Page 19 of 55 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 543

Thread: How far has Central European Bronze and Iron Ages pushed to the North?

  1. #181
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,037
    Sex
    Location
    lombardy
    Nationality
    italian

    Italy Portugal Order of Christ Russia Imperial Canada Quebec Spanish Empire (1506-1701) Vatican
    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    I just read (scanned) this:




    It's from Hans Kuhn (1962). He became famous because of his Northwestblock theory. In which he states that in the Lowlands (Benelux and Northern France) in the Bronze Age they spoke a in between Celtic and Germanic language (wiki):




    Euler considers that this theory has too less evidence and sees it as outdated. Nevertheless can Kuhn (1962) be linked to Euler (2009), because this quote of Kuhn could have been from Euler too (google translate):



    This more towards Italic statement was heavily supported by the Belgian linguist Maurits Gysseling.

    I guess what we see in the case of, large parts, the Northwestblock is proto-Germanic derived from the Unetice culture. In the case of the Sögel-Wohlde culture this makes perfectly sense. It's presumable this language didn't make the shifts (Grimm Law etc.) that were taken place in the Jastorf culture (LBA/iron age).

    So until the Roman Period and most of all the migration time the (Elp part of) Northwestblock was most probably a proto-Germanic relict area!

    Scientifically speaking you cannot have protogermanic BEFORE the Grimm law.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to etrusco For This Useful Post:

     anglesqueville (05-15-2021),  CopperAxe (05-15-2021),  JMcB (05-15-2021)

  3. #182
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    5,535
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    SGC+TRB Creool
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by etrusco View Post
    Scientifically speaking you cannot have protogermanic BEFORE the Grimm law.
    The is the definition Euler is using:



    That's quite clear imo. He uses proto-Germanic in the development of Germanic up until the first law of Grimm. In the end it's a matter of definitions, a matter of terminology.

    What matters to me is that the language of the Unetice culture settled in the Lowlands.
    Last edited by Finn; 05-15-2021 at 09:45 AM.

  4. #183
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    7,677
    Sex
    Location
    Normandy
    Ethnicity
    northwesterner
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-BY3604-Z275
    mtDNA (M)
    H5a1

    Normandie Orkney Netherlands Friesland East Frisia Finland
    "Mammals (from Latin mamma, 'breast') are a group of vertebrate animals constituting the class Mammalia (/məˈmeɪliə/), and characterized by the presence of mammary glands which in females produce milk for feeding (nursing) their young, a neocortex (a region of the brain), fur or hair, and three middle ear bones." (Wiki)
    If Euler was an evolutionary biologist, he would perhaps use "mammal" for the "development of mammals until the apparition of mammary glands, etc". That would not make things easy to understand.
    En North alom, de North venom
    En North fum naiz, en North manom

    (Roman de Rou, Wace, 1160-1170)

  5. #184
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    5,535
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    SGC+TRB Creool
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by anglesqueville View Post
    "Mammals (from Latin mamma, 'breast') are a group of vertebrate animals constituting the class Mammalia (/məˈmeɪliə/), and characterized by the presence of mammary glands which in females produce milk for feeding (nursing) their young, a neocortex (a region of the brain), fur or hair, and three middle ear bones." (Wiki)
    If Euler was an evolutionary biologist, he would perhaps use "mammal" for the "development of mammals until the apparition of mammary glands, etc". That would not make things easy to understand.
    Funny. But let's not make terminology to the matter of biggest focus....

    The split is clear: before and after Grimm's law, before is proto (as used by Euler).

    PS terminology discussion leads often to two unique Dutch words:

    *muggenziften (nitpick)
    and
    *krentenkakken ('currants poop')
    Last edited by Finn; 05-15-2021 at 10:55 AM.

  6. #185
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    5,535
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    SGC+TRB Creool
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    The headline, to be debunked, is that the language of the Unetice culture (Euler: proto-gerrmanic) settled in the Sögel-Wohlde period in the Lowlands. Until the influence of Germanic in migration ages period (incoming from the Jastorf area),

    the NW block was a Unetice language (Euler: proto-Germanic) relict area.
    Last edited by Finn; 05-15-2021 at 09:55 AM.

  7. #186
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,901
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    I just read (scanned) this:
    You know that the Nordwestblock and the Central German fortress people were more conservative and positioned in between Germanics and Celts, that's one aspect. The other is that we do know that its completely out of question that all of Hallstatt was Celtic speaking. In fact, especially the elite might have been non-Celtic even in large portions of the Western countries. With that in mind, the only safely associated archaeological cultures with Celts is La Tene and with Germanic Jastorf. Everything else is more questionable and there is absolutely no reason to assume that all of the Northern Hallstatt groups were actually Celtic speaking. That's I think the main takeaway from this, as well as the fact that both Celtic and Italic are similarly close to Germanic in its deeper origin, that's more speculative, but probably some would agree.

    There is no need of everybody in Western and Central Europe to have been Germanic or Celtic speaking, rather we deal with different more or less related Centum-speaking group and the transition from the Thraco-Illyrian (widest sense, represented by Lusatians and Eastern Hallstatt) to the Balto-Slavic sphere in the East. We might be never able to tell which exact language the people of Tollense, the people from the Nordwestblock or the people in the Central German fortress belt spoke, but we can assume they all used some sort of Centum-IE language related to Germanic-Italic-Celtic. What exactly we can't possibly reconstruct ever, its lost.
    Last edited by Riverman; 05-15-2021 at 02:40 PM. Reason: typo

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     Finn (05-15-2021),  Michał (05-15-2021)

  9. #187
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    5,535
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    SGC+TRB Creool
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    You know that the Nordwestblock and the Central German fortress people were more conservative and positioned in between Germanics and Celts, that's one aspect. The other is that we do know that its completely out of question that all of Hallstatt was Celtic speaking. In fact, especially the elite might have been non-Celtic even in large portions of the Western countries. With that in mind, the only safely associated archaeological cultures with Celts is La Tene and with Germanic Jastorf. Everything else is more questionable and there is absolutely no reason to assume that all of the Northern Hallstatt groups were actually Celtic speaking. That's I think the main takeaway from this, as well as the fact that both Celtic and Italic are similarly close to Germanic in its deeper origin, that's more speculative, but probably some would agree.

    There is no need of everybody in Western and Central Europe to have been Germanic or Celtic speaking, rather we deal with different more or less related Centum-speaking group and the transition from the Thraco-Illyrian (widest sense, represented by Lusatians and Eastern Hallstatt) to the Balto-Slavic sphere in the East. We might be never able to tell which exact language the people of Tollense, the people from the Nordwestblock or the people in the Central German fortress belt spoke, but we can assume they all used some sort of Centrum-IE language related to Germanic-Italic-Celtic. What exactly we can't possibly reconstruct ever, its lost.
    I totally agree Riverman, MBA, LBA even Iron Age cultures with roots in Central Europe had it's influence on more NW parts......and many of those influences are hard to reconstruct but still had their influence.

    Nevertheless in EBA there was influx from the Unetice area to Denmark, see Frei eta al 2019:
    https://www.researchgate.net/publica...nt-day_Denmark

    No reason to assume that other parts of NW Europe were not involved. Even more seen the biggest Sögel Wohlde grave in Drouwen (Drenthe/ North Dutch) we do only find graves that are equal in the core Unetice area's (see: Butler 1986, Meller 2017).

    The description of "proto-Germanic" (dixit Euler, 2009) equals the description of Kuhn (1962) and Gysseling for the "NW-block language" in which "proto-Germanic" is closely related to the other IE-variants especially (proto) Italic.

    So in your vocabulary the "para-Germanics" not only went to nowadays Denmark but also to the Lowlands.

    But indeed that's is only some light shed on EBA....MBA, LBA....is for the most part still dark in linguistic sense. Or?
    Last edited by Finn; 05-15-2021 at 01:49 PM.

  10. #188
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    7,677
    Sex
    Location
    Normandy
    Ethnicity
    northwesterner
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-BY3604-Z275
    mtDNA (M)
    H5a1

    Normandie Orkney Netherlands Friesland East Frisia Finland
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    There is no need of everybody in Western and Central Europe to have been Germanic or Celtic speaking, rather we deal with different more or less related Centum-speaking group and the transition from the Thraco-Illyrian (widest sense, represented by Lusatians and Eastern Hallstatt) to the Balto-Slavic sphere in the East. We might be never able to tell which exact language the people of Tollense, the people from the Nordwestblock or the people in the Central German fortress belt spoke, but we can assume they all used some sort of Centrum-IE language related to Germanic-Italic-Celtic. What exactly we can't possibly reconstruct ever, its lost.
    I agree with that. There are all the reasons to suppose that so soon as the middle of the Bronze Age Western Europe was the seat of a complex continuum of dialects, most ultimately derived from the language(s?) brought by the Cordeds and that only a small fraction of these dialects have had a descent until the historical era.This is exactly why it is very adventurous to try with all force to associate all archaeological cultures with one of the linguistic groups constructed from modern or attested languages. What language (s) did the people of Unetice culture speak in its final stages? In truth, no one knows anything about it, and in all likelihood will never know about it. There is still a case where a lost language, in particular a reconstructed one, has left enough traces to be identified: this is when it has had a strong lexical influence in a rather different language, a fortiori a language from another family. When, moreover, this language is well described, in particular by a whole series of phonological mutations which constitute so many chronological markers, we can say that the case is privileged. This is exactly what happens with the Germanic, for whom the Saami and Finnish groups are nothing less than a conservatory. It is not forbidden to scrutinize Central European hydronyms in the hope of finding Proto- or Paleo-Germanic fossils. On the other hand, it is unacceptable not to give all the attention it deserves to the enormous corpus of Germanic lexemes of Saami and Finnish, stratified from pre-Proto-Germanic to Proto-Norse, and obviously beyond. Unless of course, the object of the study is not linguistic, but only archaeological, in which case any linguistic correlation should be avoided, at the risk of the subject falling into total confusion.
    En North alom, de North venom
    En North fum naiz, en North manom

    (Roman de Rou, Wace, 1160-1170)

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to anglesqueville For This Useful Post:

     JMcB (05-15-2021),  Riverman (05-15-2021)

  12. #189
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    5,535
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    SGC+TRB Creool
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by anglesqueville View Post
    I agree with that. There are all the reasons to suppose that so soon as the middle of the Bronze Age Western Europe was the seat of a complex continuum of dialects, most ultimately derived from the language(s?) brought by the Cordeds and that only a small fraction of these dialects have had a descent until the historical era.This is exactly why it is very adventurous to try with all force to associate all archaeological cultures with one of the linguistic groups constructed from modern or attested languages. What language (s) did the people of Unetice culture speak in its final stages? In truth, no one knows anything about it, and in all likelihood will never know about it. There is still a case where a lost language, in particular a reconstructed one, has left enough traces to be identified: this is when it has had a strong lexical influence in a rather different language, a fortiori a language from another family. When, moreover, this language is well described, in particular by a whole series of phonological mutations which constitute so many chronological markers, we can say that the case is privileged. This is exactly what happens with the Germanic, for whom the Saami and Finnish groups are nothing less than a conservatory. It is not forbidden to scrutinize Central European hydronyms in the hope of finding Proto- or Paleo-Germanic fossils. On the other hand, it is unacceptable not to give all the attention it deserves to the enormous corpus of Germanic lexemes of Saami and Finnish, stratified from pre-Proto-Germanic to Proto-Norse, and obviously beyond. Unless of course, the object of the study is not linguistic, but only archaeological, in which case any linguistic correlation should be avoided, at the risk of the subject falling into total confusion.
    Of course it's with caution. Nevertheless "archeological cultures" contain "pots and people". Those people spoke languages. As the Anglo-Saxons brought their language to England so did the Unetice influx to NW Europe...

    I agree with Euler who states that we must not fall into the one extreme (the Kossinnian paradigma's before ww2 in which archeology and language etc. all were 1:1) but also not in the opposite after ww2 in which archeology and linguistics seem to have cut. That's indeed 'artificial'.

    Multidsciplinary is still needed....
    We should not throw the baby out with the bathwater....
    Last edited by Finn; 05-15-2021 at 02:21 PM.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Finn For This Useful Post:

     Michał (05-15-2021)

  14. #190
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    7,677
    Sex
    Location
    Normandy
    Ethnicity
    northwesterner
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-BY3604-Z275
    mtDNA (M)
    H5a1

    Normandie Orkney Netherlands Friesland East Frisia Finland
    I didn't want to react the other day (your "Herrenvolk" stories had put me in too bad a mood). For me, the old stories of so-called New Archeology are totally irrelevant here, as were your allusions to Nazi Nordicism (which you had the distraction of wanting to make an argument). What is in question here is the scientific possibility of deducing a language (or a linguistic affiliation) from a set of archaeological classifications, without the slightest properly linguistic clue.
    En North alom, de North venom
    En North fum naiz, en North manom

    (Roman de Rou, Wace, 1160-1170)

  15. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to anglesqueville For This Useful Post:

     Bygdedweller (05-15-2021),  JMcB (05-15-2021),  Michał (05-15-2021),  Strider99 (05-15-2021)

Page 19 of 55 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 93
    Last Post: 07-23-2020, 05:39 PM
  2. Replies: 121
    Last Post: 07-08-2020, 07:59 AM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-22-2020, 03:10 PM
  4. Impact of Unetice or Central European Bronze Age!?
    By Finn in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-08-2018, 01:12 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-08-2017, 05:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •