Aisčiai ir jų istorija

Direct Link:
Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Straipsnis / Article
Lietuvių kalba / Lithuanian
Aisčiai ir jų istorija
Alternative Title:
Aestii and their history
In the Journal:
Lituanistica. 2015, Nr. 4, p. 254-263
Priešistorė; 40-1 amžius pr. Kr.; 1 amžius; 2 amžius; 3 amžius; 4 amžius; 5 amžius; 6 amžius; Lietuva (Lithuania); Baltai / Balts.
Summary / Abstract:

LTAisčiai ir jų istorija pastaraisiais metais tapo mokslinių ir kartais istorijos mėgėjų minčių keitimosi lauku. Įvairiuose leidiniuose ir konferencijose svarstoma, ar gotai yra tie patys aisčiai, arba, kitaip sakant, vakarų baltai, ar jie griovė Romos imperiją, kaip jie dalyvavo Didžiajame tautų kraustymesi. Vieniems šios mintys yra mokslinio tyrimo dalykas, kuriame priimamos įvairios galimybės ir keliami argumentai. Kitiems – net mintis apie tai, kad aisčiai drauge su kitomis gentimis dalyvavo Europos kūrimo procesuose regisi tiesiog neįmanoma. Ir čia daug kas priklauso nuo autorių pasirengimo įsitraukti į to įdomaus ir mūsų istorijai reikšmingo laikotarpio tyrinėjimą. Čia skelbiamos pastabos yra atsakas į tuos darbus, kuriuose susidūrė nuomonių įvairovė apie aisčius ir gotus, apie aisčius ir jų kaimynus slavus, apie aistiškų galindų Didžiosios migracijos aspektus. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Baltai; Aisčiai; Gotai; Germanai; Slavai; Glotochronologija; Jastorfo kultūra; Prahos-Penkovo kultūra; Balts; Aestii; Goths; Germans; Slavs; Glottochronology; Jastorf culture; Prague-Penkov culture.

ENFor some time the relationship between the Baltic and Slavic languages was perceived through the idea of the common Baltic-Slavic linguistic tree. When analysing the language and the media of material as well as spiritual cultures, which are defined as the earliest Baltic and Slavic cultures, in isolation, we can see that the language and culture of each of them evolved separately. The Balts have their own area just as the Slavs do (in fact, the one formed later, starting with the Migration Period). In terms of language, culture and time they are separated by enormous distances and areas. The areas of language and culture development are thousands of kilometres away from each other, and the difference in the time of their formation equals thousands of years. The problem arises how to incorporate all this into a single formation and insist on calling it a common tree? However, such efforts continue to further exist in the person of V. Garliauskas, though his employed arguments (glottochronology method) do not apply in this case. The method of search for precedence of word equivalents is useless either as the chronology of language is disregarded. In the world of science the accusations against V. Toporov were unexpectedly hurled by A. Luchtanas and O. Poliakov: "<...>V. Toporov uses the method of folk etymology, neglects historical sources, archeological data and solid linguistic facts.". In the meanwhile, the arguments of both authors that could refute the spread of the Galindian linguistic layer in the vast part of Europe are absent. The analysis of Spanish sources, which could provide more data on the issues of the Galindians, is not available either. Moreover, the negation of objective archeological data on the Galindinian migration in the statements of A. Luchtanas is a total misunderstanding.The data on the migration and cultural expansion of the Galindians and Sudines to directions that were not characteristic of them previously exist and they are tangible in the archeology of the Eastern Baltic region. The relations of the history of the Balts (Aestii) and the Goths have been within the scope of interest of European historians for a very long time. Lately the works by J. Statkutė de Rosales, determined as amateur literature, have been published, where attempts are made to push ahead with the thought that the Guds (Balts) are the same Goths, that is, to impose burden of the history of Goths on the Aestii. This cannot be accepted on that ground alone that, in terms of their culture, the Goths, as a product of “Limes Romanus”, are not easily distinguished in the then abundance of nations. Moreover, the antique sources did not make any reference to the relation with the Aestii, who had been known to them at that time, with exception of the Jordanes’ legend about the northern origin of the Goths. Regrettably, so far it has remained a serious scientific problem from the perspective of the conception of the large “movement” of the Goths to the lower reaches of the Vistula. [From the publication]

0235-716X; 2424-4716
Related Publications:
2018-12-17 14:02:56
Views: 81    Downloads: 29