Germans
The termGermans(also calledTeutonsor, forsynecdoche,Goths) indicates a set of peoples speakingGermanic languages, born from the fusion between ethnic groups ofIndo-Europeanoriginand indigenous ethnic groups of Paleo-Mesolithic andNeolithicoriginin theiroriginal homeland(southernScandinavia,Jutland, today'snorthernGermany), which, after having crystallized into a single team, from the first centuries of thefirst millenniumspread to occupy a large area ofEuropenorth-central, fromScandinaviato theupper Danubeand from theRhineto theVistula.From here, starting especially from thethird century, numerousGermanictribesmigrated in multiple waves towards every direction, touching most of the European continent and reaching as far asNorth AfricaandNorth America.
After the period of migrations, the Germanic peoples went through a new period ofethnogenesisfrom which some present-day nations emerged:[1]the Scandinavian peoples (Danes,Faroese,Icelanders,Norwegians,Swedes);thefederated German peoples(including theAustriansand theSwiss Alemanni);the Franconian peoples (Flemish,Dutch,Luxembourgish) and the Anglo-Frisian peoples (Frisians,English),[2]although the legacy of the Germans is present throughoutEurope, even in nations that do not speak Germanic languages where various Germanic peoples (Goths,Longobards,Burgundiansetc.) merged with local non-Germanic populations, from theMediterraneancountries, toFrancewhere they they assumed thelocalGallo-Romance language, toRussia(Variaghi).
From the modern age it was mainly Germanic groups, at least originally, thatfounded colonies in North Americaand other non-European areas.From this period onwards, cultural elements originally typical of Germanic groups, such asthe English languageand theProtestant religionthat was created in the Germanic context in the sixteenth century, have spread throughout the world even among non-Germanic populations.
Breakdown
The Germans are traditionally divided into three groups:
East Germanic peoples
West Germanic peoples
North Germanic peoples
The partition of the ensemble of Germanic tribes into three large geographically characterized subsets (western, eastern and northern) derives from alinguisticdistinction withintheGermanic languageseven before a strictly historical one, according to the classical scheme ofAugust Schleicher: frequent were, among the Germans, the mixing and hybridization of tribes of different lineages in new formations, which even came to include non-Germanic (and, sometimes, even non-Indo-European)elements.Sometimes the scarcity of the testimonies does not allow to verify exactly the belonging of a given people to a specific branch of the Germanic family.
Ethnonym
Exonym: Germani
The term "Germani" of classical sources (LatinGermanus (-i), pronounced with initial hard G = "ghermani")Tacitusclaims to be ofCelticorigin.Initially used to identify a specific tribe, it later passed to be used for all the Germans.Tacitusclaims that the term originally indicated aGallictribesettled in today'sBelgiumbefore being driven out by a Germanic penetration: that of theTungriwho, once settled in the territory of the Celtic "Germans", would have been indicated by the neighbors with the same name, later extended to all peoples similar to them.[3]The etymology of the etymologyGermaniis not certain.If it really derives fromthe Gallic language ithas been proposed that it is a compound of *ger"neighbors" + *mani"men", comparable to theWelshger"close", theOld Irishgair"close", and theIrishgar-( prefix) "near" andgarach"nearby".[4][5][6][7]Another Celtic etymology links the root "ger" to "noisy", then "Germani" to "noisy men" or "screaming";cf."scream", Irishgairm"call".[8]However, there is no correspondence between the vowels and their length.
Other scholars have proposed an etymology from thecommon Germanicitself, *gēr-manni, "men of spear" or "sword" or in a broad sense "men of arms", cf.Middle Dutchghere,Old High GermanGer,Old Norsegeirr,[9]or evencontemporary Englishgear, "tool", "device", "equipment".However, the formgēr(fromProto-Germanic *gaizaz) seems phonetically much later than the 1st century, because it has a long vowel where there should be a short one for the Germanic languages of the period,Germanus (-i)has only one -n-, not ageminata.
Endonym: "Teutons, Germans"
The Germans identified themselves simply as "the people" or "the peoples", with a variety of words all having the same origin in thecommon Germanic*þiudiskaz(thiudiskaz).The root*þeudō(theudo) meant "people" (in the sense of the modernvolk, or "ethnic group", group of people united by the same origin and the same customs), and the suffix*-iskazformed the adjective (such continuous suffix eg in English-ishand in today's German-isch, as well as in Italian-escoon loan from the Germanic, cf.eg the proper name originally ethnonym "Francesco").TheProto-Indo-Europeanword* tewtéh₂("tribe"), which is accepted in linguistic studies as the basis oftheudo, is also at the origin of related words in other Indo-European languages such asLithuaniantautà("nation"), Old Irishtúath("tribe", "people") andOscan(one of the ancient Italic languages)touto("community").neolatines.[11]
ThiudiskazinMiddle Englishbecamethede/thedisc, but already from the Middle Ages the English referred to themselves asEngliscthenEnglish, and from the early modern Englishthedewas already lost (conserving only in some toponyms in England such asThetford, "public pass" ).Continue in 'Icelandicþjóð(thiod) which stands for "people, nation" and inNorway'snewtjodthe same meaning, and especially inGermanyofGermanyDeutschwhere it does not indicate a generic concept of people but precisely the "Germanic people".TheDutchDuits(which also has an antiquated variant,Deits, meaning only the "Dutch people"), theYiddish(Jewish Germanic) דײַטשdaytsh, theDanishtysk, the Norwegiantysk, theSwedishalso specifically indicate the nation of Germany.tyska, and neo-Latinderivatives such asGermanItalian.
The word "Teutone", in the adjectival form "Teutonic", also derives from the Germanicthiudiskazbut not through the medieval Latintheodiscus, but through the ancient LatinTeutonesalready adopted by the Romans to identify one of the first Germanic tribes with which they entered in contact, theTeutons infact.
History
The origins
The first historical and archaeological evidence (III-II millennium BC)
The Germans were the result of theIndo-Europeanization, in the first half of thethird millennium BC, ofsouthernScandinaviaandJutlandby people fromcentral Europe, already Indo-Europeanized during thefourth millennium BC.Although the exact chronology of this penetration is still object of dispute, it is recognized that by2500 BCthe cultural elements of these peoples - theculture of roped pottery- had reached a large area of northern Europe, fromtheeasternBaltic Sea totoday'sEuropean Russia, fromScandinavian Peninsulato the east coast ofthe North Sea[12].
At the time of their settlement in what would become theoriginal homelandof the Germans, the Indo-European elements already found anagriculturalcivilization developed, author of themegalithsofthe Nordic Stone Age.The ethnic characteristics of these peoples are not known, but it is possible that they were similar to those of the (relatively) neighboringFinnicpeoples[13].The more or less peaceful fusion of these pre-Indo-European elements with the Indo-European groups coming from the south determined the crystallization of the Germans, who preserved theIndo-European languageof the newcomers[12].
The degree of compactness of all the Germans is the subject of historiographical debate.It is commonly believed that, despite the split into numerous tribes and the absence of anattestedendoetnonym, the Germans were aware of their ethnic identity, as widely attested both by contemporary Greek and Roman historiography, and by the Germanic production of a little later[ 14];however, some recent historiographical trends criticize this approach and, interpreting the attestations of belonging as consequent to the classical ethnographic description, deny any form of common identity consciousness[15].In any case, full convergence remains both on the ethnically composite character of the various Germanic tribes, and on the contemporary social, religious and linguistic hom*ogeneity[14][15].
Bronze Age (17th-6th century BC)
The material culture that developed on the shores of thewesternBaltic Seaand insouthernScandinaviaduring the LateEuropeanBronze Age(1700 BC-500 BC), known asthe Nordic Bronze Age, is already considered the common ancestral culture of the Germanic people[12 ].At that time there were small and independent settlements, as well as an economy strongly centered on the availability of livestock.
This was the time when theProto-Germanic languagetook on its own peculiar characteristics within the Indo-European language family[16].Common Germanic - to be understood more as a set of related dialects than as a completely unitary language - remained substantially compact until the great migrations of Germans towards the south, which began as early as800 BC-750 BCIn the mid-eighth century BC, in fact , the Germans are attested along the entire coastal strip that goes fromthe Netherlandsto the mouth of theVistula.The pressure continued in the following centuries, not as a unitary and unidirectional movement but as an intricate process of advances, relegations and infiltrations into regions also inhabited by other peoples.Around550 BC theyreached theRhinearea, imposing themselves on the pre-existingCelticpopulations[17]and partly mixing with them (the border people of theBelgiansare considered mixed).
During this period the Germans were for a long time in contact, linguistically and culturally, with the Celts andItalics(bothOsco-Umbrian,Proto-LatinsandProto-Venetians) to the south and with theBaltsto the east[17].The relations with the Italics, certified byhistorical linguistics, were interrupted at the end of thesecond millennium BC, when these peoples began their migration towards the south[16]and would only resume starting from thefirst century BC, when withGaius Julius Caesarthe expansion ofRomewould have reached as far as the Rhine.
Iron Age (6th century BC)
From thefifthto thefirst century BC, during theIron Age, the Germans constantly pushed south, coming into contact (and often in conflict) with theCeltsand, later, with theRomans.The shift to the south was probably influenced by a worsening of the weather conditions inScandinaviabetween600 BCand300 BCapproximately[without source].The mild and dry climate of southern Scandinavia (a temperature two to three degrees higher than the current one) worsened considerably, which not only dramatically changed the vegetation, but pushed populations to change their ways of life and abandon settlements.[without source].Around this period, this culture discovered how to extract the "bog iron" (limonite) from theorein theswampsofpeat[without source].Possession of the right technology to obtain ironorefrom local sources may have favored expansion into new territories.
In the area of contact with the Celts, along theRhine, the two peoples came into conflict.Although carriers of a more articulated civilization, theGaulsunderwent the settlement of Germanic outposts in their territory, which gave rise to overlapping processes between the two peoples: settlements belonging to one or the other lineage alternated and penetrated, , in their respective areas of origin.In the long run, the Germans emerged as the victors, who a few centuries later would have spread west of the Rhine. The same process would have occurred, to the south, along the other natural embankment of their expansion, theDanube[18].
At the end of thesecond century BCthe Germans were present, as well as in their original Baltic-Scandinavian homeland, in a large but indefinite region of central Europe, at the time covered with dense forests and corresponding to the currentNetherlands,centralGermany.northern andcentral-westernPoland.The borders of the area they reached, albeit fluid and subject to changes and sharing with other peoples, coincided broadly with the lower courses of theRhineto the west and theVistulato the east;to the south the situation was even more uncertain, with Germanic penetrations even deep into regions inhabited mainly byCelts, such asNoricoandPannonia.Already inthe following century, however, the Germanic presence would have been better defined, from a territorial point of view, as that predominant in the areas immediately beyond theRoman Limes, marked in those regions by the Rhine and the upperDanube.
The myth and their subdivision in Roman historiography
In ancient times the hypothesis was widespread, reported by the Latin historian,Publius Cornelius Tacitus, inDeigine et situ Germanorum(98 AD), according to which the Germans were an indigenous people of Germany itself, since in the most ancient times the movements of entire populations took place exclusively by sea and he believes that no people of theMediterraneanhave pushed towards theNorth Sea.[19]In addition to this, the Roman historian also refers to the mythical origins that the Germanic tradition attributed to his own people, transmitted orally;they considered themselves descendants ofTuistone,divinityof the earth.His grandchildren, sons of his sonManno, would be the founders of the three Germanic lineages:
that of theIngevoni(the populations near the ocean),
of theIstevoni(who occupy the middle area)
and of theErminoni(all the others).
According to other traditions, always reported by Tacitus, Manno had many other children in addition to the first three, from which theMarsi, theGambrivi, theSuebi, theVandilialso derived, and therefore would have given rise to other tribes.[20]
Twenty years earlier, in the77/78,Pliny the Elderwrote something very similar in hisNaturalis Historia, which would complete the picture described by Tacitus, the Germanic peoples.According to the Latin historian and naturist: "the Germans have 5 races:
theVandals, which include theBurgundians, theVarinni, theCarini,Gutoni;
the Ingueoni (equivalent toIngevoniTacitus), comprisingCimbri,TeutonsandCauci(on the coasts of the German Ocean);
the Istueoni (similar to theIstevoni), close to the Rhine (and occupying the middle ground);
the Ermioni (similar to theErminoni), further inland and of whichSuebi,Ermunduri,CattiandCherusci are part;
the fifth division is made up ofPeuciniandBastarni».[21]
The conflict against Rome (2nd century BC - 5th century AD)
Cimbri and Teutoni (113 - 101 BC)
The Germans came into contact withRomefrom the last part of thesecond century BC, with the incursions ofCimbriandTeutoniin Roman territory.The two Germanic peoples moved from their nativeJutlandand penetrated intoGaul, reaching as faras the recently establishedRoman provinceofGaul Narbonne.Here they descended the course of theRhonefavoring a rebellion of theCeltictribesjust subjected to Rome and defeating on several occasions the Roman legions who had tried to stem the invasion.
In the following years the Cimbri penetrated intoIberia, while the Teutons continued their raids in northern Gaul.The two peoples then returned to turn against the dominions of Rome, threateningCisalpine Gaul;to oppose them was sent theconsulGaius Mario, who in two battles annihilated both peoples: the Teutons inAquae Sextiae(today'sAix-en-Provence) in102 BC, the Cimbri inCampi Raudii(nearVercelli) in101 B.C
Having overcome the danger of the invasion of Cimbri and Teutoni, Rome passed to a markedly expansionist policy towards the north, in the territories ofcentral-westernEurope.The process, divided into various phases, led to the conquest of all the areas located west of theRhineand south of theDanube, as well as various penetrations beyond this line.The uninterrupted frontier ofthe Roman Empire, extending fromthe NorthSeatothe Black Sea, was theLimes, for centuries a barrier to the expansionist push of the Germans towards the south and west.Along the Limes, there were numerous conflicts that arose over the centuries between the Romans and the Germans, who tried several times to penetrate the richer and more organized territory subject to the City.However, only when the Roman Empire entered - for internal reasons - intoserious crisis, the Germans succeeded in penetrating with large masses on this side of the Limes (3rd century).
Caesar and Gaul: the Rhine as a natural border with the Germans (58-54 BC)
At the time of theconquest of Gaulled byCaesar, new conflicts broke out along theRhine, the border between theCeltsand the Germans.Since72 BCa group of Germanic tribes, led by theSuebiofAriovisto, had crossed the river and tormented theGallic territorywith its raids, also inflicting a hard defeat on theGaulsatAdmagetobriga(60 BC).The Gauls then invoked the help of Caesar, who definitively defeated Ariovistus nearMulhouse(58 BC).
However, the defeat of Ariovisto was not enough to stop the pressure exerted in those years by the Germans on the Gauls.A mass ofUsipetesandTencterithreatened theBelgianMenapiat the mouth of the Rhine, providing Caesar with a new opportunity for intervention (55 BC).Defeated the two tribes inBelgian Gaul, the proconsul crossed over into the lands of the Germans: having crossed the Rhine, he carried out raids and looting to terrorize the enemy and induce him to give up new raids towards Gaul.He therefore firmly fixed the border of the territories subject to Rome on the same Rhine.
The attempted Roman conquest under Augustus (12 BC-9 AD)
The Germanic peoples had repeatedly tried to cross theRhine: in38 BC(the year in which the German allies,Ubi, were transferred to Roman territory)[22]and in29 BCtheSuebi, while in17 BCtheSigambri, together withUsipetiandTencteri(clades lolliana).[23]Augustus thought the time had come to annexGermany, as his fatherGaius Julius Caesarhad donewithGaul.He wished to bring the boundaries ofRoman Empirefurther east, from theRhineRivertothe Elbe River.The reason was purely strategic rather than economic-commercial.They were in fact marshy territories covered by endless forests but the Elbe river would have considerably reduced the external borders of the empire.[24][25]
It fell to the stepson of Augustus,Drusus major, the onerous task of operating in Germany.Thecampaigns that followed were numerous, discontinuous, and lasted for about twenty years from12 BCto6 ADleading to the establishment of the new province ofGermanywith the establishment of numerous military installations in its defense.All the territories conquered in these twenty years were however definitively compromised when in7August he sentPublius Quintilius Varoto Germany, lacking diplomatic and military skills, as well as unaware of the people and places.In the 9th an army of 20,000 men consisting of three legions was massacred in theforest of Teutoburgo, leading to the definitive loss of the entire area between the Rhine and the Elbe.[24][25][26]
The Roman occupation of the Agri decumati
After the Teutoburg disaster, Rome tried again to reduce the Germans to obedience, but they always managed to avoid bowing to the Roman yoke, except for momentary episodes.An expedition led byGermanicusunderTiberius(14-16AD) ended with the victory of theBattle of Idistaviso, which however did not lead to an expansion of the Roman dominions.In47Claudiusdecided to permanently withdraw the legions on this side of the Rhine. During this period, various Germanic tribes based near the mouth of the river had had to accept thestatusof tributaries of Rome, only to rebel (theFrisiin28, theBataviansin69-70).
Between83and85a new campaign against the Germans was led by the Roman emperorDomitian, who clashed with theCattiand occupied the area of theAgri decumates, thus reducing the length of the Limes between the Rhine and the Danube.Later, the same emperor fought against other Germanic tribes (theMarcomanniand theQuadi) further east, along the middle course of the Danube (Pannonia), in a series of campaigns then continued byTrajan(89-97).
The Germanic tribes at the end of the 1st century
Thefirst detailed description of the Germansdates back to the end of the1st century, reported in theGermanyofGaius Cornelius Tacitus(about98AD).By that time the Germans had long since become sedentary farmers.The Roman historian, likeCaesarbefore him, deals exclusively with "West Germans", who are therefore the first to be described in detail byhistoriography.Tacitus testifies that initially these Germans were not interested in the Roman territories.Every now and then, upheavals generated internally or induced by external pressures channeled the endemic aggression of these warrior tribes towards the borders of the Roman Empire, which aroused in them fear, reverence and greed.But the Empire was too strong and the tribes too weak to be able to consolidate those forays into real military campaigns.The incursions were rather the Romans to carry them out in the barbarian lands, with terrifying results.[27]It was only between thesecondandfourth centuriesthat, pushed by the tribes of nomads of the steppes who, militarily superior, occupied the pastures, they began to push south.
The division of the ensemble ofGermanic tribesinto three large geographically characterized subsets (western, eastern and northern), follows alinguisticdistinction withintheGermanic languagesrather than a strictly historical one[28], since mixing was frequent among the Germans and hybridizations of different tribes.
The West Germans
InGermanyTacitusdivides the (western) Germans into three groups:Ingaevones,IstaevonesandHerminones.This tripartition has also been accepted by modern historiography, which identifies them respectively with the tribes ofthe North Sea, theRhine-Weserbasinand theElbebasin[29].
TheIngaevonesat the time of Tacitus were the tribes settled along the coasts ofthe North Seaand the small adjacent islands;among these, theFrisi(at the mouth of the Rhine), theAngles(in today'sSchleswig-Holstein), theSaxons(also originally from Schleswig-Holstein, then expanded south and west until reaching the Rhine and entering in conflict with other Germanic tribes) and theJutes(traditionally located inJutland. Angles, Jutes and most of the Saxons migrated en masse toGreat Britainin the5th century[30].
TheIstaevoneswere located, in thefirst century-second century,in the area of the basins of theRhineandWeserrivers.Among the various tribes that were part of this group, theBatavi, theUbi, theTreveri, theCattiand theFranks stand out, who soon evolved from a single tribe to a confederation including contributions from different origins.
TheHerminones(often also referred to by the generic name ofSuebi, however used inconsistently by classical sources) occupied, always around the first century, the region between the lower course of theElbeand theBaltic Sea, then called theGulf of Codano.Among the tribes that were part of it, in addition to the Suebi themselves, there were theMarcomanni, theQuadiand theSemnoni;the latter would have formed the nucleus of theAlemanniconfederation.
The East Germans
Also called, from the place of their settlement between the1stand2nd centuries, "group of theOder-Vistula", also this great subset of the Germans, identified mainly on a linguistic basis[31], was divided into numerous tribes;among the main ones,Vandals,Burgundians,Gepids,Rugi,Eruli,Bastarni,Sciri,Goti(later split into two branches:OstrogothsandVisigoths) andLombards(the latter, however, are sometimes included among theHerminones, West Germans)[32].
There is little information on this Germanic branch in the first centuries AD: due to the rare contacts with the classical world, the testimonies of Greek and Latin historians and geographers are few and confused.Only starting from theIII-IV century, with the first great migratory movements of the East Germans from theBalticareatowards theRoman Limesand with theGothictranslationof theBiblebyUlfilas, the East Germanic tribes would have entered the line of history .
The Northern Germans
Despite the scarcity of contacts, Latin historians and geographers have handed down some information on the northern branch of the Germans:Pliny the Elderindicates them with the generic name ofHilleviones, whileTacitusrecalls the tribe of theSuions(from whose name that ofSwedenderives).Common fromthe Proto-Norse language, handed down by inscriptions inthe runic alphabet, in the first centuries AD the various tribes were settled in the southern part ofthe Scandinavian Peninsula;only from the5th centuryvarious migratory movements began, which considerably expanded the area occupied by this Germanic branch[33].
The Marcomannic Wars of the end of the 2nd century
After a period of tranquility, the Germans resumed maneuvering against theRoman Empirein135, with theSuebi;against them, in two campaigns,Lucio Elio Cesare(136-137)moved.But during thesecond century itwas above all theMarcomanniwho fought against Rome, giving rise to a long period of military conflicts (from167to188) fought above all inPannonia.
In166/167, the first clash took place along thebordersofPannonia, at the hands of a few bands of maraudingLombardsandOsii, which, thanks to the prompt intervention of the border troops, were quickly rejected.The peace stipulated with the neighboring Germanic populations north of theDanubewas managed directly by the emperors themselves,Marcus AureliusandLucio Vero, now wary of the barbarian aggressors and for these reasons they went to far offCarnuntum(in168).[34]The premature death of his brother Lucio (in169not far fromAquileia), and the breach of pacts by the barbarians (many of whom had been"customers"since the time ofTiberius), brought a mass never seen before then, to pour devastatingly into northern Italy as far as the walls ofAquileia, the heart ofVenetia.The impression caused was enormous: it was from the time ofMariothat a barbarian population had not besieged the centers of northern Italy.[35]A coalition of tribes was formed around the Marcomanni, which also includedQuadi,Vandali,Narists,Lombardsand even non-Germanic peoples, such as theIazigiofSarmatic stock.The emperorMarcus Aureliusmoved against itwho, despite defeating the barbarians several times, was unable to complete his project due to the death of the Roman emperor (in180).This put an end to the Roman expansionist plans and led to the abandonment of the occupied territories of theMarcomanniaand the stipulation of new treaties with the"client" populationsnorth-east of themiddle Danube.[36]
Invasions of the third century: the first ethnic federations
After theMarcomannic Wars, a new trial took place among the Germans: in place of simple tribal coalitions, real ethnic federations were created.The identities of each single tribal group gave way, in these cases, to a new, broader, "national" identity: that of the federation.Examples of this new modality were theFranks, theAlemanniand later, from thefifth century, theAnglo-Saxons.The process took place only in a few cases, and was only one of the possible lines of development of the great process of reorganization carried out by the Germanic tribes during the migratory processes known as theBarbarian Invasions.;in other cases the aggregation of tribes, parts of tribes and even individual warriors continued around already existing tribes, which thus acted as a catalyst and continued to preserve their own identity (even if now enlarged).Aggregations of this kind were, for example, those that took place around theSuebi, theOstrogoths, theVisigothsand theLombards.EvenMarcomanniandQuadiacted several times in coalition, also united with non-Germanic peoples such as theIazigiofSarmatic stock.
The invasionsof this period(from212/213to305) constituted an uninterrupted period of raids within the confines of the 'Roman Empire, conducted for the purpose of plunder and booty[37]by armed men belonging to the people who gravitated along thebordersnorthern:Picts,CaledonsandSaxonsinBritain;the Germanic tribes ofFrisi,Saxons,Franks,Alemanni,Burgundi,Marcomanni,Quadi,Lugi,Vandali,Jutungi,GepidiandGoti(Tervingito the west andGrutungito the east[38]), theDaciantribesof theCarpiand theSarmatictribesofIazigi,RoxolaniandAlani, as well asBastarni,Scythians,BoraniandErulialong theRhine-Danuberiversand theBlack Sea.
The growing danger of Germans andSarmatiansfor the Roman Empirewas mainly due to the aforementioned change in the tribal structure of their society compared to previous centuries: the population, constantly growing and driven by oriental peoples, needed new territories to expand on pain of the extinction of the weaker tribes.Hence the need to join large ethnic federations, such as those ofAlemanni,[39]Franks[40]andGoths,[41]to better attack the nearby Empire or to defend itself from the irruption of other neighboring barbarian populations.For other scholars, however, in addition to the pressure of external populations, it was also the contact and confrontation with the Roman imperial civilization (its wealth, its language, its weapons, its organization) to suggest to the Germanic peoples to restructure and organize themselves into more robust and permanent social systems, capable of better defending themselves or seriously attacking the Empire.[42]Rome, for its part, by now from the first century AD was trying to prevent the penetration of the barbarians by entrenching itself behind thelimes, or the continuous line of fortifications between the Rhine and the Danube and built precisely to contain the pressure of the Germanic peoples.[43]
The breakthrough by the barbarian populations who were along thelimeswas also facilitated by theperiod of severe internal instabilitythat the Roman Empire crossed during the third century.In Rome, in fact, there was a continuous alternation ofemperorsandusurpers(the so-calledmilitary anarchy).The internal wars not only unnecessarily consumed important resources in the clashes between the various contenders, but - what is much more serious - ended up emptying precisely the borders subjected to the aggression of the barbarians.
Invasions of the 4th century
The effort undertaken by theAugustiwho had followed one another already during the third century and then in the fourth century, both because of the lack of a long-term project, and because of the economic crisis that had hit the Roman tax system, failed to save the integrity of the Empire.It was now clear that any effort to maintain thestatus quowould not produce the desired results.Diocletianand histetrarchy,Constantine Iand hisdynasty, could only slow down this process. By the middle of the4th centurythe pressure of the Germanic tribes on the borders of theDanubeand theRhinehad become very strong, pressed by theHunsfrom theCentral Asiansteppes(perhaps the same population, remembered with the name ofXiongnu, who a century earlier had undermined theChinese Empireat theGreat Wall).The irruption of the Huns on the European chessboard profoundly changed the characteristics of the Germanic attacks against the Roman territory: if during thethird centurythe prevailing modality had been that of raids with the aim of looting, after which the various tribes, federations or coalitions returned to their settlements located immediately beyond theRoman Limes, in the 4th mass migrations to the Empire began.In this process, it was not only the warriors who moved, but the entire people, in search of new areas of settlement;migration, however, did not completely replace raiding, but the two modes intersected and overlapped repeatedly.
At first, Rome attempted to absorb the movements of the Germanic populations by inserting them within its own structures, entrusting them with a settlement area along the Limes and committing them, in exchange for hospitality, to the defense of the Limes itself.The splitting of the greatGothicfamilyinto the two "western" (Visigoths) and "eastern" (Ostrogoths) branches did not stop their pressure against theDanube Limes, which they exercised both individually and jointly between the third and fourth centuries.Following the migration of the Huns, initially inPannoniaand due to the domino effect caused by it, however, the policy of progressive assimilation could no longer be continued, and the Germans broke out en masse and beyond any planning within the Empire.At the end of the process, which continued in the following centuries, numerous Germanic peoples found themselves settled in various territories of Western and Southern Europe and even inNorth Africa, consequently redesigning the ethnic and linguistic map of the Old Continent.
The new situation had as a turning point thebattle of Adrianople (378), in which theVisigothsdefeated the army of the emperorValens, who lost his life in the battle.Theodosius, in fact, called to lead the Eastern empire byGratianafter the death of Valens, and his successors adopted a new containment strategy against the barbarians.After that event, in fact, the emperors, unable to stop the invasions militarily, began to adopt a policy based on the systems ofhospitalitasandfoederatio.After the terrible defeat of Adrianople in378, the Roman emperors were thus forced to "suffer" the presence of the barbarians both inside and outside theimperial borders, one of the main causes of the disintegration and separation between thewesternandeasternpartof theempire.
Invasions of the 5th century
The extreme agony of Rome began when, around395, theVisigothsrebelled.[44]The death ofTheodosius Iand the final division of 'Western Roman Empireand d'Eastbetween his two sonsHonoriusandArcadius, brought the general VisigothAlaricto break the alliance with the empire and to penetrate through Thrace to camp under the walls ofConstantinople.At the same time theHunsinvaded Thrace andAsia Minorwhile theMarcomanniPannonia.It was only thanks to the intervention of GeneralStilicone, who, although blocked by the authority ofArcadio, was able to stop a possible siege of the eastern capital in the bud.[45][46][47]
And again in402the Visigoths tried a new coup by besiegingMediolanum, the other imperial capital (this time in the western part) whereHonoriushad taken refuge.It was only thanks to a new intervention by Stilicone that she was saved and Alaric was forced to lift the siege.
A few years later, in410, Alaric's attempts achieved major success.Thanks above all to the death of Stilicho, the only bulwark of the Roman world, he managed to penetrate Italy andsackRomeitself.[48][49][50]On that date, for some years already, the imperial capital had moved toRavenna,[51]but some historians claim 410 as a possible date of the real fall of the Roman Empire.[52]Deprived of Rome and many of its formerprovinces, with an increasingly marked Germanic imprint, the Roman Empire of the years following 410 had very little in common with that of past centuries.By 410,Britainwas now permanently lost,[53] justas a large part ofWestern Europewas cornered "by all kinds of calamities and disasters",[54]ending up in the hands ofRoman-barbarian kingdomsformed at within its original borders and commanded byVandals,Swabians,VisigothsandBurgundians.[55]
There was only a timid attempt to restore the ancient splendor of Rome by themagister militumEzio, who managed to provisionally face the barbarians until451, when he beat the Huns ofAttilathanks to a coalition of Germanic peoples federated in thebattle of the Fields Catalaunici.[56][57][58]Ezio's death in454led to the subsequent end in the span of twenty-five years and a newsack of Romein455.
Infact,476sanctioned the formal endof the Western Roman Empire.In that year,Flavio Oresterefused to pay the Germanic mercenaries in his service.Dissatisfied mercenaries, including theHeruli, revolted.The revolt was led by the barbarianOdoacer.Odoacer and his men captured and killed Orestes.A few weeks later,Ravenna, the capital of the Empire, fell and the last emperorRomulus Augustuswas deposed.This event is traditionally considered the fall of the Roman Empire, at least in the West.All Italy was in the hands of Odoacer, who sent the imperial insignia to the emperor of[59]
Roman-Germanic kingdoms (5th-8th century)
In the territories that belonged tothe Roman Empireand later submerged by thebarbarian invasions, the new German arrivals gave life, together with theRomanesquevanquished(Gallo-Roman and Iberian-Roman ethnic groups and peoples of other origins, residues of the dissolution of the ancient Roman Empire ), to state institutions of a new type, calledRoman-barbarian(or Latin-Germanic)kingdoms.Within these kingdoms, during theHigh Middle Ages, the integration between the German invaders and the Romanesque natives took place, thus giving life - at least in the most general lines - to the ethnic and linguistic composition ofEuropemodern.The "Romano-Barbarian" monarchies had a dual character linked both to the Germanic tradition of the conquerors (unwritten laws, importance ofshepherding,Aryanreligious beliefand warrior customs) and to the Latin tradition of Romanized peoples, with bishops often coming from ancient families Roman aristocrats.
Thepars occidentiswas reorganizing itself according to the new institutional profiles of the so-called "Roman-barbarian monarchies", formally recognized by the only remaining emperor, that of the East.The old municipalities, however, remained operational for a long time, although the economy and society were severely affected and did not recover for many centuries.Cities gradually depopulated (due to insecurity, lack of supplies andgallopinginflation) and the economy became ruralized.Now exhausted the slaves for the large estates, thesettlersspread(men and women formally free, but linked to the lands they worked and to the landowners, to whom they lent free, compulsory and unilateral works decided by the masters), who took refuge there in exchange for the protection of thevigilantes, small private military corps.
In the large estates, divided between the families of the colonists, the old monocultures had by now broken up in favor of diversified products and a greater presence of pastures for livestock (typical activity of the colonists of Germanic origin).It was almost never possible to reach self-sufficiency and markets persisted, at least for valuable goods and handicrafts.
The decline of trade with the East madepapyrusrare, which was replaced in the preparation of books in monasteries with the most precious (and expensive)parchment, obtained from suitably tanned animal skin, a resource now more readily available due to its greater diffusion breeding.
The Roman-Barbarian kingdoms maintained many of the structures of the Roman government, especially at the municipal level, using the collaboration of the Romans (or, better said,Romanesque) to govern their state.[60]It does not appear thatFranksandBurgundianshad maintained the Roman provincial system, while theVisigothsandVandalsmaintained the provinces (governed byrectoresoriudices) but not dioceses and prefectures.[61]Only in ItalyOdoacerand, subsequently, theOstrogothkings(primarilyTheodoric the Great) fully preserved the late-imperial administrative structure by maintaining theprefecture of the praetorium of Italyand the two vicariates ofItaly, AnnonariaandSuburbicaria, as well as the various provinces into which Italy had been divided.When Theodoric conquered Provence, in 508, he also reconstituted adiocese of Gaul, promoted two years later to the rank ofprefecture, withArelate as itscapital.The prefecture of the praetorium of the Gauls was abolished in 536, under the reign ofVitige, following the cession of Provence to the Franks.The reason why Odoacer and, subsequently, Theodoric fully maintained the late-imperial administrative structure was that they were officially viceroy of the "Roman" Emperor of Constantinople, so Italy continued nominally to be part of the Roman Empire, albeit in "indirect" way.Civil offices (such as that ofvicar,praetorian prefect,praeses,praefectus urbi,consul,magister officiorum) continued to be clothed with Roman citizens, while barbarians without citizenship were excluded.The Romans, on the other hand, were excluded from the army, made up entirely of Ostrogoths.
The laws of the Roman-barbarian kingdoms attest that the Barbarians received a third or two thirds of the lands of the settlement region, on the basis of the institution of the so-calledhospitalitas.
Some of the Roman-barbarian kingdoms, such as those of theBurgundiansin theRhonebasinor of theSwabians(Suebi) in the northwestern part of the Iberian Peninsula, were assimilated during the sixth century by the neighbors (that of the Burgundians by the Franks and the Swabian by the Visigoths );others, such as those of theVandalsin North Africa or theOstrogothsin Italy, also collapsed in the sixth century under the offensive of Byzantium, which attempted to rebuild the unity of the empire.Those of theVisigothsin Spain and theFranksin the former Gallic provinces instead they survived, both for the rapid integration between the populations of residents and the invaders, and for the collaboration with the Church and with exponents of the Latin intellectual world.TheVisigothic kingdomcollapsed in the early 8th century, conquered by the Muslim Arabs.After the collapse ofthe Ostrogothic kingdom, in 568 Italy was invaded by theLombards, whosereignlasted until 774, when it was conquered by the Franks ofCharlemagne.
Society
Family
Tacitus adds that alongside the ranks of fighters, their families are in the rear, so close that they hear the shouts of encouragement from their women and their children.These are for every soldier the most dear people, to whom they offer the wounds to be treated (to mothers and wives) and from whom they are fed with food, exhorted and encouraged.[62]
"It is said that sometimes the ranks that withdrew, so much so that they were on the point of giving up, were forced to return to fight thanks to the insistent prayers of the women who, showing their breasts, made their men understand the danger that loomed over them if they fell prisoner.And in fact the Germans fear women's imprisonment more than their own. "
(Tacitus,De origine et situ Germanorum, VIII, 1.)
In women the Germans saw something holy and prophetic and did not scorn their advice, nor did they neglect their responses.[63]Not surprisingly, during the principality ofVespasian, a woman,Veleda, was considered by most of her almost a goddess, while in more ancient times this role was held by a certainAlbrinia.[64]Women lived with great reserve and modesty of their femininity (pudicitia), without being negatively influenced by shows or banquets.Both men, like women, ignored the betrayal.It is no coincidence that adulterers were very rare in such a numerous society.[65]
Getting to know a woman before the twentieth year was very shameful for the Germans.In fact, they valued their virginity, since they believed it gave them greater strength, vigor and stature.[66]Marital relations were austere, and for this Tacitus himself admired them.In fact, the Germans, almost alone among the barbarians, needed only one wife, apart from a few who contracted several marriages, not so much for the desire for pleasure, but because they were sought after for their nobility.[67] Withthem it was not the wife who brought the dowry to her husband, but he who offered it to her.The husband's parents and relatives reviewed the gifts, which were not given to the woman's pleasure, but were mated oxen, a harnessed horse, a shield, a spear and a sword.[68]In exchange for these gifts, the wife was bought, while she gave her husband some weapon: this represented the deepest content of their bond, their sacred mysteries and the wedding deities.The wife was also obliged to share hardships and dangers with her husband, ready to suffer and have the same fate, both in peace and in war.This also represented the symbol of the gifts of the husband's family.[69]
Once a woman became a mother, she had to return to her children what she had received, to then pass it all on to her future daughters-in-law and from these to their grandchildren, in a continuity of traditions from generation to generation.[70]Each child was nursed by his own mother and was never entrusted to nurses or maids.[71]
Young people are allowed to carry weapons only after the tribe has acknowledged that they are capable of handling them.In the assembly, one of the chiefs or the father or one of the relatives provides the young man with a spear (framea) and a shield.In this way, a first form of youth honor is highlighted.If before this ceremony, young people were considered to be part of the family, they are now part of their tribe or people.[72]A great nobility or the great merits and virtues that young people can have, confer on some of them even the dignity of head;others of them follow the strongest of them, whose value has already been tested.[73]
In times of peace, rather than being idle for a long period, some young people went to those allied populations who were engaged in war, since, as Tacitus maintains, "the Germanic race is intolerant of peace".This served to acquire glory more easily if in combination with dangers, and "only with violence and war was it possible to maintain a large following."[74]
The love instinct in young people awakens late and for this reason, according to Tacitus, they enjoy a strong virility.Even girls don't marry too early.Strong in youth like husbands, they have the same stature as themselves and marry when they are equal in strength to their companions.And the children born to them consequently have the same vigor as their parents.[75]
A curious fact that Tacitus relates is that the sons of the sister were held by the uncle in the same consideration as the fathers, so much so that when they were forced to take hostages, the sisters' children were asked above all, representing an extremely sacred and profound relationship of kinship for them. .[76]The more relatives and consequently the relatives were numerous, the more the old were honored.[77]
It was a duty for the ancient Germans to consider as their own, both the enmities and the friendships of their father or a relative.The hatreds were not endless, however.Even murder could be forgiven with a fixed number of oxen and sheep;and the family could therefore remain satisfied with this offer.Tacitus sums up at the end that all this was to the benefit of the community, since "grievances were more dangerous in an atmosphere of freedom".[78]
Forms of government
Structure
The basic structure of Germanic society was the* kunja(English:kin,cynn, Saxon:cunni, German:kunne), which means "generation", "race", "descent", etymologically related to the Greekghenosand the Latingenus, established in* sibjō(German:sippe; equivalent toclan), formed by the union of several patriarchal families related to each other.The clan constituted an entirely autonomous and self-sufficient economic, military and political entity.The superior entity of thesippenwas the* theudō(alsothiuda), thevolk, "people" (English:thede, Saxon:thiod, German:diot[laterdeutschwith the adjectival suffix-isch],OldNorse:thjóð, with the German form later Latinized intheodiscus), territorially extended in thegau, called by the Latinscivitas, that is a tribe settled in a specific territory.
Substantially democratic, Germanic society experienced forms ofelective monarchywithin which the assembly of free men, thething(orallthing, or, in the Anglo-Saxon kingdomswitan) periodically reunited, effectively maintained all powers, including the judicial one.The assemblies expressed the decisions of the people, which therefore consisted of the free and voluntary union of differentkin.
Clan leaders, kings and princes
Tacituswrites that, around the end of thefirst century, the German kings were elected by virtue of their lineage, the generals instead in relation to the valor shown in battle.And if the power of the former was not unlimited, nor free, the latter based their authority on example, arousing admiration if they were brave, if they fought before their ranks in battle.[79]
The clan leaders had their own following, within which there was a hierarchy of positions, distributed according to the will of the one who led them.Often the various subordinates (comites) competed with each other to obtain a more advanced position, closer to their leader, while the leaders competed with each other for more numerous and stronger companions than their peers.[80]The notoriety of the leaders was asserted not only among their own people, but also among other populations, when his group was known for the demonstrated value.It is no coincidence that some of them were insistently requested through embassies, offering offers of gifts, and with their fame they could influence the outcome of a war.[81]
In battle it was shameful for a clan leader to allow himself to be surpassed in valor by his own subordinates.And it was equally shameful for them, not to match the courage of their commander.Worse still, it was a lifelong mark of infamy and shame, to return safe from a fight when one's captain had died in battle, since the most sacred commitment was to defend and protect one's leader, even going so far as to attribute to the his own acts of heroism.[82]The clan mates, on the other hand, demanded a horse from their commander, a victorious spear bathed in enemy blood, since the food was abundant, however simple and crude it was and in fact constituted a realsalarymilitary.The spoils that could be divided at the end of a war or a raid were therefore very appreciated.[83]It is no coincidence that Tacitus writes that among the Germans it constituted "proof of indolence and cowardice, buying with the sweat of the brow (like working the land and waiting for the harvest) what it was possible to obtain with blood and honor wounds [in battle]».[84]
Assemblies
The clan chiefs gave life, probably already at a very ancient age, to periodic assembly meetings.The assembly meetings of the entire people took place on fixed days, during thenew moonor thefull moon, a period that they consider the most favorable for taking certain initiatives.[85]
«The fact of being free gave them a certain disadvantage in the fact of never gathering all together, as if behind a command;they lose two or three days to wait for those who linger.When it suits the disordered crowd, they sit down carrying their weapons.The priests then, who also have the right to punish, impose silence "
(Tacitus,Deigine et situ Germanorum, XI, 3-4.)
During the general assembly, first the speeches of the king, or of the chief, are heard, in order of age or nobility of lineage, or military valor, or eloquence, which is measured by the effectiveness of their persuasive arguments, more than for the commanding authority they hold.[86]When ideas meet the favor of the majority, they are greeted by the sound of spears colliding.[87]
In case of war, the assembly appointed men of particular value or authority as commanders, and these, simple "first among equals", always had to answer for their actions to the assembly itself.Only in a later period did the elected military commanders begin to assume the traits of kings and with the formation of the Roman-barbarian kingdoms, after the end of theWestern Roman Empire, prestigious royal lineages became established.In any case, the figures of the Germanic rulers were always limited in their power by the assembly.
The use of thecomitatus was interesting, that is, the habit of aggregating young people from less prominent families to those of more important families, making them become inseparable companions in peace and war.This model of personal fidelity would have influenced, through the Roman-barbarian legislation, the institutions of theMiddle Ages, becoming one of the salient features.
Semi-free men and slaves
After the free men, the minority with the right to bear arms and who held the entire power (among theLombards theywere calledArimannifor example), came the aldi (hald, Latinized:haldii), semi-free men tied to the land almost in the same way ofserfs;finally theslaves, almost always prisoners of war or civilians captured during the raids.
Tacitus adds that it would not be possible to recognize a servant from his master for any particular refinement of education.They both grow together with the same flocks, on the same ground, until age separates free men and value highlights them.[88]
Normally the masters did not entrust the slaves with particular tasks, as the Romans did;each governs his home and family;housework was entrusted to his wife and children.The master required the slave, like a settler, to provide him with a certain quantity of wheat or livestock or fabric.Within these limits, obedience was mandatory.[89]It was difficult for a master to beat a slave or have him thrown into prison, or forced him into forced labor.It was easier for him to kill him, mostly driven by the rush of anger.And in this case the murder went unpunished.[90]
The condition of the freedmen was not very different from that of the slaves.They rarely had ancestry in the family, none in the village, apart from those populations who had a monarchical regime.Here, in fact, they could obtain more power than free men or nobles themselves.[91]
Calendar
The Germans in Tacitus' time, unlike the Romans, counted nights instead of days.With this criterion they fix the time, and consequently the subpoenas.[85]They divide the year into only three seasons, unlike the Romans who had four: in practice they knew, according to Tacitus, winter, spring and summer.They therefore ignored the proper name and gifts of autumn.
Settlements
The Germans lived in small communities or scattered settlements.There were therefore no cities among them.The buildings were made of wood and very simple, andTacitusalreadytestifies to the existence of buildings similar to what would later become thefachwerkhaus, the characteristic house of the Germanic peoples.They do not tolerate their homes being contiguous to each other.In fact, they live separately, in isolated places, close to where they have found a source, a field, a wood of their choice.[93]Each of them surrounds their home with an empty space, either to guard against the period of fires, or perhaps because they ignore the art of building like the Romans.[94]Tacitus again reports that the Germans did not seem to know the use of building stones or that of tiles.And for every need they use raw wood without paying any attention to the appearance that derives from it.Only some points of their homes are covered with a land so pure and shiny that it seems to imitate colors and colorful designs.[95]
Sometimes they also dig underground caves, covering them with manure.And these are used as shelters in winter or as warehouses for the harvest, as they relieve the rigors of frost and when they are stormed by the enemy, they often manage to hide their possessions.[96]
The archaeological discoveries also testify to the existence in the areas occupied by the Germans of fortified places, theburga, hence the names of the cities ending inburg,borg[97](asWürzburg, inGermany) orburgh,boroughorbury(asPeterboroughorCanterbury, inGreat Britain).
At the time of Caesar, there was noprivate ownershipof land among theSuebi: the lands gradually occupied were divided among the clans, each of which in turn divided its share between families of the same stock or groups of relatives that made it up.[98]The highest magistrates and clan leaders, in fact, each year assigned families a certain place, and then the following year they granted a different one.[99]They justify this practice with the fact that they did not want the population to get used to a sedentary life, losing their passion for war;that the strongest did not drive the weakest from their holdings by enlarging their possessions;that they did not care too much about building comfortable houses to shelter them from the heat and cold;that love for money was not born.[100]In doing so, everyone had a wealth equal to that of the most powerful.[101]
Hospitality
Always Tacitus tells us about hospitality, a fundamental characteristic for the uses and customs of the Germans."No other nation exercised this cordial form in receiving strangers more than the Germans."In fact, they were very predisposed to prepare feasts, banquets.On the contrary, it was a form of disrespect to exclude a person from one's home;and each received the guest according to his possibilities, setting the table as he could.[102]Each time the food ran out, the guest was invited to go to a new home where he could be welcomed in the same way, and accompanied.And although they went to their neighbors without warning, they were always received with equal courtesy.[103]
Regarding the right to hospitality, no one made a difference between known and unknown people.And when a guest left, in case he needed something, it was customary to give it to him.Likewise, inquiries could be addressed to the guest with equal ease.Therefore they rejoiced in the gifts, both for those they had given and for those received, of which they did not rest in duty.[104]
Traditional clothing
All the Germans dress with a short cloak, blocked by afibulaor, if they do not have one, by a thorn.With the other parts of the body naked, they spend whole days next to the lit fire.[105]The richest differ from others in that they wear a robe, not as large as that of theSarmatiansorParthians, but so tight as to highlight the individual limbs.[106]They also wear the skins of wild animals, those who live along the banks of theRhinewear them without any elegance, while those who are more internally wear them with greater taste.The first are those who do not know all the ornaments derived from trade.[107]
Furthermore, women do not differ from men in clothing, even if they often dress in linen cloaks, decorated with red stripes, without stretching the upper part of the robe into a sleeve;in fact, they keep their arms bare up to their shoulders and also uncover the upper part of the chest.[108]
When they fought, they were often bare or otherwise covered with a light tunic.[109]Caesar adds that they were accustomed to washing themselves in rivers, men and women in a promiscuous way, and to wear as clothes, in those very cold regions, only skins or short garments calledrenoneswhich, small as they were, left most of the body uncovered .[110]
Typical day and feeding
Tacitus tells us that as soon as they woke up from sleep, and often it also happened late, they washed themselves with hot water, since in their regions winter took up most of the season.Once they finished washing, they began to eat, sitting on a chair, in front of a table separate from the others.Afterwards, armed men went to their respective occupations, and often feasted together.[111]For none of them was it shameful to spend day and night drinking.Fights were frequent, as it was customary to get drunk.They rarely resulted in heated discussions, often ending in killings and injuries.[112]
It also happens that, during banquets, the Germans deal with matters of greater importance, such as reconciliations between themselves, marriage agreements, the choice of leaders, of peace or war, "almost that in no other better moment can they manifest their thoughts with greater sincerity.These people […] open themselves to the secrets of their intimate, thanks to the license to drink;it follows that their thought is revealed clearly in a sincere way ».The day after the question is taken up and decided, without being able to dissemble.[113]
They drink a liquid, made from barley and wheat, which when fermented resembles wine.It is an ancient recipe for the futurebeer.Those who lived near the banks of the Rhine also bought wine.They simply feed on wild fruits, freshly killed game, curdled milk.They participate in banquets, certainly not sumptuous and therefore without delicacies.[114] On theother hand, they cannot contain themselves when it comes to drinking, so much so that Tacitus himself hopes that their tendency to drunkenness will be favored, so as to see them easily overwhelmed by this vice, to which they are linked as much as they are their weapons.[115]
Shows and entertainment
There was, according to Tacitus, only one type of spectacle that characterized these populations.The young men, naked, for fun, jumped between swords and spears, aimed menacingly at them.[116]As they exercised continuously, they practiced it and became skilled.The only reward for this dangerous game was the enjoyment of the spectators.[117]
They also play dice and they played them with such blind fury that they even bet their own personal freedom as the last stake in the game.[118]The vanquished accepted voluntary servitude and, although he might be even younger or stronger, he endured being tied up and sold.This stubborn perseverance in playing even one's own life, they called loyalty.And it seems that to get rid of the shame of having won their peers in this way, the victors sold the slaves thus obtained.[119]
Funeral
The funeral was celebrated by the Germans without any pomp.They were interested in only one thing, that the bodies of illustrious men were cremated with a particular type of wood.[120]They did not throw precious clothing or perfumes on the stake of those who were cremated.Instead they burned the dead man's weapons and for some they also added the horse.[121]
The tomb was made up of a set of clods, as the Germans could not stand the honors of sepulchral monuments, which to them seemed to weigh on the dead with their complicated architecture.[122]
The weeping and groans of pain soon ceased.Instead, the pain and melancholy lasted a long time.It was for women to mourn the dead, for men to remember.[123]
Military techniques
At the time of Mario and Caesar (1st century BC)
Cesaretells that the Germans spent their lives between hunting and war.From an early age they devoted themselves to those activities that tempered the body for fatigue.[124]He testifies, speaking of the mighty people of theSuebi, of how the German knights fought on foot.
«[...] During the cavalry clashes they often dismount and fight on foot;they have trained the horses to remain in place, where they quickly repair if necessary;in their view, there is nothing more shameful or inert than using the saddle.So, however few they may be, they dare to attack any group of riders who mount a saddle, no matter how numerous. "
(Cesare,De bello gallico, IV, 1.2.)
From this techno-tactical form, it is believed that the so-calledequitate cohortslater aroseat the time ofthe Augustan reform of the Roman army:
«Ariovisto[...] every day he fought with the cavalry.This was the kind of combat in which the Germans practiced.The knights were 6,000: there were as many very brave infantry and very fast in the race.The knights had chosen them from each department, one by one for their own personal defense.They took part in the battles in their company.The knights withdrew to them, and if the fighting escalated, they too would charge.If anyone was seriously injured, had fallen off the horse, they would surround him.If they had to make a long advance or a rapid retreat, their speed was so great for the exercise, that by supporting themselves on the horses' manes they equaled their speed.
(Caesar,De bello gallico, I, 48.4-7.)
The normal deployment of the Germanic infantry was instead of thephalanxtypeas Caesar tells us again:
“With such violence the Romans went to the assault of the Germans, but just as suddenly and quickly the Germans rushed to the attack, that there was no room [for the Romans] to launch thepilumsagainst the enemy.Leaving thepilaaside,they fought hand to hand with swords.But the Germans quickly, according to their custom, lined up in phalanx and supported the onslaught of swords. "
(Caesar,De bello gallico, I, 52.3-4.)
At the time of Tacitus (1st century AD)
The Germans, unlike theCelts, fought mainly on foot, ina "wedge"phalangite formation, as indicated byTacitusin hisGermany.[125]Tacitus adds that the best infantry was that of theCatti.[126]From the nomadic tribes of the steppes (ScythiansandSarmatians) they then learned a greater use of the horse to the detriment of the infantry.
“Few [Germans] use swords or large spears.Instead, they handle rods that they call "framee", with a sharp and short point, but so pointed and easy to use that with the same weapon, depending on the case, they can fight from near or far.The knights also use only the shield and this type of spear, while the foot soldiers also launch [other] bullets.Each of them throws many even very far.They fight naked or at most wearing a light robe.The Germans do not flaunt any elegance, they limit themselves to adorning their shields with particular colors.Few of them use armor, only one or two wear a metal or leather helmet.
Their horses do not differ in beauty or speed.The Germans do not teach them to make evolutions, as we [Romans] do, but lead them straight to the charge, or make them fold back with only one type of conversion to the right, so that by virtue of this tight circular move , no one is left behind.Judging by the whole, the backbone of their army lies in the infantry.In combat, the infantrymen mix with the knights, so that they adapt well to the battle between cavalry and the speed of the infantry soldiers, chosen from among the young and destined for the front of the line, is harmonized.The number of these is also fixed.There are 100 for each district, and they are called like that between them, so that what was initially just a number, today is a name of honor.
The army, lined up in battle, forms a wedge.The Germans do not consider it an act of cowardice, but only a sign of prudence, to retire, as long as we return to fight.Even when the outcome of the battle was not too favorable, they bring back the bodies of fallen comrades from the field.It is their utmost shame to abandon the shield.Those who are guilty of such guilt are excluded from sacred assemblies and ceremonies, so much so that many who had withdrawn from the fight, then hanged themselves to put an end to shame.
(Tacitus,Deigine et situ Germanorum, VI, 1-6.)
The period of the great invasions
Their military technique had also evolved considerably, mainly thanks to the techniques learned during the years spent in the ranks ofthe auxiliary troops of the Roman army.The main weapon remained the shock shaft (framea) of various lengths.The use of the sword was less widespread among some tribes.They also used throwing javelins, like theFranks, similar to theRomanpilum.The bow remained a secondary weapon for most of these peoples.Other weapons used in combat were theax, particularly by theFranks, and themace.
The defensive armament had evolved considerably, accompanying the traditional one with a wooden shield in the center of which was placed a metal umbo, a helmet and often an iron mesh armor.And anyway they all wore breeches (similar to our trousers), a tunic, sometimes cloaks (as in the case of theAlemanni) as well as sandal-like shoes that tied up to below the knees, and were worn over a sort of primitive socks (used mainly during the winter).
Some tribes remain famous for the characteristics of theircavalry: the knights fought mixed with light infantry, and often abandoned their horse, accustomed to waiting for them, to fight themselves on foot.The core of the army, however, remained the infantry.Horn sounds and the famousbarritusorbarditus(war cry), stimulated the ardor of the fighters.[127]
The Germans learned the art of building defensive valleys for their camps from the Romans, as well as the concept of command of battle.The leaders were once used to lead by example by launching an attack.During this time they changed tactics, directing their soldiers as the Romans did, away from the front lines.
They were used for their courage and warlike skills as allies of the Roman border troops.In fact, it is said that in 288 ADMaximianmadea vassal kingdomof theFranks, which was entrusted with the defense of the border against the other Germans.From that moment on, the Franks, in addition to being enrolled inthe auxiliary troops of thearmy, began to enter the service of Rome asfederates, preserving their organization, their national leaders, their language and their customs, their independence, so much so that making them less and less assimilable and more and more dangerous for theRoman Empire.
It was then the turn of theGoths, at the time ofTheodosius I, to be recognized as federates.And the killing ofStilichoin408AD was the last attempt by the Roman element to fight the superiority of the Germans in the army and in the state.With 410 AD, the year of the sack of Rome by Alaric, the era of the Roman-barbarian kingdoms began.
Physical aspect and nature
Of their appearanceGaius Julius Caesarwrote:
"[...] The type of diet, daily exercise and free life they lead (from an early age, in fact, they are not subjected to any duty or discipline and do absolutely nothing against their will) increase their strength and make men with an imposing physique. "
(Caesar,De bello gallico, IV, 1.9.)
At the time ofGaius Julius Caesar(58-53 BC) the Germans east of theRhinewere taller than the Roman soldiers of the time;if in fact the Romans rarely exceeded the meter and sixty-five in stature,[128]the Germans also reached a little more than 170 cm[129].Theconqueror of Gauladds that "thelonger they remained virgins, the higher was their glory among their neighbors, for they believed that virginity would increase stature, strength and vigor."[130]
Tacitusstates that generally the Germans had blue eyes and tawny hair (blond and reddish-blond), endowed with a robust physique but unable to resist thirst and heat, although excellent both for fighting and for resisting frost.[131]They grew naked and dirty until they reached that solidity and greatness of the bodies that aroused great wonder in Tacitus and in the Romans.[132]
One hundred and fifty years later, the Roman historianTacitushanded down the following to us:
«[...] without having mingled with other nations, being [their] own people, and sincere, only to themselves and not to others similar.Therefore, the appearance of the bodies, although in such a great number of men, is the same in all: the proud eyes, of a cerulean color (blue), the blond hair, large in stature, vigorous only in the impetus, but not already in their toil and suffering, as they cannot even tolerate thirst and heat, but they are used to the quality of [their] country and the air to withstand cold and hunger. "
(Tacitus,Deigine et situ Germanorum, IV, 2-3.)
Tacitus adds that when they were not at war, they spent their time in idleness rather than hunting or cultivating the fields, busy sleeping and eating, leaving all the house and family chores to women, the old and the weakest. .[133]
"By a strange contrast of nature, these men who love and at the same time hate peace so much"
(Tacitus,De origine et situ Germanorum, XV, 1.)
It was also the custom, both of individuals and of tribes, to bring gifts of livestock or their harvest as a sign of respect to the leaders.And they show gratitude and contentment once they receive gifts from neighboring populations, whether they are sent by private individuals or officially by other tribes, such as chosen horses, splendid armor, plates and necklaces, but also money, as they do with the Romans.[134]
Genetic studies
Studies of modernpopulation geneticssupport a close correlation between the migratory movements of the Germanic peoples and the distribution that the male lineage has today represented byhaplogroup I1 (and especially I1a) ofthe Y chromosome, whose origin is traced to a man (what population genetics refer to as the "most recent common ancestor") who lived between 4,000 and 6,000 years ago in northern Europe, possibly in the area that is now Denmark.In other words, haplogroup I1a is the one that most characterizes the Germanic peoples.[135]
It is also probable that haplogroup I1 ispre-Indo-European, i.e. haplogroup I1 could belong to those Paleolithic populations native to northern Europe who were assimilated by theIndo-Europeanswhen they came from Central Asia, participating in the ethnic, cultural and linguistic formation of the Germans.In other words, the analysis of the Y-DNA both of modern Germanic populations (Germans, Scandinavians, English, etc.) and of the remains left at the ancient settlements reveals a hom*ogeneous mixture of haplogroup I1 with elements of haplogroups typical of other populations Indo-European (especiallyCeltsandSlavs), such as haplogroupsR1a1a,R1b-P312 and R1b-U106.This composition is the one that possibly bore the "most recent common ancestor".[136]
Haplogroup I1 is found in 40% of Icelandic males, 40% –50% of Swedes, 40% of Norwegians, and 40% of Danes.It then peaks over 30% among the Germans of northern Germany and the English of eastern England.Haplogroups R1b and R1a, common to other peoples of Indo-European origin, together are found in 40% of Swedish males, 50% of Norwegian males, 60% of Icelandic ones, 60-70% of Germans, and between 50% % and 70% in British and Dutch males with regional variations.[137]The presence of haplogroups R1b-P312 and R1b-L21 in today's Germanic peoples suggests a Celtic substrate and is frequently found in Holland and southwestern England.[138]Haplogroup R1b-U106 has peaks in Scandinavia and provides relevant information on the migration routes followed by the Germans.[139]
Religion
Origins
The lack of sources prevents us from knowing in depth the original religion of the Germans: their sources (archaeological,runesand poems) are often difficult to interpret, while the Latin and Greek sources are late and scarcely objective due to the implicit difficulty of understanding cultures foreign to those of their world.
We know the Germanic gods, theAsi(cfr.OldNorseáss,Proto-Germanic* ansuz,Proto-Indo-European * h₂énsus, "generated" or "generanti", that is, the "genii" or "gods") and theVani(OldNorsevanir, proto-Indo-European* wen, " effort "), thanks above all to Scandinavian sources.In their mythology there are many affinities with other Euro-Asian cultures, which indirectly testify to a series of external influences that are difficult to extricate from the "original" contents of Germanic culture, also due to the inhom*ogeneity between the various tribes.
Asi and rooms reminiscent of theAsurasandDevasIndo-Iranian, while theNornsremember theFates/Moiregreek-Roman presiding over human destiny;Odin/ Wotan, as present at the passage between life and death, is similar toHermes/Mercury, whileThoris similar toAres/Mars, to whom they sacrifice animals to appease him.[140]The Vani (NjordhrorFreyja) are more attributable to the cult of the Earth / Mother and of fertility, as dispensers of wealth, peace and fertility of land and sea.
Cesare tells us in hisGallic De Bellothat the Germans not only did not havedruidswho presided over religious rites, but they did not even zealously deal with sacrifices.[141]They had among their gods only those whom they saw and from whose power they clearly received help, such as the Roman deities of theSun, theMoonorVulcan.[142]However, this is exaggerated if we consider thatTacitustells us of priests,[143]whileStraboof priestesses among theCimbri.The latter tells that they had gray hair, were dressed in white with linen cloaks fastened with clasps to bronze sheaths and were barefoot.Now with a sword in hand, these priestesses wandered in search of prisoners of war throughout the camp;once found, they first crowned them and then led them to a bronze vase, as large as twenty amphorae.The vessel was on a raised platform where the priestess was to mount, who would then cut the throat of each prisoner, collecting their blood in this large kettle-vessel.The blood shed was then used to interpret a prophecy, while the body of the now dead prisoner was the subject of an inspection of the bowels, always in order to be able to issue a prophecy about the victory of their people.Then the women,[144]
Tacitus wrote inGermanythat the Germans did not have a priestly caste, nor religious effigies, nor did they consider it adequate to the majesty of the gods to enclose them between closed walls, nor to portray them in forms that recalled the human image,[145]even if it is not of the all correct, because anthropomorphic religious representations were found, remains of temples and there were priests.One of the most important sacred centers was Uppsala, Sweden, where there was a temple dedicated to the three gods Odin, Thor and Freyr.Then there wereshamanswho mediated between the world of the living and that of spirits.
The Germans, especially theSuebi, were scrupulous observers of omens anddivinations.If it was a collective consultation, it was the priest of the city who asked, if it was a private consultation it was the head of the family himself.The gods were then invoked;fragments of a fruit tree, previously torn to pieces and scattered over a white robe, were extracted, three fragments and, lifted, the meaning was interpreted.If the signs were unfavorable, no further consultations were made throughout the day, if instead they were favorable, a new test was required to guarantee the hope.Even among the Germans it was then customary to interpret the songs and the flight of birds.[146]Then there is another form of foreboding among the Germans, especially to predict the outcome of important wars.Should they have a prisoner against whose nation they will have to fight a war, he was compelled to fight against a champion of their own, each using his own weapons.The victory of one or the other was regarded as an omen on the final outcome of the war to be faced.[147]
Adoption of Christianity
The Germanic peoples who first entered the Roman Empire adopted its state religion,Christianity.Most of them opted in the initial stages forArianism, a doctrine which since 380 had been declared heretical by the Church of Rome and which recognized the Word (and therefore Christ) a later nature than that of God the Father (simplifying, the first verses of theGospel of Johndid not apply to the Arians: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"; the Word for the Arians was not identified with God but was his creation) .The Aryan bishops and priests, removed from the areas of influence of the empire, found followers among the Germanic peoples.
With the establishment of the Roman-Germanic kingdoms and from the conversion of the Franks to the (Catholic) Church of Rome byClovisin 511, the Germanic Aryan peoples also gradually adhered to the official doctrine of the Roman Church.
The peoples who had remained outside the Roman Empire had preserved the Germanic religion.They were converted to Christianity relatively late by an intense missionary activity mainly bythe Carolingian Empire(case of England), or by royal decree (Norway and Iceland), or even with military force from the Carolingian power (case of the Saxons, whose conversion accompanied the annexation to the Carolingian Empire).
The Protestant Reform
In 1517 a Saxon Augustinian friar,Martin Luther, became the bearer of the general discontent that in the Germanic area generated the financial policies of the Church of Rome, especially those related to the practice ofindulgence, starting a movement of reform of the Christian religion known for then as a "Protestant reform" which first of all provided for the abandonment of the Roman Church and the expropriation of its assets.
TheProtestantismimmediately found the adhesion of the potentates of the Germanic area, and within a relatively short time almost all the Germanic peoples (except principalities of Southern Germany and the current Austria, southern Holland including Flemish) were converted to the new faith, which found expression in a great diversity of churches and doctrines, initiallyLutheranism,Calvinism(Reformed Churches) andAnglicanism(English Church).
The reform led to a religious split in Western Europe between a Germanic-Protestant north and a Roman Catholic south which has had political and cultural consequences whose effects continue to this day.
Modern developments
The radical changes that the Protestant reform brought about in Germanic societies and in the worldview of each individual, and specifically the Protestant doctrines that underlie these changes, such as Martin Luther's doctrine of the "two kingdoms", are considered by some scholars like the seeds that paved the way for the processes ofseparation between State and Churchand consequentsecularization.[148]Since the twentieth century, the countries that were the cradles of the Protestant reform have been the scene of a gradual and constant decline of Christianity.In2013, only 34% of the Dutch claimed to adhere to Christianity.Even in theEast Germanstatesthat were incorporated into theSoviet Unionafter theSecond World Warthere was a decline of Christianity also due to policies contrary to the religion of the union, so much so that in 2010 inSaxony-Anhalt, the homeland of Martin Luther, Christians were only 18% (14% Protestants and 4% Catholics).[149]A similar decline occurs in the Scandinavian countries and England.
From the second half of the twentieth century there has been a rediscovery of the ancient Germanic religion, the cult of theAsi(from the Indo-European* h₂énsus, that is the "generated" or "generanti", that is the "genii" or "gods"), and also to the Vani, which took the form of a constellation of different small groups that nevertheless recognize themselves under the common term of "Etenism" (cf. Eng.Heathenism, "religion of theland" or "of the woods" ).Still a minority throughout Europe, the movement has some visibility inIcelandwhere theÁsatrúarfélagið("Sodality of Divine Fidelity" or "
Right
According to Tacitus, the Germans did not use either condemning to death or placing the stocks.No one, other than priests alone, was allowed to beat anyone.The priests could in fact punish someone, in obedience to a general order, as if they had received the command from the god himself, whom they believe present in battle.[150]
The leaders decide on minor issues.The most important decisions are instead taken by everyone, even if they are discussed in front of the leaders.[151]
During the meetings, indictments or a capital trial could be made.And according to the crimes committed, the penalties to be administered were distinguished:[152]
traitors and deserters were hanged from trees;[152]
the cowards and cowards, as well as those who committed acts "against nature" such as hom*osexuality, were immersed in the mud of the swamp and covered with a mat,[152] asif to hide the "foul wickedness".[153]
for the most minor offenses, the penalty was proportionate to the gravity of the guilt (including the murder itself).The guilty, in fact, were obliged to pay, giving a certain number of horses or head of cattle;part of the fine was paid to the king or tribe, part to the offended one or his relatives.[153]
In these same assemblies were chosen those leaders who were responsible for administering justice in the various districts and villages.One hundred companions selected from among the people, therefore, gave a hand to the former, thanks to their advice and authority.[154]
For the ancient Germans, justice was primarily a private matter.They do not deal with any business, whether public or private, without being armed, apart from young people who have not yet been given permission to bear arms.[72]Whoever dared to offend someone suffered the revenge of the offended person, calledfeud.If one did not have certain proofs to accuse someone, the guilt of the accused was verified through theordealor judgment of God (judgment of God is not the original name, but it was given by the Christianized Germans and by theLombards): if the accused remained unharmed after walking on hot coals or had defeated the accuser he could be declared innocent (the Germans, in fact, thought that Fate would not help the guilty).There was also a sentence served with a heavy fine, called theguidrigildo.
In the rare cases of adultery on the part of the woman, the punishment was entrusted to the husband.In the presence of relatives, he chased the adulterous woman out of the house, after having cut her hair, stripped her body and, under the beating of her husband, she was made to pass through all the streets of the village.And although she was beautiful, young and rich, she could no longer find a new husband.No indulgence was therefore reserved to her.[155]
The Germans consider it highly unbecoming to limit births or to suppress any of the children born after the first.The good mores (boni mores) of the Germans have a greater value than the good laws (bonae leges)elsewhere.[156]For each father, natural heirs were the children, so much so that it was not necessary to make any will.And when there were no children, the first heirs in the succession were the brothers, then the paternal uncles and then the maternal ones.[157]
It was unknown to these populations to lend money and to dramatically increase it to the point of practicing usury.In fact, they abstained more than if it had been forbidden by the law.[158]
Among theTencteri, skilled horsem*n, horses were inherited as slaves, the house and everything that is part of the right of succession.Tacitus says that the horses, however, were not passed on to the eldest son, but only to the one among the sons who was more deserving, that is to say more valiant and proud.[159]
Economy
Agriculture
The Germans, at least in the time of Caesar, did not deal with agriculture with zeal.[160]L 'agricultureof the rest was primitive, and tended simply to exploit as far as possible, immediately, the land snatched from the forest.Infact, the Romanproconsulsaid that:
«[…] They have no private or divided land, no one can stay more than a year in the same place to practice agriculture.They eat little of wheat, live mainly on milk and sheep meat,[160] theyhunt a lot.[…] They grant free access to merchants, more to have the opportunity to sell their war booty than to want to buy imported products.Indeed, the Germans do not make use of imported foals (unlike the Gauls, who have a real passion for them and buy them at a high price), but exploit the horses of their region, small and ungainly, making them very robust with daily exercise. fatigue animals.[...] They absolutely do not allow the importation of wine,
(Cesare,De bello gallico,IV, 1.7-2.6.)
Tacitusadds that the land was generally fertile for the cultivation of seeds, but not productive of fruit trees.It is rich in livestock, especially of short stature.The cattle also do not wear horns.The Germans are content with having many, as this represents their true wealth.[161]According to the Latin historian, they had no mines of either silver or gold.[162]Nor was iron found in abundance in those territories, at least around the end of thefirst century.Few were, in fact, the warriors who used spears or large spears made of this metal.[163]
The fields were occupied and available to all villagers, depending on the number of those who cultivated the land.They were then divided among themselves according to the rank of each.However, the vastness of the lands made it easy to subdivide.[164] Andevery year, the lands to be sown changed, even if there was an overabundance of land to cultivate.The fertility and the enormous breadth of the fields do not force them to a great effort to plant orchards, to divide the land among the various inhabitants of the village, to irrigate the gardens.They ask the land, especially grain.[165]
Business
They trade with the Romans, especially the people closest to thelimes, receiving silver vessels in exchange, as well asgold and silver coins, in particular those with a serrated edge or with the engraving of theRomanchariot.Those of the innermost regions, on the other hand, because of their crudeness and simplicity, still use the barter of goods.[166]In fact, there were frequent exchanges of goods with the northern peoples, north ofthe imperial bordersof theRhineandDanube, ofGermania Magna, ofSarmatiaandScandinavia.The goods that were imported from the Roman Empire were usually grain and cattle which, according to the historianTacitus, were of unsightly size,[167]as well as slaves, often employed as bodyguards or gladiators.[168]On the other hand, during the period oflate antiquity,hides and pigs were imported.
The historianTacitustells us that at the time ofMaroboduo, afterTiberiushad established with him a treaty offriendshipwith the Roman people, a large number of Roman food and merchantswere present in the capital of theMarcomanni, in Bohemia.[169]Let's not forget that the Marcomanni had settled here at the end of thefirst century BC,[170]that a young Maroboduo had been inItalyand that he encouraged trade also as a sign of detente with his nearby Roman ally.[171]Bohemia was easily accessed by following theamber routewhich, passing throughCarnuntumon theDanube(at the confluence with theMorava), came fromAquileia.[171][172]
L 'Amberwas a luxury item that came to Aquileia, only to be sold inItalyand used what ornament in vases, jewelry and amulets.Pliny the Elder told of an expedition of a Roman knight tothe Baltic Seaat the time of EmperorNero, to procure a large quantity of amber.[173]Furthermore, locks of blond hair were imported to make wigs.[174]
On the contrary,large quantities ofsealed earthwere exported toGermanyand Scandinavia, especially from southern and central Gaul, as well as bronze and glass vases, various tools, silver weapons, rings and fabrics.
Almost two centuries later, after thedefeat of the Marcomanni(173ca.), the Roman emperorMarcus Aurelius"fixed the places and days for the trade of the same, since they had not been fixed previously".[175]Again Tacitus at the end of thefirst century, in writing hisGermany, wrote that among these populations silver vases could be found, given as gifts to ambassadors and their tribal leaders, while their strength still depended on the authorities of Rome who often financed them withmoney.[176]In any case, from the archaeological finds in Bohemia, there are numerous Italic bronze vases from thefirst century, together with above allsilverandgoldcoins.Then these imported objects fromthe Roman Empirespread northwards, through the river valleys tothe North Seaandthe Baltic Sea.[177]
Language
The ancient Germanic tribes spokemutually intelligibledialectsand shared a common culture and the samemythology, as is clearly indicated by theBeowulfand theVolsunga saga.The existence of a common identity is evidenced by the existence of a proper term, indicating non-Germanic populations:* walhaz(plural of* walhoz), from which toponyms still in use today asWales(Welsh)are derived,Valais(Wallis),Wallonia(Walloon) andItalian Tyrol(Welschtirol)[178].
A further example of this ethnic unity is given by the fact that theRomansrecognized them as the only population and gave them the collective name ofGermani.
In the absence of a hegemonic policy such as that imposed by the Romans on the Italic populations, the various tribes remained free, under the guidance of their own leaders, either hereditary or elected.
Culture
The Germans did not usewritingextensively, relying instead on the oral and cantorial tradition ofmythsandlegendsthat exalted the valor and courage of the protagonists.Some artistic testimonies of the Germans that have come down to us aremetalobjects(such asweapons,bucklesandjewels) finely worked and engraved.
Slavs
TheSlavsare an ethno-linguistic branch ofthe Indo-European peoples: they live mainly inEurope, where they make up about a third of the population.Starting from their original homeland (inEastern Europe) in the6th century, they also moved toCentral Europeand theBalkans.Many of them later settled inNorth Asiaor migrated to other parts of the world. The Slavic immigrants joined the populations who already inhabited the lands where they settled;for this reason modern Slavic peoples show few common genetic traits.On the other hand, a unifying factor is the fact that everyone speaks theSlavic languages, as well as a common sense of Slavic identity, understood however in a very different way among the various peoples. Slavic peoples are traditionally divided alonglanguage linesintoWestern Slavs(which includeCzechs,Slovaks,Poles,KashubsandSorbs),Eastern Slavs(which includeRussians,Belarusians,Ukrainians,andRuthenians) andSouthern Slavs( including theSerbs,Bulgarians,Croats,Macedonians,Montenegrins,BosniansandSlovenes).
Origin of the term "Slavs"
Several hypotheses have been made about the origins of the name "Slavs" (inLatinSclaveni, inOld Church SlavonicSlověne, a term attested by the first Slavic written sources, dating back to the9th century):
a typicalromanticetymologyderived the name from theSlavicword, which means 'glory';therefore "Slavs" would mean "famous, glorious peoples", because in ancient times the Slavic tribes were made up of great warriors whose fame passed from tribe to tribe.This hypothesis is now discarded forlinguisticreasons.[1]
others hypothesize that the name derives fromslovo, which means 'word' (to be contrasted with theprotoslavian* němjcj, 'mute', the term with which the Slavs indicated theirGermanneighborsbecause they did not understand what they were saying; still today inRussianнемец means 'German');therefore the "Slavs" would be "peoples who speak the same language", "peoples who understand each other".
contrary to the previous hypothesis, someone relates the name of the Slavs with theProto-Germanicword* slawõz, which means 'to be silent', and therefore they would be "the silent ones".
someone speculates that theRussiananthroponymSlavmeans 'wise', 'pious', 'devout', and hence the name of all the people, which therefore would mean "devotees to the gods, or to the God, of a common Slavic religion ".This etymological hypothesis is popular today among those who claim the unity of theoriginal Slavic religion.
otherSlavists, includingMax Vasmer, put forward what is now considered the most valid hypothesis: it brings us back to theIndo-European* kleu, 'to bathe', which would have given the Proto-Slavic* slu(the passage fromveilingtosibilantafter theliquidis normal in "satemlanguages").The Indo-European root would refer to "something that flows".TheSlučriverstillflowstoday inUkraine: the Slavs could bear in their name their origin from the region of this river.
The etymology of the Italian word "slave"is also connected with the name of the Slavs:[2]inmedieval Latin, the wordsclavusderives from "Slav".With theGreek ByzantinetermΣχλαυηνοί the historians of theEastern Roman Empire ofthe6th centurydesignated the Slavs who, having crossed theDanube, began to infiltratethe Balkan peninsula.[3]The Greek term then passed to the LatinSclaveni;how and why, alongside these forms, the short ones Σχλάβοι andSclaviaroseit's not clear.Very quickly and in all European countries the ethnonym changed into a synonym for "enslaved people".Thus passed to indicate a juridical status, replacing theclassicmancipiumandservus, the medievalsclavusis at the origin of the word that indicates "slave" in almost all European languages.With a similar process, on the other hand, theFinnish languagesuse the wordorjawith the meaning of 'slave', which could derive from the name of their ancient "Aryan"enemies.
Ethnogenesis and original settlements
The Slavs made their appearance in 'EuropeCentral and Eastern Europe, in the area of the riversWarta,the Vistula,the DnieperandDniester, to thesixth centuryAD, and the area then began to move towards the four cardinal points.
The homeland of the Slavs
For this period and above all for the previous centuries, we have no written sources and very few archaeological finds bearing witness to the events of the Slavs before the beginning of this migration.We must therefore rely onlinguistics, bearing in mind that the conclusions that can be reached are very relative.
Two termsprotoslavi,* Ostrovuand* otoku, meant 'island'.For the origin of these words, however, the island is understood as a "river island", a piece of land around which water "flows" (inmodern Russianостров still means 'island', but the verb течь means 'to flow').For this reason it is assumed that the original Slavic people did not know the sea (on the other hand, all the terms relating to the world of navigation present in today's Slavic languages are not of Slavic origin, but derive mostly fromthe Greek language, starting from the Russian word корабль, 'ship', which derives from the Greek χαράβιον).
Another Protoslav word,* buk, 'beech', derives from theProto-Germanic* bõkõ: almost with certainty, the area of origin of these Slavs was an area where no beech trees grew.
There is, however, an element that further complicates things and creates still unsolved problems: the so-calledLusatian civilization(1400-500 BC).According to some scholars, it is a manifestation ofGermanicculture, but according to Polish and Czech historians it is already a Slavic cultural manifestation.This civilization spread as far asElba: if it had been an original Slavic civilization, we should hypothesize that the Slavs revealed themselves to be present in that area a thousand years before the 6th century AD The hypothesis that the Lusatian civilization witnesses a presence of Slavs so early and so in the West is however very weak .No ancient toponym in the area seems to have Slavic origins (it is not at all proven that the name of the city ofKaliszderives from the Protoslavian* kalu, 'mud'), and we do not find words ofCelticoriginin the Slavic languages, while it would have been inevitable that the Lusatians came into contact with Celtic peoples.
The most widespread hypothesis is that in this area that we considered at the beginning, betweenPoland,UkraineandBelarus, the protoslav populations appeared around the sixth century AD, perhaps coming from theUrals.
However, several theories have been formulated regarding the "homeland of the Slavs".[4]
Society
Thesocietyof the Slavs was of a tribal type and remained so for a long time.Eachtribehad its own territory, the fields were owned in common, andprivate propertywas very limited.
In the beginning, social life was based on the concept of* rod('lineage', 'lineage'), a close blood relationship.Little by little, however, the family grew, first through marriages, then even those who had entered it as a workforce began to be considered members of the family.Thus we passed from a family based on kinship to the local community: thus the first villages were born and then, when merchants and artisans moved to the larger and more fortunate centers, the first cities were born, first protected by wooden palisades, then by walls of Stone.
Institutions were closely related to trade, legislation was oral and customary (to have written legislation,Russkaya Pravda, we have to wait for the reign ofYaroslav the Wise(1019-1054). The judicial system clearly reflected the customs and needs of a company of merchants. The prince (knjaz ') was simply considered aprimus inter pares: he was the most valiant warrior, recognized and elected chief, just like in theGermanicworld.Later the princes would try to make their office hereditary.The prince's tasks were to promote trade and fight against enemies: the prince was primarily responsible for providing and organizing armed stocks to protect traders.These armed escorts will soon become the main army of the prince (družina, analogous to theGermanictrustis), in symbiosis with the prince himself.The prince, initially not noble, will then tend to become a noble and to extend his nobility to his army (the origins of theboyarclass are therefore foundin thedružina).The boyars then became large landowners, each having their own staffdružina, and inevitably the conflict between prince and boyars will grow more and more.
Economy
The Slavs were skilledfarmers, who cultivated their own plots of land with family work and widely exploited the forests andnatural resourcesof the territories they inhabited.
In historical times, the Slavs were notnomadic peoples: only when the soil was exhausted did they look for other locations.
They cultivatedcereals(wheat,millet,rye,barley,oats), andvegetables(cabbage,turnips,carrots,pumpkins), raised livestock (cattle,horses,pigs,sheep), practicedhuntingandfishing, and worked timber.
They mostly settled along rivers because
movement was facilitated,
it was easier to defend oneself (wooden palisades on the land-side of a settlement and the possibility of escape on the river-side),
the river supplied fish for subsistence.
The trade took place by barter: then they began to use hides asmoney, finally the metal coin was introduced.
The movements of the seventh century AD
From the beginning of theseventh centurythe Slavs began a collective migratory movement.
Towards the west the Slavs occupied the territories ofcentral Europeleft partly empty by theGermans, who had moved into what was theRoman Empire.Avoiding thePannonian plain, teeming withAvars, throughPolandthey reachedPomerania.In805Charlemagnefixed the so-calledLimes Sorabicusalong theElbe,SaaleandDanube rivers.From808onwards,theLimes Saxoniaewas also establishedbetween theGulf of Kieland the city ofLauenburg, to try to put a dam on the spread of the Slavs.These two borders, in effect, mark the end of the advance of the Slavs to the west, after they were established in Pomerania,Silesia,Bohemia,Moravia,Slovakiaand theWestern Carpathians.Not having available written sources for this period, we must refer tolinguisticsand above all totoponymy:
Berlinis derived from theProto* berlu, 'pole',
Leipzigfrom the Proto-Slavic* lipa, 'linden'.
To the south, the Slavs descended along theBalkan peninsula: through the "Porta Morava", they descended towards theDanube, which they crossed atVindobona;crossingSerbiathey reachedDobrujaandPindus, overlapping the pre-existing populations such asIllyrians,DaciansandThracians, or mixing with them as with theBulgarians, and finally stopped in front of the walls ofConstantinople, so that they had to settle down.Byzantinepoliticsof the VII-VIII century(Constantinople was engaged first against thePersians, then against theArabs) he did not succeed in diverting the Slavs, as he usually did with other migrant populations, to the west;therefore the Slavs were welcomed with a statute similar to that of theRomanfoederates, to defend the lands from thepeoples of the steppes, especiallyAvarsandPeceneghi.Above all Serbs and Bulgarians will be greatly influenced bythe Byzantine civilization(in the political sphere, with the typicalByzantineCaesaropapism, but also literary and artistic).
To the east, the Slavs found no obstacles or borders: immense lands covered withtundraorsteppes, great rivers such as theDon, theVolgaor theOkà, swamps, flat areas inhabited by peoples of the steppes such as theCumans, the Pecenegians, theKhazarsand theBulgarians of the Volga: with these peoples the Slavs were always at war (except with the Khazars).
To the north, the Slavs encountered no opposition from other peoples: they moved towards theBaltic Sea, towards theLadogaandOnegalakes, theNorthern Dvinaand theWhite Sea.They encounteredBaltic peoplessuch asLithuanians,Latvians,JatvjaghiandPrussians, andUgric peoplessuch asOstiachiandVoguli, andFinnish peoplessuch asFinns,Estonians,Lapps,Mordvini, theMeri, theVopsi, theVotesand theCareli.
The Slavs were therefore able to migrate more easily, especially towards the east and north.
During theHigh Middle Ages, small groups of Slavs also settled innorthern Italy, particularly inFriuliandVeneto.According to the chroniclerPaolo Diacono,theLombardsemployed Slavic auxiliaries during some military operations, such as for the siege ofCremonain 603, and at the gates of their capital,Pavia, a large port on theTicino, with a castle, calledSclavaria, is documented[5 ].
There have always been linguistic and cultural exchanges between Western Slavs and Eastern Slavs.
Austria,HungaryandRomania, non-Slavic countries, divide northern (western and eastern) Slavia from southern Slavia.Contact between northern and southern Slavia was largely prevented, above all by raids (first) and by the settlement (later) of theMagyars.[6]But at the beginning of the15th centurymany Southern Slavic intellectuals (especially Serbian monks), fleeing from theOttomans,fledtoMoscow, thus creating a strong bond and a fruitful exchange.
Traditional religion and Christianization
The religion of the ancient Slavs
It is not possible to accurately reconstruct theoriginalSlavicpantheon.The written sources (both documentary and narrative) are all subsequent to the conversion of the Slavs toChristianity: they were written bymonks(practically all for the period of theKievan Rus'and about three quarters for the period ofMuscovy), and these authors they systematically eliminated any reference topreviouspaganism.
TheRussian Chroniclescontain narrative sections (skazanja) that refer to the period prior to the conversion of the Slavs, but these stories have all been reviewed and adapted by the monks whowrotethe chronicles.A different case is that ofbyliny,epictalesin verse, handed down orally: here you can find much more information on the religion of the Slavs, even if it is difficult to place chronologically precisely the information that comes to us from oral sources.
A reference to a Slavic deity in theChronicle of past yearsis found in an oath formula which always concluded commercial treaties between Russian andGreekmerchants:
"WeRussiansswear to respect what has been established, otherwisePerun'swrathwill hang over us"
Comparing variousbylinyand also someskazanjewe can say that:
Perun was the god of lightning,
was represented by a tree trunk (evidence of an influence ofshamanism, which could have come to the Slavs from theFinns, ofUralic stock), with a silver head and a golden mustache,
seems to have been worshiped almost exclusively inKievan Rus'.
However, the problem of what relationship there is between Perun andThor, theGermanicgodof lightning (in Rus' there were theVarangians), andPerkūnas, aBalticdeitydepicted just like Perun,remains to be solved.Ultimately, it is not yet clear whether Perun was a deity proper to the Slavic world, or "borrowed" from the Germanic or Baltic world (it is inthe Baltic languagesthat the name of Perkūnas can be linked to "thunder": still today inLatvianperkůnsmeans 'thunder', while similar words inUkrainianorPolishmay have entered later).Incidentally, it is possible that the name of the god Thor it were written on some source inrunes, and the authors of the Slavic chronicles may have confused the transliteration of aÞwith aP.
From other sources the names of other deities emerge:
Dažbog, god of the sun,
Svarog, god of fire,
Volos, god of cattle,
Stribog, god of hunting.[7]
Christianization of the Slavs
In the9th century,theByzantinemonksCyril and MethodiusChristianized manySlavictribes.In order to makethese peoplesunderstand theHoly Scripturesand theChristianliturgy, they invented a new alphabet, the so-calledGlagolitic alphabet.
ThePaleoslav languageis written with two alphabets:
theGlagolitic alphabet,
theCyrillic alphabet.
The alphabet invented by Cyril and Methodius is the Glagolitic one, while the Cyrillic one, which bears the name of Cyril, was created by his disciplesNaumandSava, who took refuge inMacedonia.
«If it was the Slavs in the sixth century who demolished the bridge that connected the Christian East and West, it can be said that from the 9th and 10th centuries onwards their historical task would have been to rebuild it.The difficult destiny of the hinge peoples awaited them, the prospect of participating, according to epochs and circ*mstances, in partial rapprochement and osmosis or vice versa in separations and misunderstandings between theOrthodoxEastand theCatholicWest, between two ways of conceiving the world and its structures, laws and purposes, and the role that man is called to play voluntarily or in spite of himself. "
(Francis Conte,The Slavs, p. 37.)
Proto-Slavic language
The ancestor of allSlavic languageswas born in an uncertain epoch fromthe Proto-Indo-European language(probably after passing through a Proto-Balto-Slavic stage).According to the most widespread thesis, the Indo-Europeans who remained after the migrations began to use the Balto-Slavic language.[citation needed]The actual Proto-Slavic, defined as the last stage of the language that precedes the division ofhistoricalSlavic languages, dates back to the7th century, and was probably spoken during the5thand6th centuries.
The Slavic language group belongs to the so-calledSatem, orEasternIsoglossallanguages of the Indo-European language family, along with the Baltic and Indo-Iranian groups.This is in contrast to the western division (centum languages), which includes Germanic and Celtic.
Doubts about the indigenous origin of the language
The origin of Pre-Proto-Slavic and Proto-Slavic speakers is the subject of great debate.[4]From thenineteenth centurythe question assumed a political value, particularly in relation to the history of Polish divisions, and to German imperialism known asDrang nach Osten: in essence, both the Germans and the Slavs wanted to be the natives of the earth along theVistulaRiver.
Theautochthonoustheorystates that the Proto-Slavs are native to the area of present-dayPoland, already before the6th centuryAD,
allochthonoustheoryholds that the Slavs immigrated to the area of modern Poland after the 6th century.
The debate was exploited forpoliticalpropagandapurposesand has often taken on emotional tones and imbued with proto-archeology and nationalist mysticism.
Over the years some hypotheses have been put forward to recognize archaeological traces of Slavic populations prior to the 6th century AD, when the Slavs are clearly recognizable in the swampy area that includes today'sBelarus,PolandandUkraine:
Hypothesis of the Lusatian culture: Pre-Proto-Slavs were present in northeasternCentral Europeat least since the end of the second millennium BC, and were the bearers ofthe Lusatian cultureand later ofthe Przeworsk culture(part ofthe Chernyakhov culture).
Hypothesis of the Milograd culture: The pre-Proto-Slavs (or Baltoslavs) were the bearers ofthe Milograd culture.
Hypothesis of the Chernoles culture: The pre-Proto-Slavs were the bearers ofthe Chernoles cultureof northern Ukraine.
Correlations with genetic frequencies
Recentgenetic hypotheses on the population of Europe, in the process of being elaborated, propose an at least partially alternative theory on the origin of the Slavs.Observing the frequent recurrence of a specifichaplogroup of the Y chromosomeamong the historical heirs of the Slavs, and noting its particular frequency inPomerania, this hypothesis identifiestheancestral cradleof the Slavic language and culturein the area between present-dayGermanyandPoland, which from there it would radiate south and east.
A vague reminiscence of this indigenous origin may be present in the legend ofLech, Čech and Rus, which tells in various forms the story of three brothers who later split up, generating the Polish, Czech and Russian nations.
Religion and alphabet of the modern Slavs
Today the Slav-speaking states are:Belarus,Bosnia and Herzegovina,Bulgaria,Czech Republic,Croatia,Republic of Macedonia,Montenegro,Poland,Russian Federation,Serbia,Slovakia,SloveniaandUkraine.
The Slavs gradually adoptedChristianitybetween the6thand10th centuries, and consequently the ancient Slavic religion was suppressed.The two main Christian divisions in the Slavs are theOrthodoxand theCatholics, which are flanked by minorities of theProtestantandIslamicreligion.In many Slavic ethnic groups the great majority of believers share the same religion, although many areatheistsoragnostics;in the latter case, people can still identify with a particular religion in a cultural and historical sense.
1.Those who are mostlyOrthodox:
Russians
Ukrainians
Belarusians
Serbs
PannoniofRuthenia
Ruthenians
Bulgarians
Macedonians
Montenegrins
2.Those who are mostlyCatholic:
Poles
Silesians
Kashubs
Czechs
Moravians
Slovaks
Slovenes
Croats
3.Those who are predominantlyMuslim:
Bosgnacchi
Gorani
Pomaks(Muslim Bulgarians)
Torbesh(Muslim Macedonians)
4.Mixture of religions:
Sorbi(Catholic / Protestant)
The divisions betweenOrthodoxandCatholicswere sharpened by the use of theCyrillic alphabetby the Orthodox and Greek Catholics and of theLatin alphabetby the Roman Catholics.TheSerbian language, theBosnian languageand the Montenegrin language can be written in both the Cyrillic and Latin script.
