| Author |
Message |
|
Len Parker
|
|
  |
 |
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
 Posted: Thu 28 Sep, 2017 9:43 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Basically all indo-european people had "martial brotherhoods" of wolf (and or dog) warriors.
The etymology of were-wolf actually means "man-wolf".
So men who can shapeshift into wolves ("hamrammr").
The word for World (eng), Welt (germ), Wereld (dutch), Verden (dan), Världen (swe) all contain this word for "man" as the first element in these germanic languages. Wer- is cognate with Latin Vir also meaning man. Virtus = manliness.
In old Norse Ver-Aldar = man-age/epoch. [actually dutch Wer-eld preserve the full name best.
The world is etymologically not a place, but an age. Frey was the "veraldar goğ" - the god of the man-age.
The place we live is Midgard.
In many indo-european societies the young men was send out as packs of wolves/dogs, so by attacking and terrorizing the numbers they could earn their man-hood and eventually return to society as "humans" and marry, settle and build a family.
In some societies you had to participate in a certain number of raiding campaigns, before you were allowed to become a member of society.
Caesar wrote of the Germani: "Robberies which are committed outside the boundaries of each state they consider no disgrace, moreover they assert that these are done to train the youth and reduce sloth".
So it was "man building" for young "wolves" to raid and steal (essentially what was a centuries later called going "viking").
Some composite old norse names include the ending -şjófr which means "thief". Not "ordinary theft" which were dishonourable, but theft during raiding. Geirşjófr = spear-theif or Valşjófr = battlefield-thief.
The Spartan youth were also "wolves" outside Spartan society having to survive by raiding the helots (greek slaves of the spartans) to get food.
Intoxicated young warriors in wolf skins is also found with iranian speakers: "Saka haoma-varka".
Saka = Persian name for the Scythians (speaking eastern Iranian languages) of the Eastern steppe and the Tarim basin.
Haoma = The Iranian (Avestan) cognate for Vedic Sanskrit "Soma". Probably the ephedra plant (stimulant substance used in ephedrine).
Varka = Persian for Wolf.
These Iranian warriors also used war-dances and battle songs to get into a battle-frenzy.
We see in germanic society that Odin's name means rage and that bear and wolf warriors are especially connected to Odin. The Torslunda plaque and Gutenstein foil likely show war-dances where we also see wolf-warriors!
Tacitus reports that the Batavian troops under Civilis danced a tripudium (= three step dance) as was their custom before a battle. Saxo uses the same word (!) in two different stories in his Gesta Danorum:
The tripudium occurs before Uffe's victory over two saxons in a duel which saves Denmark and before Starkad's duel with the Saxon hero Hama.
We have not found any evidence of intoxicating substances used by Germanic warriors. It is important to point out that battle frenzy can be achieved by psychological means - you don't need a substance.
Amanita muscaria (fly agaric) was once proposed, but that causes stomach irritation which aren't exactly what you need before combat.
It is the same variation you see with shamanistic traditions. Some use intoxicators, other don't.
A great work of you are interested in indo-european wolf warriors are:
Kris Kershaw (2000).
The One-eyed God. Odin and the (Indo-)Germanic Männerbünde.
Journal of Indo-European Studies.
Monograph Series.
Monograph No. 36.
]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dan D'Silva
|
| Posted: Fri 29 Sep, 2017 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I know this is a relatively small part of the whole, but I take issue with the translation of "haoma-varka." The final syllable there is usually transliterated ga (contrast with the transliteration of Varkâna or Verkâna (Hyrcania) which is generally accepted to mean "Land of Wolves"). The Amyrgian Scythians' name in Persian is usually transliterated Sakâ haumavargâ and translated as "haoma-drinking Scythians." And I have to say that that makes more sense to me than "haoma wolf Scythians." There doesn't seem to be anything else that I've stumbled across in literature or artwork connecting them with wolves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Fri 29 Sep, 2017 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan D'Silva wrote: | | I know this is a relatively small part of the whole, but I take issue with the translation of "haoma-varka." The final syllable there is usually transliterated ga (contrast with the transliteration of Varkâna or Verkâna (Hyrcania) which is generally accepted to mean "Land of Wolves"). The Amyrgian Scythians' name in Persian is usually transliterated Sakâ haumavargâ and translated as "haoma-drinking Scythians." And I have to say that that makes more sense to me than "haoma wolf Scythians." There doesn't seem to be anything else that I've stumbled across in literature or artwork connecting them with wolves. |
The Sanskrit word for wolf is vŕ̥ka and the Avestan vǝhrka-, so "varka" is plausible in Old Persian, if "wolf" is meant in the composite name. It could perhaps be the case, that there is (or once was) a debate, whether it should actually be -varka or -varga?
Translation wise (grammatically) the explanation you give certainly makes more sense, so thanks for the input, and from a quick search on the net it seems that haomavarga is the overwhelmingly accepted reading these days!
It doesn't not take away that you likely had "wolf warriors" in many different indo-european peoples and likely also among Iranian speakers, but this was a bad choice of example.
The wolf warriors as a "männerbünde" was particular prominent in germanic society at a very late date (iron age and early viking age) and you find fragments of myths in other indo-european languages, that seems to indicate that it also existed at some point back in time (maybe you have to go all the way back to the bronze age for some groups).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ken Speed
|
| Posted: Sat 30 Sep, 2017 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Denmark is not exactly the high arctic, even in the cool and wet iron age. Only if forced to sleep outside in wintertime are you in danger of dying of cold. Dying of pneumonia after getting wet and cold is a much more likely way to die. Denmark was very wet in the Iron Age."
Neils, We know where the garment was found but we don't appear to know where the garment is from do we? It could quite easily be from a much colder part of Europe than Denmark.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Sun 01 Oct, 2017 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ken Speed wrote: | "Denmark is not exactly the high arctic, even in the cool and wet iron age. Only if forced to sleep outside in wintertime are you in danger of dying of cold. Dying of pneumonia after getting wet and cold is a much more likely way to die. Denmark was very wet in the Iron Age."
Neils, We know where the garment was found but we don't appear to know where the garment is from do we? It could quite easily be from a much colder part of Europe than Denmark. |
The tunic was made of marten, that occurs naturally in Denmark.
The Danish article cites an article (Munksgaard 1974) where there should be images of germanic warriors in roman service wearing these kind of tunics (with the fur on the inwards side). So if it was produced outside Denmark, it would much more likely be to the south, than to the north of Denmark. There is no real reason to suspect it was made outside of Denmark.
As you had many warriors from the Danish area serving as auxiliaries in the Roman army and then returning home (and being buried with roman artifacts) it is possible it could have been made at home OR somewhere in the Roman empire.
Skin-clothes protects better against rain than textiles, so their popularity in the iron age can be explained that it was a very wet period. Textiles were still more common than skin in the Iron Age, so it is likely a segment of the population which for some reason choose skin (perhaps being mobile, instead of sedentary).
The Møgelmose tunic was highly worn and had been repaired several times. So it probably shows a more utilitarian focus, than showing high status fashion. The tunic was found with some bones and skull-fragments with some fairly long hair still attached, which sadly are no longer preserved).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ken Speed
|
| Posted: Mon 02 Oct, 2017 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen wrote
"The tunic was made of marten, that occurs naturally in Denmark
The Danish article cites an article (Munksgaard 1974) where there should be images of germanic warriors in roman service wearing these kind of tunics (with the fur on the inwards side). So if it was produced outside Denmark, it would much more likely be to the south, than to the north of Denmark. There is no real reason to suspect it was made outside of Denmark.
As you had many warriors from the Danish area serving as auxiliaries in the Roman army and then returning home (and being buried with roman artifacts) it is possible it could have been made at home OR somewhere in the Roman empire. "
So your thesis is that only Danish Germanic warriors served the Romans? You seem to want to have your cake and eat it too. On one hand you say that a marten skin tunic isn't necessary for the conditions in Denmark at that time but you're not open to the idea that the garment may have come from elsewhere. I'm not assuming anything but I think we should be open to the possibility that the tunic may have come from elsewhere in northern Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Mon 02 Oct, 2017 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ken Speed wrote: | Niels Just Rasmussen wrote
"The tunic was made of marten, that occurs naturally in Denmark
The Danish article cites an article (Munksgaard 1974) where there should be images of germanic warriors in roman service wearing these kind of tunics (with the fur on the inwards side). So if it was produced outside Denmark, it would much more likely be to the south, than to the north of Denmark. There is no real reason to suspect it was made outside of Denmark.
As you had many warriors from the Danish area serving as auxiliaries in the Roman army and then returning home (and being buried with roman artifacts) it is possible it could have been made at home OR somewhere in the Roman empire. "
So your thesis is that only Danish Germanic warriors served the Romans? You seem to want to have your cake and eat it too. On one hand you say that a marten skin tunic isn't necessary for the conditions in Denmark at that time but you're not open to the idea that the garment may have come from elsewhere. I'm not assuming anything but I think we should be open to the possibility that the tunic may have come from elsewhere in northern Europe. |
??? Where did you get these ideas from? I haven't stated these things at all.
First my point is that skin is better for keeping out rain than textiles and that marten is an unusual choice, but still an animal that occurs naturally in the area where the tunic was found - at that was at Jelling in Central Jutland.
I said that germanic warriors in roman service apparently used these kind of tunics - so they were likely used by germanic warriors from many different places. Yet the germanic society were comprised of different tribes who often fought fiercely among each other, so if you had served in the Roman empire, you would likely return to your home territory and NOT settle among a different germanic tribe. [Again it is possible, but not likely].
Since this find is from modern Danish area, it is most likely made locally - or as stated above, somewhere within the Roman Empire is possible. [So where do you get the idea, that I was not open for it to be from elsewhere - the Roman Empire was huge in 200 AD).
Off course it is possible it was made elsewhere, but we don't have any indication that it was? According to Ockham's razor we have to accept the simplest explanation, unless we have some kind of evidence to suggest not.
The simplest solution is a local person was buried with his own very worn and many times repaired tunic.
If not using Ockhams razor, everything we find, can be said to have been made somewhere else....
So until we find a mass of the martin tunics some other place in the world (or it is made by a technique not known locally in the area it is found), it is safest to assume it was made locally.
This find is from the modern Danish area, but the warriors would not be "Danish" in 200 AD as they hadn't conquered Jutland by that point in time. You seem to miss that I wrote that the roman army "had many warriors from the Danish area" - I did not at any point state the warriors were "Danish" -> tribe of the Danes, which in 200 AD most likely were in Scania + Halland.
The tunic could very well be a home-coming person that fought for some side in the Marcomannic wars (166-180 AD).
See the different tribal groupings:
[Most of the Scandinavian tribes are not placed on the map as we know to little to place them accurately].
Gudme/Lundeborg on Fyn having an almost total monopoly of Roman prestige goods in Scandinavia from around 200 AD (as the archaeology shows), it seems obvious that many from the modern Danish territory choose to fight on the roman side in this great conflict and thus secured a profitable alliance and gift exchange monopoly with the Roman empire.
It is likely that this group - with close ties of friendship with Rome - were the so called ErilaR we see on the older futhark inscriptions. [The ErilaR could possibly be the group the romans called Heruli]
Whether the person deposited in Maglemosen in Jutland were friends or foe with the Gudme dynasty is hard to know off course.
So what kind of "northern europe" do you have in mind then?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic