Anglo-Saxons

History, archaeology, historiography, peoples, and personalities of ancient Rome and the Mediterranean.

Moderator: Aldus Marius

Anglo-Saxons

Postby Quintus Marius Primus on Mon Aug 16, 2004 2:59 pm

I was wondering what evidence the Romans left us with regard to the Germanic tribes that would eventually come to invade and then settle in England (i.e. the Angles, Saxons, Frisians, and Jutes) around the 4th centry onwards? As the Rhine was the Empire's boundary for so long, there must have been contact with the tribes located towards the river's mouth.

Anyone know...?

Multas gratias
Q. Marius Primus
Londinium, Britannia
User avatar
Quintus Marius Primus
Eques
Eques
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:14 pm
Location: Londinium, Britannia

Postby Curio Agelastus on Mon Aug 16, 2004 11:27 pm

Salve Quinte Mari,

As far as I know, the Angles, Saxons, Jutes and Frisians weren't mentioned directly by the Romans - at least, not while they remained in Germany. Bear in mind that all four tribes came from what is now the very south of Denmark and the Holstein/Kiel and Lubeck areas of Germany, so the Romans were far less concerned with them than with those Germanic tribes who were throwing themselves over the boundaries of the Roman Empire further south, in what is now Bavaria and that area; the tribes who would come to invade England were far too far north to have much importance in the eyes of the Romans. Although they were probably aware of them, they certainly weren't high on a list of priorities. I've certainly never heard of them mentioned by any of the Roman historians.

Once they invaded Britain, however, it was a different matter. By this point, however, Rome was struggling to hold on to more valuable provinces, and eventually, as I'm sure you're aware, Rome abandoned Britannia to her fate.

Bene vale,
Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.
Marcus Scribonius Curio Agelastus
Rector ColHis, Senator

Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
User avatar
Curio Agelastus
Senator
Senator
 
Posts: 470
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 9:38 pm

Postby Quintus Marius Primus on Tue Aug 17, 2004 11:54 am

Salve Curio

I would have thought that there wold have been some contact with the tribes that eventually settled England, as although traditionally people thought that the Anglo-Saxon tribes came from (modern) Denmark and northern Germany, these days it is pretty much well accepted in hostorical circles that there must have been a lot of migration from what is the Low Countries, especially when you consider the geography (Holland is after all a lot closer to England than Denmark and Germany) and linguistics (English's closest linguistic "cousin" is Frisian so the original English settlers must have come from an area very close if not including people from that area).

Still, your comment about the Romans' attentions in Germania being elsewhere are certainly true, so that they could have had little interest in the tribes further north.

I do recall reading somewhere that the Romans had three tribal names for Germanic tribes in that general area, but I can't for the life of me remember what they are or where I read about it!

Ave
Q. Marius Primus
Londinium, Britannia
User avatar
Quintus Marius Primus
Eques
Eques
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:14 pm
Location: Londinium, Britannia

Postby Gnaeus Dionysius Draco on Tue Aug 17, 2004 3:20 pm

Salve Quinte Mari!

Quintus Marius Primus wrote:I would have thought that there wold have been some contact with the tribes that eventually settled England, as although traditionally people thought that the Anglo-Saxon tribes came from (modern) Denmark and northern Germany, these days it is pretty much well accepted in hostorical circles that there must have been a lot of migration from what is the Low Countries, especially when you consider the geography (Holland is after all a lot closer to England than Denmark and Germany) and linguistics (English's closest linguistic "cousin" is Frisian so the original English settlers must have come from an area very close if not including people from that area).


It seems unlikely to me that the Frisians lived in modern-day northern Netherlands at the time of the Roman Republic or early Empire (or even the later Empire). The Frisian that is spoken today is West-Frisian, but some offshoots of the other variants still exist (although on the verge of extinction) in northern Germany and the North Sea isles of Denmark and Germany (Waddeneilanden in Dutch). This actually seems to support that the Frisians came from northern Germania and Denmark, although it is true that the Franconians pushed the Frisians back north (which also explains why Dutch is 'in between' German and English).

Quintus Marius Primus wrote:Still, your comment about the Romans' attentions in Germania being elsewhere are certainly true, so that they could have had little interest in the tribes further north.


Well, a good reference may be Tacitus' Germania. Tacitus himself is said to have visited Belgica and Germania Inferior (and hence had first-hand knowledge on the Germans). So, I wouldn't say the Romans weren't interested in what was beyond their primary military horizons.

Quintus Marius Primus wrote:I do recall reading somewhere that the Romans had three tribal names for Germanic tribes in that general area, but I can't for the life of me remember what they are or where I read about it!


The problems with these tribal names and tribes is that they are rarely used consistently. For example, the Cimbri and Teutones migrated from north to the south, and after they were defeated, there is little evidence that they continued to exist as a significant tribe or clan, although the name 'Teutones' continues to be used for modern-day Germans until this day. Some tribes also merged. The Quadi and the Marcomanni, for example, iirc, merged to form the Bavarii and the Franconians were a mixture of a lot of tribes on the Rhine.

To get back at the topic of the Anglo-Saxons, it is very likely that not only they (and some Frisians and Jutes) crossed the North Sea, but we have to go by linguistic and cultural evidence we have. This is further complicated by the Danish and Norwegian invasions in Great Britain and Ireland.

Vale optime!
Draco
Gn. Dionysius Draco Invictus
User avatar
Gnaeus Dionysius Draco
Curialis
Curialis
 
Posts: 1618
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 8:04 pm
Location: Belgica

Postby Quintus Marius Primus on Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:01 pm

Salve Draco

I have found a website with the three tribal names - they are Ingvaeones, Irminones, and Istvaones. The website with some info on them is:

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Ingvaeonic

Seems that they refer to tribes from the North Germany area so could be used in relation to the Anglo-Saxons and other Germanic tribes, but very difficult to prove of course. It seems that the term Ingvaeonic is used by some linguists to refer to the language that split into English, Frisian, and Dutch. I think that's how I originally heard about it.

Vale bene
Q. Marius Primus
Londinium, Britannia
User avatar
Quintus Marius Primus
Eques
Eques
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:14 pm
Location: Londinium, Britannia

Postby Gnaeus Dionysius Draco on Thu Aug 19, 2004 12:08 pm

Salve Quinte Mari,

Yes, although I believe this devision was made by Maurer in 1943, and I don't know if it was perceived by the German tribes as such.

To elaborate a bit more on Dutch, roots-wise it is still more akin to German (which is also partly a Franconian language), but it underwent many influences from Ingvaeonic languages. In fact, this can be clearly traced through the dialects. As you move from east to west in the Dutch-speaking area in Europe, you can see that in western dialects a plural on <s> occurs much more than a plural on <en>. For example, my dialect has two vowels that exist in English but not in Standard Dutch (I live near the west). Well, perhaps more than you wanted to know :).

Thanks for the link.

Vale bene,
Draco
Gn. Dionysius Draco Invictus
User avatar
Gnaeus Dionysius Draco
Curialis
Curialis
 
Posts: 1618
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 8:04 pm
Location: Belgica

Postby Quintus Marius Primus on Fri Aug 20, 2004 11:17 am

Salve Draco

Thanks for the little description on Dutch dialects - not too much info at all. As someone interested in linguistics, especially sociolinguistics (which includes dialectology) I find that very interesting. I found the formation of plurals of interest, that the more western parts of the Nederlands speaking areas use <s> more.

In most parts of the country English originally formed most of its plurals with the <en> ending but the more Northern form of forming them with <s> spread and seemed to have become standard throughout the country by the 15th and 16th centuries. There are of course a few remnants of the <en> plural left (children, oxen) but not much more than that!

Vale
Q. Marius Primus
Londinium, Britannia
User avatar
Quintus Marius Primus
Eques
Eques
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:14 pm
Location: Londinium, Britannia


Return to Collegium Historicum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron