The Huns and the Parthians

#51
1. it is not only Jordanes: According to Ammianus, Ermanaric was "a most warlike king" who eventually committed suicide, faced with the aggression of the Alani and of the Huns, who invaded his territories in the 370s. Ammianus says he "ruled over extensively wide and fertile regions"
Any political domain approaching the size suggested by Jordanes is very unlikely. Jordanes appears to have imaginatively elaborated upon the well-known Histories of Ammianus, who provides a brief and vague notice from which little can be reliably derived. I'll supply the following from Peter Heather's book Goths and Romans, 332-489, pp. 87-89, who, back in 1991, was responding to the then-current predilection to believe in Jordanes' conception of Ermenaric's domain:

"(p. 87) Were the Tervingi and Greuthungi the only Gothic political units to exist before the Hunnic invasions? Or, putting the same question a different way, did Ermenaric, king of the Greuthungi, rule all Goths who were not Tervingi?
(p.88) The Getica answers in the affirmative, and on the basis of Jordanes, Ermenaric is normally considered to have ruled ‘all the Scythian and German nations’ (23. 116–20). But this picture was built up from Ammianus’ brief account of the king, and is quite untrustworthy. When read without preconceptions derived from the Getica, Ammianus’ description of Ermenaric is decidedly vague. He is a ‘most warlike monarch’ who ruled ‘extensive and rich lands’ (31. 3. 1). He was clearly an important ruler, but it is difficult to say exactly how important. The question can perhaps be resolved using less direct evidence.
After the Hunnic invasions, as we have seen, at least two, and perhaps three major groups of Greuthungi threatened the Roman frontier at different moments. If Ermenaric ruled all these Greuthungi, the Huns must have fragmented his realm. This is not impossible, but Ammianus’ narrative suggests that all Ermenaric’s Goths crossed the Danube in 376 (31. 3. 1–3; 31. 4. 12; 31. 5. 12). Ammianus was concerned not with the Greuthungi per se, but with the build-up to Hadrianople, and may simply have ignored any split. He did, however, mention one among the Tervingi (31. 3. 8). In addition, other large Gothic groups also came into contact with the Roman empire in the seventy-five years after Ermenaric’s death (cf. p. 13).
If Ermenaric ruled all Goths except the Tervingi, these groups—or, at least, their ancestors—must have been his subjects (assuming that there was no Gothic population explosion). Put alongside the known groups of Greuthungi, the list which follows emphasizes exactly how large a realm encompassing all Goths, except the Tervingi, would have been. Within it would have been found the force of Alatheus and Saphrax (perhaps c. 10,000 men), Odotheus’ Greuthungi (of unknown but significant size), the ancestors of Radagaisus’ group (over 10,000 men), those of Theoderic Strabo’s followers (at least 10,000 men), those of the Amal-led Goths (c. 10,000 men), and various other units such as the Crimean Goths totalling perhaps another 10,000 men. These figures are rough approximations, but give an indication of the order of magnitude involved. To have combined them all, Ermenaric’s empire would have had to be enormous, with a potential (p.89) army of at least 60,000 men. Such an empire seems very unlikely; it would be much larger than any other known Gothic political unit, and would surely have made a much greater impact in our sources. At no great distance from the Roman frontier (Valens fought some Greuthungi in 369, AM 27. 5. 6), it would have been many times more powerful than the Tervingi, who caused Valens so much trouble (see below), and would surely have been the main object of Roman policy in the region. The Empire was much more concerned, however, with the Tervingi, so that we should probably envisage several smaller Gothic political units east of the Dniester.
There is a little more evidence in favour of this view. In 399, according to Claudian, ‘Ostrogoths mixed with Greuthungi’ inhabited Phrygia at the outbreak of Tribigild’s revolt (Eutr. 2. 153). It is impossible to know what precisely Claudian meant, but, at face value, he distinguishes Ostrogoth as a third category of Goth apart from Tervingi and Greuthungi. This would be fully in line with what we have already seen of the realignment that the Huns caused in Gothic society; we might envisage, for instance, that some of the ancestors of the Gothic groups of the fifth century were such Ostrogoths, but this is pure hypothesis. Russian archaeologists have also identified five Černjachov sites as political centres on the basis of size, fortification, and topography. It would be rash to declare these the capitals of politically autonomous areas, but this is quite possible. In any case, a realm uniting all Goths except the Tervingi would surely have left much more trace in the contemporary historical record."
 
Feb 2017
418
Rock Hill, South Carolina
#52
The Scandinavian/Baltic origin of the Goths has been disproven for almost 20 years.

by your link: " The ethno-linguistic affiliation of the Hunnu is controversial among Yeniseian, Altaic, Uralic, and Indo-European. Ancient DNA analyses on the remains of the Hunnu people had shown some clues to this problem. Y chromosome haplogroups of Hunnu remains included Q-M242, N-Tat, C-M130, and R1a1. "
it is clear in the mixed group, Scythian/Iranian culture prevailed. religion, burial ceremony, language, military tradition. i suggest iranian warchief with squad came and organised eniseians into invincible horde

the rest of your post similarly weak: telling fortunes who invented horseriding, or making statements with no proof.
IIRC there's a ban on discussing genetics here but the difference is that 99.9% of tested ethnic Xiongnu skeletons exhibit Q-M242 (or the Q-M3 group) which is a HIGHLY SPECIFIC genetic marker while literally every ethnic group on the Eurasian steppes exhibits R1a1 due to trade and interbreeding and other factors and it is hardly useful as a genetic identifier.

it is clear in the mixed group, Scythian/Iranian culture prevailed. religion, burial ceremony, language, military tradition. i suggest iranian warchief with squad came and organised eniseians into invincible horde

...

say something more than own opinion.
I'm sorry but who's the one expressing unsourced opinions here? I've sourced my statements.

The Ostrogoths (Latin: Ostrogothi, Austrogothi) were the eastern branch of the older Goths (the other major branch being the Visigoths). The Ostrogoths traced their origins to the Greutungi – a branch of the Goths who had migrated southward from the Baltic Sea and established a kingdom north of the Black Sea, during the 3rd and 4th centuries. They built an empire stretching from the Black Sea to the Baltic. The Ostrogoths were probably literate in the 3rd century, and their trade with the Romanswas highly developed. Their Danubian kingdom reached its zenith under King Ermanaric, who is said to have committed suicide at an old age when the Huns attacked his people and subjugated them in about 370.
Wikipedia... which is wrong. The Greuthungi were not part of the Ostrogoths who originated from the Amali Goths and merged with the Goths of Triarius to form the Ostrogoths. The Greuthungi nobility and those capable of migrating crossed the Danube in 376 and ultimately became a part of the Visigoths.

Read Heather, The Goths or his more recent Empires and Barbarians.
 
Last edited:
Nov 2018
82
Russian Federation
#53
guys u are bit pedant. i don't care were Ostrogoths Greutungi or not. half of Goths stayed in the east, had to become part of the horde. ostrogothic descendants still live in Don, Kuban, Donbass regions of Ukraine/Russia. Hitler admitted their ancient german roots. some talk communist slogans and drink vodka.

99.9% of tested ethnic Xiongnu skeletons exhibit Q-M242
unsourced opinion.
I'm sorry but who's the one expressing unsourced opinions here? I've sourced my statements.
how about pic
 
Mar 2018
329
UK
#54
Hunnictraveller, you might find this helpful:

opinion /əˈpɪnjən/
noun
a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.
fact /fakt/
noun
a thing that is known or proved to be true.
Something that Hitler said? Doesn't make it a fact. DNA evidence extracted from Xiongu skeletons? Definitely a fact.


Note that the definition of fact/opinion doesn't include "supports hunnictraveller's personal opinion".[/quote][/quote]
 
Nov 2010
6,999
Cornwall
#56
guys u are bit pedant. i don't care were Ostrogoths Greutungi or not. half of Goths stayed in the east, had to become part of the horde. ostrogothic descendants still live in Don, Kuban, Donbass regions of Ukraine/Russia. Hitler admitted their ancient german roots. some talk communist slogans and drink vodka.
I'm going to be controversial and suggest that most people on here know more about the Goths than Hitler?
 
Feb 2017
418
Rock Hill, South Carolina
#59
ostrogothic descendants still live in Don, Kuban, Donbass regions of Ukraine/Russia.
First of all it's not half. We have no idea what the numbers were. There were also approximately 8 known Gothic groups and several more unnamed ones.

Also pedantry is also exactly what historical accuracy is...

Hitler admitted their ancient german roots. some talk communist slogans and drink vodka.
Ah I see we've invoked Godwin's law.

unsourced opinion.
until u bring research 99.9% hun DNA belong Yeniseans, your posts just an opinion
I posted my source. See the paper by L.L. Kang et al. I posted earlier (unfortunately it's not available online beyond the abstract).

Also I said that 99.9% of ethnic Huns exhibit the Q-M242 gene. I did not say "99.9% of Hun DNA is Yeniseian" which is factually wrong. Genetic markers can be used to affiliate a people with an ethnic group due to their distribution pattern, but DNA has little to do with membership of an ethnic group itself.

how about pic
Well first of all there's a lot of debate about whether the Kushans were the Yue-Zhi and furthermore we know for a fact the Yue-Zhi spoke Tocharian and the Kushans did not.

Second of all that's a map (and a bad one at that), not an academic source, or something that in any way proves the Huns were Indo-Iranians.
 

Similar History Discussions