covered by the Wielbark culture to the area covered by the Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture. The main problem is that the Wielbark culture continue uninterupted well after the creation of the Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture. This argues against a massive migration from the areas covered by the Wielbark culture since a large scale migration should lead to abandonment of a relative large number of settlements.
So some kind of migration from the area covered by the Wielbark culture to the area covered by the Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture is very likely. It is however not possible to know from which area inside the Wielbark culture they came from, or their ethnicity, or the the size of the migration. So even if one were to establish a link between Scandinavian culture, Wielbark culture and Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture it does not automaticly follow that an ethnical group actually moved the whole way.
Trying to get a connection between the Wielbark culture, and the Goths, and Scandinavia is however a lot more difficult. If we are to belive Tacitus the Goths had established themself roughly in the area covered by the Wielbark culture before 100 AD. Now here we run into a very serious problem. The burial practices in the early Wielbark culture are very different from the burial practices in Scandinavia at the time, only some time after 100 AD does Scandinavian burial practices (with some modifications) come into use. This means that the Wielbark culture, and the Goths if Tacitus is rigth, has been established without a direct migration from Scandinavia. There is simply no logical reason why Scandinavian migrants should have abandoned their burial practices for 3-4 generations and then reverted back to them.
As for the scholary debate on this topic the invasion/large scale migration from Scandinavia into the Wielbark culture went out of fashion in the 1960's when Kmiecinskis pointed out the change in burial practices. People like Wolfram, Noble and Halsall for the most part has argued for a no migration from Scandinavia and only a small migration of Goths south from the Wielbark culture theory. Heather argues a no migration from Scandinavia and a relatively large Goth migration south theory. Hansen argues that most of the connection is due to small mercenary bands (if I don't remember wrong), Stoorgard argues for exogamy as an explanation for some cultural exchange. Olsen argues for cultural exchange due to mercenaries and exogamy, and Anders Kaliff has put forward a theory where he argues for a small migration of Scandinavian elites into the Wielbark culture combined with trade, exogamy and a mutual exchange of craftsmen. Hachman went for the slightly more exotic theory of an invasion north into Scandinavia by Goths. Kokowski is as far as I know one of the few who really has argued for the invasion/large scale migration theory the last 20 years or so. Kokowski has however not really been able to explain the changes in burial practices. There is most likely a couple of theories that I have managed to forget here, but it should at least cover the most used theories at the moment. The conclusion would as far as I can see be that 1. it is hard to talk about an academic consensus on the origins of the Goths, and 2. it's even harder to talk about an academic consensus for them coming out from Scandinavia .
Oh, and all of the scholars mentioned above does to my knowledge accept that the name Goth comes from the meaning "to pour"/"outflow of river". That does actually seem to be the only thing that scholars can agree on at the moment.
Last edited:
Academics might argue on the specifics, but generally speaking, where else could the German-speaking Goths come from, if not from the area inhabited by Germans? At worst, the area of German ethnogenesis could be slightly revised to include not only Southern Sweden but also the mouth of Vistula, which is not exactly half the world away. And IIRC Wielbark ended up disappearing pretty much completely at some point between the establishment of the Gothic kingdom and the migration of Slavs, so I don't find it particularly strange. It's still a migration, it's just that some "stragglers" were still around in the Vistula area while the "vanguard" already established the Cherniachov polity on the lower Dnieper.
They would com out from an area inhabitated by Proto Germanics/Germanics, but these scholars argue that there is no direct link between the Wielbark culture and a migration of people out of Scandinavia. If the Goths left, lets say the area around Hamburg in 500 BC, wandered around for 600 years and established themself at Vistula it would be "sligthly" different from leaving Southern Sweden in the first century AD to form the Wielbark Culture.
As for a ethnogensis covering Southern Sweden and the Wielbark culture you again run into the trouble of why the Goths show up in the area before the influence from Scandinavia. As for the migration south the problem is that the evidence points to the vast majority staying put, not that some "stragglers" being left behind. And yes, the Wielbark culture disappears, but it does so more than 200 years after the formation of the Sîntana de Mures/Cernjachov culture.*
Edit. * There is a difference between a tribal movement like the one described by Jordanes and historians before 1962 and a small warband of professional aristocratic warriors with a charismatic leader which is what Wolfram would argue, or even a band of mercenaries that some others argue.
Last edited:
Interesting. Are there alternative explanations for the disappearance of the Wielbark culture?
Well that isn't that suprising is it? The Goths that arrived at the Vistula was still speaking (late) proto-germanic afterall, the split between North and East and West Germanic occured after the creation of the Wielbark culture. And Gothic more closely resembles proto-germanic than any other Germanic laguage grouping even though it does share some unusual characteristics with Old Gutnish (which, by the time we know it from, must have been separated from Gothic by 1100 years).
As far as I have been able to gather wielbark settlements were abandoned, specifically settlements in eastern pommerania were abandoned en masse in the first half of the 3rd century
Do you have any sources on that? As far as I have been able to gather standing stones appear in the Wielbark area in the later half of the first century, pretty much at the same time as the material culture itself is established. The stone circles at Węsiory seem to be dated at 1st and 2nd century AD, the stone circles at Leśno seem similarily to be dated at 1st and second centuries AD (both incidentally being located in Eastern Pommerania).
Didn't know that "estuary" was one of the believed meanings of Goth, I've only read theories that Gutan/Guto (to pour) refered either to metal casting ("Gjuta" in for example modern Swedish) or refered to men and manhood, similar to how the Gutnish word for "boy" is "Gutt".
I've seen it listed as "estuary" although not in a particularly legit source. It seems to be a pretty logical development from "pouring" though. (IE: a river is "poured")
It doesen't only apply to metal-casting in modern swedish either. (not sure how old it is though) as eg. "gjuta olja på vågorna" ("pour oil on the waves") or the opposite "gjuta olja på elden" (pour oil on fire)
Sorry, about to board a plane so I have to take this fast. The rest will most likely have to wait to the end of the week.
Wielbark stone circle graves are dated to B2 in "Die Wielbark-Kultur und die Problematik der Gotenwanderung" by Blischke in Archaeologische Informationen, 19/1&2, 1996
and in "Archhäologie und Geschichte der Goten vom 1.-7. Jahrhundert" by Bierbrauer in Frühmittelalterliche Studien Jahrbuch des Instituts für Frühmittelalterforschung der Universität Múnster 1994. Both date the beginning of the Wielbark culture to B1, which is before B2.
Meaning of Goth can be found in Gothic connections. Contacts between eastern Scandinavia and the southern Baltic coast 1000BC – AD500 by Kaliff
Wielbark stone circle graves are dated to B2 in "Die Wielbark-Kultur und die Problematik der Gotenwanderung" by Blischke in Archaeologische Informationen, 19/1&2, 1996
and in "Archhäologie und Geschichte der Goten vom 1.-7. Jahrhundert" by Bierbrauer in Frühmittelalterliche Studien Jahrbuch des Instituts für Frühmittelalterforschung der Universität Múnster 1994. Both date the beginning of the Wielbark culture to B1, which is before B2.
Meaning of Goth can be found in Gothic connections. Contacts between eastern Scandinavia and the southern Baltic coast 1000BC – AD500 by Kaliff
Interesting. In Portuguese "gota" means drop (as in raindrop). Maybe this root was developed at a late Proto-Indo-European stage, and then developed in a divergent manner in Proto-Germanic and in Proto-Italic?
I remember one of my ol' 2nd. grade work books (it was the old Äppel, Päppel, Pirom, Parom paper clusters if anyone remembers those had a section on "tricky words" and one of them was trying to distinguish between gjuta, njuta & ljuta
had a section on "tricky words" and one of them was trying to distinguish between gjuta, njuta & ljuta
Absolutely. But I must say that as an ethnonym it doesn't make too much sense, unless perhaps they simply called their land by the Vistula "estuary" and the ethnonym is derived from a toponym sort of like it is believed that Burgundians might be named after an urheimat on Burgundaholmr (Bornholm in old norse). But that would really only work for the Goths and it discounts the possibility of a relationship between the Goths and the other tribes with near identical names.
Ofc, you also "gjuter" concrete into a for example a plinth ("gjuta en plint"), or courage into something (example; "han gjuter mod i ett helt land"). It's just a synonym for pouring in Swedish and I think the same is true for all scandinavian languages.
Last edited:
Sorry, been a little too busy lately to write down something sensible.
True, it is not a big suprise, but I do like to eliminate possibilities when I argue for/against a case. Bad habit
Some settlements were indeed abandoned, but not on a massive scale, which is why you have a rather sizeable group of historians arguing for the "war band" theory instead of a tribal migration (some, like Peter Heather do however still argue for a rather large scale migration). The Wielbark settlements in Northern Poland continued into late D1 to early D2, so if it was a migration and not "war bands" that went south it can't have been a whole tribe moving as was the belief before 1962.
Sorry, at times I can be a little too geeky. B1, B2 and so on are time periods used by archaeologists. They are lazy bastards, so instead of writing AD 1 - 70/80 they simply write B1.
Another, and perhaps more easily availible source on Wielbark stone sircle graves, is "The Goths" by Peter Heather:
True, it is not a big suprise, but I do like to eliminate possibilities when I argue for/against a case. Bad habit
Some settlements were indeed abandoned, but not on a massive scale, which is why you have a rather sizeable group of historians arguing for the "war band" theory instead of a tribal migration (some, like Peter Heather do however still argue for a rather large scale migration). The Wielbark settlements in Northern Poland continued into late D1 to early D2, so if it was a migration and not "war bands" that went south it can't have been a whole tribe moving as was the belief before 1962.
Cool, have a nice flight
.........
B1 and B2? What does that mean?
Sorry, at times I can be a little too geeky. B1, B2 and so on are time periods used by archaeologists. They are lazy bastards, so instead of writing AD 1 - 70/80 they simply write B1.
Another, and perhaps more easily availible source on Wielbark stone sircle graves, is "The Goths" by Peter Heather: