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

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
3,411
Slovenia
#52
I thought that Ostrogoths were also having a Sarmatic element, they were a collection of peoples which they gathered on their trek from Baltic to Black Sea steppe. I was still having a feeling that German element was still prevalent and ruling caste also Germanic.

What about comparing them to Bulgars and their Turkic/Slavic mix? Ostrogothic kingdom was pretty short lasting (60 years), so they were having no time to change their starting composition (to Romanic one in Italy). How were Visigoths in 700 ethnically different from Visigoths in 500?
 
Likes: thegreathoo
Nov 2010
6,999
Cornwall
#53
I thought that Ostrogoths were also having a Sarmatic element, they were a collection of peoples which they gathered on their trek from Baltic to Black Sea steppe. I was still having a feeling that German element was still prevalent and ruling caste also Germanic.
Absolutely. The whole 'barbarian migration' thing has much more blurred lines than is generally thought of. Which makes sense if you think about it as there would be constantly little pockets of people left behind in the territory of others, of whatever size, who simply joined the current main power. The number of peoples listed in the Rhine crossing of 406 is quite a few, not just Vandals, Swabians and Alans - Sarmatians is one of those. The Swabians themselves are thought to originate as an amalgamation of other tribes.

Subsequently Alans and Silingian Vandals would be absorbed by the Asdingos (Hasdingian Vandals) and later the Swabians by the Visigoths. The whole Ostrogoth/Visigoth migration thing is full of this sort of thing and as the Ostrogoths' star stareted t wane, those garrisoned in Hispania and married to Visigoths would stay and others migrate from Gaul and italy to joing the Visigothic nobility. I guess the 'join' is harder to see between fellow Goths??

I guess the popular image is about formed warriors wandering around Europe, but it is of course people trying to settle somewhere in peace and get their own land, away from those nasty Huns and others, at the end of the day.
 
Likes: macon
Sep 2012
3,458
Bulgaria
#55
@johnincornwall I guess he meant Salian Franks. Anyway the Merovingian dynasty ended in mid 8th century with disposition of the last Childeric, whilst the first commonly accepted ruler of Moravia was Moimir in mid 9th century, nearly hundred years later. Not in the same time period, probably a mistake.
 

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
3,411
Slovenia
#56
Absolutely. The whole 'barbarian migration' thing has much more blurred lines than is generally thought of. Which makes sense if you think about it as there would be constantly little pockets of people left behind in the territory of others, of whatever size, who simply joined the current main power. The number of peoples listed in the Rhine crossing of 406 is quite a few, not just Vandals, Swabians and Alans - Sarmatians is one of those. The Swabians themselves are thought to originate as an amalgamation of other tribes.

Subsequently Alans and Silingian Vandals would be absorbed by the Asdingos (Hasdingian Vandals) and later the Swabians by the Visigoths. The whole Ostrogoth/Visigoth migration thing is full of this sort of thing and as the Ostrogoths' star stareted t wane, those garrisoned in Hispania and married to Visigoths would stay and others migrate from Gaul and italy to joing the Visigothic nobility. I guess the 'join' is harder to see between fellow Goths??

I guess the popular image is about formed warriors wandering around Europe, but it is of course people trying to settle somewhere in peace and get their own land, away from those nasty Huns and others, at the end of the day.
Swabians were Alemanni. Suebi were Marcomanni and Quadi. :)

Suebi crossed Rhine with others in 406.
 
Feb 2018
119
EU-Germany
#58
this is an easy question to answer: the slavs in the balkans

on why the ostrogoths could not have had an impact on italy is found in their short duration and their ending in a long and grinding war, there are sources that speak of local recruitment aswell as help from the visigoths from iberia suggesting an immense bloodloss already before the byzantine upperhand;
maps indicating the scale of presence 1]ostrogothic sites (circle=necropolis aka real presence) from the ostrogothic kingdom(italy/balkan) 2]* piemonte region circle=necropolis green=ostrogoths blue=longobards purple=?burgundian/merovingian circle
ostro1.PNG 1] ostro2.PNG 2]

in comparison to this archaeological(EMAearly-middle-ages) map from the piemonte region only it is clear why the ostrogoths had a difficult task in making an impact, the ostrogoths ventured into a still very much intact population aka pre-goth/byzantine war, pre-pestilence(narses rule) and pre-longobard invasion; their then attested presence is just too meager to have sufficed an impact _contrary the longobards who were present after all these, to the local population, detrimental events and recent papers are at the very least indicating that these inturn did indeed made an impact;

* the red squares are the most recent longobard necropoli excavated 2009-11 with san albano sturo the largest with >700 burials
 
#59
I thought that Ostrogoths were also having a Sarmatic element, they were a collection of peoples which they gathered on their trek from Baltic to Black Sea steppe.
Damn straight! The Gothic vast realm in the western Black Sea region was largely Slavic just prior to the fall of Roman provinces, or maybe better to say prior to the arrival of the Huns. The Goths came out of Scandinavia 1000 BCE and lived in the Donetsk region before moving to the east Balkans around 500 BCE. They never lived in Germany, and they did not come out of Germany in the ancient times.
A large part of the Gothic kingdom were the Slavs they lived with, since the ancient times. And that is how the territories were divided subsequently.

Out of that Gothic culture, meaning the mix of Slavs and Goths, Roman provinces fell in the east, and then the west.

I don't know what taxonomy is used to classify them as German, but it isn't historic.

Now, we can say perhaps that the Gepids were German, since they came from the Baltic Sea region very late to the Balkans, around 200 AD, and Germany being defined as the land west of the Visla river, then perhaps the Gepids were German, because they are attested as related to the Goths of the black sea. Unfortunately we do not know how large a part they played in the Gothic expeditions. Their territory was relatively small in the Pannonian basin.
 
Nov 2010
6,999
Cornwall
#60
on why the ostrogoths could not have had an impact on italy is found in their short duration and their ending in a long and grinding war, there are sources that speak of local recruitment aswell as help from the visigoths from iberia suggesting an immense bloodloss already before the byzantine upperhand;
After the battle of Vouille the 2 branches fell under the 'same management' as it were, as Theodoric the Great stabilised the Visigoths under Ostrogothic control at the same time taking advantage of the vacuum in the Visigothic hierarchy. This situation carried on as far as the Visigothic reign of Teudis (531-548) who was an Ostrogoth, former adviser of Theodoric and the king who first really installed the Visigoths in Toledo. There were certainly Ostrogoth garrisons in Hispania and the nobility, either by way of that or emigration from Gaul, seemed to head toward the Visigoths as times got tougher for the Ostrogoths. I hadn't heard of Visigothic contingents fighting in Italy but there's no reason why not.



Damn straight! The Gothic vast realm in the western Black Sea region was largely Slavic just prior to the fall of Roman provinces, or maybe better to say prior to the arrival of the Huns. The Goths came out of Scandinavia 1000 BCE and lived in the Donetsk region before moving to the east Balkans around 500 BCE. They never lived in Germany, and they did not come out of Germany in the ancient times.

Out of that Gothic culture, meaning the mix of Slavs and Goths, Roman provinces fell in the east, and then the west.

I don't know what taxonomy is used to classify them as German, but it isn't historic.
.
As in the other thread, the Scandanavian proof is weak or non-existent.

I wouldn't really describe Roman provinces in the west 'falling'. In Hispania for example Roman armies comprised almost entirely of Visigoths had surpressed rebellions and as far as they were concerned the Visigoths were later just running Hispania and it's hispano-roman nobility as it was at the time. Not sure they really saw the 'join'.

This is not unlike the process in Gaul where hispano-romans also fought for Clovis. After all it's not the fault or comprehension of Visigoths or Franks that central control went out of the window.

'Germanic' - tricky one. I've recently read of sources where the Visigoths prior to the Vouille campaign referred to the Franks as 'the Germans'. But that doesn't really mean too much given the time differences involved. It's more certain that the Goths were in Eastern Germany/Poland at some point than Scandanavia, but firstly there's some centuries difference and also 'German/Germanic' probably meant something different in 500 AD than it does today, given the 3 different varieties of German languages areas etc that are spoken of today by those who know about such things. Which aint me.