Who had bigger impact – the ostro(goths) on the Italian Peninsula or the slavs on Balkans?

Feb 2015
23
south Slavic guy
#31
No, I claim based on sources that Ostrogoths are not germanic. Ostrogoths are Slavs .
Ostrogoths being Slavic is a total science-fiction in my mind.

Ostrogoths were goths, a germanic tribe for all we know. Getae (geths) were also of germanic stock who inhabited the Balkans before the Slavic (Sklavines) arrival. It's really not that impossible for them to have been intermixed at some point with one another, but you just can't say that the Ostrogoths were a Slavic tribe. It's historically incorrect.
 
Sep 2012
3,458
Bulgaria
#33
Ostrogoths being Slavic is a total science-fiction in my mind.

Ostrogoths were goths, a germanic tribe for all we know. Getae (geths) were also of germanic stock who inhabited the Balkans before the Slavic (Sklavines) arrival. It's really not that impossible for them to have been intermixed at some point with one another, but you just can't say that the Ostrogoths were a Slavic tribe. It's historically incorrect.
Getae were Goths, eh? Jordanes in his Getica at a time shortly after the fall of the Western Roman Empire considered Goths and Getae the same ppl and even mentioned Getae deity Zalmoxis as their king. The point is that this is also Dacian main god and Romanian historians connect Getae with Dacians & Thracians. According to Herodotus and Strabo they were a group of Thracian tribes. The problem is that all scholars from the time of Jordanes, Procopius was already mentioned e.g. named all migrating ppl into the territory of the empire western and eastern part, including diff Germanic, Slavic and Celtic ppl as Getae (our Goths?) and this is the basis of the theory thegreathoo mentioned above. According to them they were all Getae. Note Geats is not equal to Getae.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2015
23
south Slavic guy
#34
Getae were Goths, eh? Jordanes in his Getica at a time shortly after the fall of the Western Roman Empire considered Goths and Getae the same ppl and even mentioned Getae deity Zalmoxis as their king. The point is that this is also Dacian main god and Romanian historians connect Getae with Dacians & Thracians. According to Herodotus and Strabo they were a group of Thracian tribes. The problem is that all contemporary scholars from the time of Jordanes, Procopius was already mentioned e.g. named all migrating ppl into the territory of the empire western and eastern part, including diff Germanic, Slavic and Celtic ppl as Getae (our Goths?) and this is the basis of the theory thegreathoo mentioned above. According to them they were all Getae. Note Geats is not equal to Getae.
I don't want to enter a discussion where I'm not entirely informed. It's a different topic (about the Getae).
What I've wanted to say is that Ostrogoths are germanic for all we know, and that they could have intermixed with slavic tribes during the time when they were united in a common alliance under the leadership of the East Goths.
Slavic (Sklavines) are definitely not Goths. As Ostrogoths are not Slavs.
 
Sep 2012
3,458
Bulgaria
#35
I don't want to enter a discussion where I'm not entirely informed. It's a different topic (about the Getae).
What I've wanted to say is that Ostrogoths are germanic for all we know, and that they could have intermixed with slavic tribes during the time when they were united in a common alliance under the leadership of the East Goths.
Slavic (Sklavines) are definitely not Goths. As Ostrogoths are not Slavs.
A good explanation is that the initially Ostrogoth elite /smaller Germanic speaking group was gradually assimilated into the larger Slavic speaking group. Nothing is static, nothing stays the same. It happened before, for example in Iberia with Visigoti and the local Latin Vulgate speaking population. In Bulgaria on the Balkans, Bulgars defeated eastern Romans and founded Bulgaria, it took several centuries until local Slavs assimilated them. The Varyags in Russia, the Franks in France etc. etc list continues.
 
Jul 2014
6,213
Lower Styria, Slovenia
#36
No, I claim based on sources that Ostrogoths are not germanic. Ostrogoths are Slavs. Ostrogoths are the ones who took over the roman provinces in the Balkans and they are Slavs.
Visigoths are a different story. Next time, read better, and make a valid counter. Otherwise I will not respond to garbage like that.
So I made a mistake. You, for one, can stop being a d*ck and actually provide some quotations for your claims like everyone in this thread is asking for. At the moment noone is taking your gibberish serious, if you haven't noticed, and won't even if you make a headstand. Either show actual evidence for your claims or stop waisting our time. Your word alone isn't worth anything here and so far you haven't produced one single evidence in your own support. It's all a fairy tale you came up with. You know, there used to be a moderation on this forum. By now they'd call you on your bs and if you couldn't provide some sources you'd have to stop or get warned. Then you'd get banned, to the delight of many. I haven't seen a moderator in quite some time though. So I guess impunity is ruling these waters now ...
 
Feb 2015
23
south Slavic guy
#37
A good explanation is that the initially Ostrogoth elite /smaller Germanic speaking group was gradually assimilated into the larger Slavic speaking group. Nothing is static, nothing stays the same. It happened before, for example in Iberia with Visigoti and the local Latin Vulgate speaking population. In Bulgaria on the Balkans, Bulgars defeated eastern Romans and founded Bulgaria, it took several centuries until local Slavs assimilated them. The Varyags in Russia, the Franks in France etc. etc list continues.
It sounds like a good explanation but it's not based on any evidence/facts. Show us some proof to continue discussing it, or it will be pointless to further make up stories of nothing, really.
I like to discuss only on good documented facts.
The creation of Bulgaria is more complex than what you describe in just one sentence. The battle of 681 of Bulgars who defeated the Romans is definitely important, but it did NOT lead to the creation of the First Bulgarian Kingdom. It was created before that. And not only by Bulgars, rather the Slavic tribes who had already defeated the Eastern Romans prior to their arrival. And "defeated" is a short word for describing a very long process of back-and-forth battles with variable success for both sides.
 
#38
Ostrogoths being Slavic is a total science-fiction in my mind.
.
No, your understanding of events is science fiction, because it all rests on your understanding of "goths" in the word Ostrogoths. That fiction is divorced from facts.

Time is 450-500 AD. Ostrogoths in Jordanes are defined by two things: 1. They rule in Pannonia. 2. The rulers are Valamir, Thiudimer, Vidimir. These same "Ostrogoths" go over to Sarmatian territory who are already ruling on the other side of the river Savus, in Illyricum, and just move through their territory without any problems to the south, to Greece. Not only that, but when Suevi attacked Dalmatia, the Ostrogoths, Valamir, Cudimir, i Vidimir went to war against them.
Slavs already ruled Roman provinces in the Balkans, even in the time of Attila, because Attila was on the east side of Danube, outside of the roman provinces.

And this is confirmed by later sources who plainly say that the Slavs took over the roman provinces in the West Balkans. Not once are Germans mentioned as ruling the roman provinces.

Therefore:

Fall of Roman provinces in the Balkans is around 400.

1. Jordanes 550: 450-500 Slavs rule Pannonia and Dalmatia (Illyricum).
2. Porphyrogenitus 950: Slavs took roman province of Dalmatia coming from Danube, after the rule of Diocletian (300), from the Romans.
3. Gesta Regum Sclavorum 1200: Slavs took roman province of Dalmatia, from the Romans, coming from Pannonia and Moesia. Calls them Ostrogoths.

No mention of the Germans.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2015
23
south Slavic guy
#39
No, your understanding of events is science fiction, because it all rests on your understanding of "goths" in the word Ostrogoths. That fiction is divorced from facts.

Time is 450-500 AD. Ostrogoths in Jordanes are defined by two things: 1. They rule in Pannonia. 2. The rulers are Valamir, Thiudimer, Vidimir. These same "Ostrogoths" go over to Sarmatian territory who are already ruling on the other side of the river Savus, in Illyricum, and just move through their territory without any problems to the south, to Greece. Not only that, but when Suevi attacked Dalmatia, the Ostrogoths, Valamir, Cudimir, i Vidimir went to war against them.
Slavs already ruled Roman provinces in the Balkans, even in the time of Attila, because Attila was on the east side of Danube, outside of the roman provinces.

And this is confirmed by later sources who plainly say that the Slavs took over the roman provinces in the West Balkans. Not once are Germans mentioned as ruling the roman provinces.

Therefore:

Fall of Roman provinces in the Balkans is around 400.

1. Jordanes 550: 450-500 Slavs rule Pannonia and Dalmatia (Illyricum).
2. Porphyrogenitus 950: Slavs took roman province of Dalmatia coming from Danube, after the rule of Diocletian (300), from the Romans.
3. Gesta Regum Sclavorum 1200: Slavs took roman province of Dalmatia, from the Romans, coming from Pannonia and Moesia. Calls them Ostrogoths.

No mention of the Germans.
How's Theodimer a slavic name?

Theodemir, Theodemar, Theudemer or Theudimer was a Germanic name common among the various Germanic peoples of early medieval Europe. According to Smaragdus of Saint-Mihiel (9th century), the form Theudemar is Frankish and Theudemir is Gothic.

I guess Theodoric the Great was Slav as well??

Vandalarius? Slavic? Athalaric? )

You just completely make up history according to your taste.

Not only this. The Ostrogothic artefacts are WAY different than the Slavic ones.
 
#40
Theodemir, Theodemar, Theudemer or Theudimer was a Germanic name common among the various Germanic peoples of early medieval Europe. According to Smaragdus of Saint-Mihiel (9th century), the form Theudemar is Frankish and Theudemir is Gothic.
You cannot in your fiat interpretation disregard the fact, a monumental and crucial fact, that the Ostrogoths took over roman provinces in the Balkans, directly from the Romans, and Germans did no such thing. It's in the title of the topic, and it is beyond historical dispute. The Slavs took over the Roman provinces, and those were the Ostrogoths. The fiat claim is they became Germans when they crossed over to Italy? Of course not. That is only possible in the blah blah bloo blo blooo heads.

You are mixing up Goths and Germans, or better to say, you are equating them solely because of a fiat definition, without any historical support. You cannot equate goths and Germans of the period!

In the historical period of the fall of the roman provinces, Germans are not the only ones who can claim the Gothic history of the period. Slavs are also Goths, and specifically they are Ostrogoths. And they might even be Visigoths because of the Merovingian dynasty of the period which is a parallel to the eastern Moravian kingdom, and the Visigoths came from the Balkans, albeit they did not stay in the Balkans but continued westward.

Thiudimer is Cudimir and recorded in later times as a Slavic name, of subsequent rulers as well. There is nothing germanic about Thuidimer. Even more so because it is not an isolated name but his brothers were Vidimir and Valamir.

In the same period and territory they, the Slavs, had a Great Moravian Kingdrom, while the Visigoths had Merovingian dynasty in the West.
 
Last edited: