Wordmarks for UT and College of Liberal Arts
Winfred P. Lehmann, Director :: PCL 5.112, 1 University Station S5490 :: Austin, TX 78712 :: 512-471-4566
LRC Links: Home | About | Books Online | EIEOL | IE Lexicon | IE Maps | IE Texts | Pub. Indices | SiteMap

Gothic Online

Lesson 4

Todd B. Krause and Jonathan Slocum

The Earliest Raids of the Goths

The Goths began their famous foray into the history books in the third century AD, when they launched the first attack of what would become in the eyes of contemporaries a barbarian ravaging and pillaging machine. Their first entry into the literary records comes with their attacks on the Roman empire. At the time, the most exposed province was Transylvanian Dacia; but this region was protected by the Carpathian mountains, hence attacks generally came from south of the range across the lower reaches of the Danube or through a stretch of land connecting the so-called Dacian Salient to the Roman-occupied regions of the Balkans. The first known attack was the sack of Histria at the mouth of the Danube in 238. This was followed some 10 years later by other land attacks: Marcianople, a city inland from the westernmost extent of the Black Sea, was sacked in 249 by a Gothic group led by Argaith and Guntheric; in 250 Cniva crossed the Danube at Oescus and captured Philippopolis, wintered his army, and then in 251 defeated Roman forces and killed the emperor Decius at Abrittus.

The Goths then changed tactics and led sea-borne attacks via the Black Sea, the first series coming sometime around 255-257. The first attack fell on Pityus, on the eastern coast of the Black Sea, but was unsuccessful. In the next attack a year later, the 'Boranoi' -- a group possibly including the Goths -- ravaged Pityus, Trapezus, and a large part of the Pontus, the region of Asia Minor bordering the Black Sea in the southeasternmost reaches. A year later the Goths explicitly attacked the cities Apamea, Chalcedon, Nicaea, Nicomedia, Prusa, as well as the surrounding areas of Bithynia and Propontis, lying near the southwesternmost reaches of the Black Sea.

The next attacks came another 10 years later. In 268 the Goths and other tribes formed a large fleet which headed across the Black Sea to the south, unsuccessfully attacking Tomi and Marcianople, and subsequently (also unsuccessfully) Cyzicus and Byzantium. They pushed through the Dardanelles into the Aegean and dispersed in three forces: (1) composed of Heruli attacking the northern Balkans near Thessalonica -- subsequently defeated by Emperor Gallienus in 268; (2) composed of Goths and Heruli, attacking Attica -- after pushing north over land they were defeated by Claudius at Naissus in 270; (3) probably led by the Gothic chieftains Respa, Thuruar, and Veduc, and attacking Asia Minor, then Rhodes and Cyprus, then Side and Ilium and Ephesus, destroying the temple of Diana. This third group was pushed back to the Black Sea in 269. After this foray into the Mediterranean, there were no other attacks through the Dardanelles.

The Goths returned to land battles in an attack across the Danube in 270 against Anchialus and Nicopolis. This was followed by a Roman attack across Danube in 271, defeating the Gothic king Cannabaudes. The Goths attacked the Pontus again in 276-277, pushing farther inland to Galatia and Cilicia.

The impact of these waves of Gothic attacks is clearly felt in the Canonical Letter of Gregory Thaumaturgus, bishop of Neocaesarea (modern Niksar) in the Pontus region of Asia Minor. His episcopate fell during the emperor Decius's persecution of Christians, which started c. 250 AD. He may have lived until the reign of Aurelian (270-275 AD). The letter is a response to a neighboring bishop's questions concerning the conduct of Roman soldiers during and after the most recent period of Gothic raids in the Pontus (translated in Heather and Matthews, 1991):

Canon 5   Others delude themselves by keeping the property of others which they have found, in place of their own which they have lost, in order that, since the Boranoi and Goths worked on them deeds of war, so they may become Boranoi and Goths to others. I have therefore sent my brother... [that he may] advise you whose accusations you should accept....
Canon 6   Concerning those who forcibly detain captives (who have escaped) from barbarians.... Send men out into the countryside, lest divine thunderbolts descend upon those who perpetrate such wickedness!
Canon 7   ... As for those who have been enrolled among the barbarians and followed after them as prisoners, forgetting that they were men of Pontus, and Christians, and have become so thoroughly barbarised as even to put to death men of their own race by the gibbet or noose, and to point out roads and houses to the barbarians, who were ignorant of them; you must debar them even from the ranks of Hearers, until a common decision is reached about them by the assembly of saints, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Canon 8   ... As for those who brought themselves to attack the houses of others, if they are convicted after accusation, let them not be fit even to be Hearers. If however they confess their own guilt and make restitution, they are to prostrate themselves among the ranks of the penitent.

It thus seems clear that the raiding parties, though in origin homogeneous groups of Goths or other individual tribes, were soon augmented by other enterprizing -- or coerced -- individuals within the lands they attacked. The attacks themselves thus only left a transitory material calamity. More long-term problems were felt when the raids had ceased, and there arose the issues of readmitting offenders and presumed offenders into the societies to which they formerly belonged.

Reading and Textual Analysis

The following passage is Luke 4.1-13, in which Jesus is tempted by Satan. In the first verse, we find the collocation gawandida sik 'returned', encountered in several places in other readings. This phrase is more literally 'brought himself back'. Though Gothic has a functioning morphological mediopassive which might, on Indo-European historical grounds, serve to connote exactly the meaning reached here, Gothic is already very close to other Germanic languages in the frequent use of such periphrastic reflexive collocations to render transitive verbs intransitive.

In Luke 4.3 we find a nominative form sunáus instead of the proper nominative sunus 'son'; a similar form diabuláus replaces the proper nominative diabulus in Luke 4.5. It is likely that, shortly after the time of Wulfila (if not before), the diphthong áu was monophthongized and subsequently indistinguishable from u, leading to occasional scribal confusion. Similar phonetically derived scribal confusion occurs in Luke 4.4: we find the forms hláib and libáid, which do not show the expected devoicing of final -b and -d to -f and -þ, respectively.

Note also the construction in Luke 4.3: qiþ þamma stáina ei waírþái hláibs 'command this stone that it be made bread'. This is an example of the particle ei used to introduce an indirect command. The particle ei was originally a general relative marker, setting off an entire phrase as dependent on surrounding material. Only later did this particle become attached to demonstrative pronouns to form relative pronouns, such as saei. Some of these subsequently became subordinate conjunctions, e.g. þatei. Gothic may also use prepositional constructions for subordinate clauses, such as Luke 4.10: du gafastan '(in order) to support' shows the frequent use in Gothic of the preposition du with the infinitive in purpose constructions.

The phrase in Luke 4.7, in andwaírþja meinamma 'in my presence', translates the Greek enōpion emou, which is not explicit in the King James Version. The English phrase 'Get thee behind me, Satan' in Luke 4.8 does not appear in the Gothic, an indication that the Gothic translation was made from a different manuscript than the King James Version.

4:1 - Iþ Iesus, ahmins weihis fulls, gawandida sik fram Iaurdanau jah tauhans was in ahmin in auþidai

2 - dage fidwor tiguns, fraisans fram diabulau. jah ni matida waiht in dagam jainaim, jah at ustauhanaim þaim dagam, biþe gredags warþ.

3 - jah qaþ du imma diabulus: jabai sunaus sijais gudis, qiþ þamma staina ei wairþai hlaibs.

4 - jah andhof Iesus wiþra ina qiþands: gamelid ist þatei ni bi hlaib ainana libaid manna, ak bi all waurde gudis.

5 - jah ustiuhands ina diabulaus ana fairguni hauhata, ataugida imma allans þiudinassuns þis midjungardis in stika melis.

6 - jah qaþ du imma sa diabulus: þus giba þata waldufni þize allata jah wulþu ize, unte mis atgiban ist, jah þisƕammeh þei wiljau, giba þata.

7 - þu nu jabai inweitis mik in andwairþja meinamma, wairþiþ þein all.

8 - jah andhafjands imma Iesus qaþ: gamelid ist, fraujan guþ þeinana inweitais jah imma ainamma fullafahjais.

9 - þaþroh gatauh ina in Iairusalem jah gasatida ina ana giblin alhs jah qaþ du imma: jabai sunus sijais gudis, wairp þuk þaþro dalaþ;

10 - gamelid ist auk þatei aggilum seinaim anabiudiþ bi þuk du gafastan þuk,

11 - jah þatei ana handum þuk ufhaband, ei ƕan ni gastagqjais bi staina fotu þeinana.

12 - jah andhafjands qaþ imma Iesus þatei qiþan ist: ni fraisais fraujan guþ þeinana.

13 - jah ustiuhands all fraistobnjo diabulus, afstoþ fairra imma und mel.

Lesson Text

4:1 Iþ Iesus, ahmins weihis fulls, gawandida sik fram Iaurdanau jah tauhans was in ahmin in auþidai 2 dage fidwor tiguns, fraisans fram diabulau. jah ni matida waiht in dagam jainaim, jah at ustauhanaim þaim dagam, biþe gredags warþ. 3 jah qaþ du imma diabulus: jabai sunaus sijais gudis, qiþ þamma staina ei wairþai hlaibs. 4 jah andhof Iesus wiþra ina qiþands: gamelid ist þatei ni bi hlaib ainana libaid manna, ak bi all waurde gudis.

5 jah ustiuhands ina diabulaus ana fairguni hauhata, ataugida imma allans þiudinassuns þis midjungardis in stika melis. 6 jah qaþ du imma sa diabulus: þus giba þata waldufni þize allata jah wulþu ize, unte mis atgiban ist, jah þisƕammeh þei wiljau, giba þata. 7 þu nu jabai inweitis mik in andwairþja meinamma, wairþiþ þein all. 8 jah andhafjands imma Iesus qaþ: gamelid ist, fraujan guþ þeinana inweitais jah imma ainamma fullafahjais.

9 þaþroh gatauh ina in Iairusalem jah gasatida ina ana giblin alhs jah qaþ du imma: jabai sunus sijais gudis, wairp þuk þaþro dalaþ; 10 gamelid ist auk þatei aggilum seinaim anabiudiþ bi þuk du gafastan þuk, 11 jah þatei ana handum þuk ufhaband, ei ƕan ni gastagqjais bi staina fotu þeinana. 12 jah andhafjands qaþ imma Iesus þatei qiþan ist: ni fraisais fraujan guþ þeinana.

13 jah ustiuhands all fraistobnjo diabulus, afstoþ fairra imma und mel.

Translation

From the King James version:
4:1 And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, 2 Being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered. 3 And the devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread. 4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. 6 And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine. 8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
9 And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence: 10 For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee: 11 And in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. 12 And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
13 And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season.

Grammar

16. Weak Nominal Declension

The weak declension of nouns is nothing more than n-stem nominal formation. In principle it is no different from the formation of r-stems or nd-stems: the affix -Vn- intercedes between nominal root and endings, where V is some vowel. Just as brōþar 'brother' is inherently an r-stem noun (employing no other formations), likewise weak nouns are inherently weak, i.e. only n-stem. While adjectives may employ strong or weak declension (see Sections 13 and 17) according to contextual demands, a given noun by contrast employs only one declension at all times: a weak noun always declines weak, a strong noun always strong.

16.1. an/jan/wan-Stems

The an/jan/wan-stem nouns are generally masculine or neuter. Nouns with the j- or w-augment take the same endings as those without. The nouns atta 'father', arbja 'heir', and gawaúrstwa 'fellow-worker' -- respectively an-, jan-, and wan-stems -- serve to illustrate the masculine forms. The nouns haírtō 'heart', áugō 'eye', and sigljō 'seal' -- respectively an-, an-, and jan-stems -- serve to illustrate the neuter forms.

Weak an-Stem   Masculine           Neuter        
                         
Stem   attan-   arbjan-   gawaúrstwan-   haírtan-   áugan-   sigljan-
                         
N Sg.   atta   arbja   gawaúrstwa   haírtō   áugō   sigljō
A   attan   arbjan   gawaúrstwan   haírtō   áugō   sigljō
G   attins   arbjins   gawaúrstwins   haírtins   áugins   *sigljins
D   attin   arbjin   gawaúrstwin   haírtin   áugin   *sigljin
                         
N Pl.   attans   arbjans   gawaúrstwans   haírtōna   áugōna   *sigljōna
A   attans   arbjans   gawaúrstwans   haírtōna   áugōna   *sigljōna
G   attanē   arbjanē   gawaúrstwanē   haírtanē   áuganē   *sigljanē
D   attam   arbjam   gawaúrstwam   haírtam   áugam   *sigljam
                         

Note that the dative plural is built by analogy to a-stem nouns, without the intervening Vn-affix. The nouns aba (masc.) 'man, husband'; aúhsa (masc.) 'ox'; namō (neut.) 'name'; and watō (neut.) 'water' have different forms in the plural. These are boldfaced in the chart below. The masculine noun manna 'man' generalized the zero-grade of the n-stem formation (-n- rather than -Vn-), yielding a peculiar declension.

Weak an-Stem   Masculine           Neuter    
                     
Stem   ab(a)n-   aúhs(a)n-   man(a)n-   nam(a)n-   wat(a)n-
                     
N Sg.   aba   aúhsa   manna   namō   watō
A   aban   aúhsan   mannan   namō   watō
G   abins   aúhsins   mans   namins   watins
D   abin   aúhsin   mann   namin   watin
                     
N Pl.   abans   aúhsans   mans, mannans   namna   watōna
A   abans   aúhsans   mans, mannans   namna   watōna
G   abnē   aúhsnē   mannē   namnē   watanē
D   abnam   aúhsam   mannam   namnam   watnam
                     

For the zero-grade forms of manna, compare Latin declension: nom. sg. carō 'flesh' with acc. carnem, as opposed to nom. sg. homō 'man' with acc. hominem.

16.2. ōn/jōn/wōn-Stems

The ōn/jōn/wōn-stem nouns are generally feminine. Nouns with the j- or w-augment take the same endings as those without. The nouns tuggō 'tongue', arbjō 'heiress', and ūhtwō 'early morning' -- respectively ōn-, jōn-, and wōn-stems -- serve to illustrate the forms.

Weak ōn-Stem   Feminine        
             
Stem   tuggōn-   arbjōn-   ūhtwōn-
             
N Sg.   tuggō   arbjō   ūhtwō
A   tuggōn   arbjōn   ūhtwōn
G   tuggōns   arbjōns   ūhtwōns
D   tuggōn   arbjōn   ūhtwōn
             
N Pl.   tuggōns   arbjōns   ūhtwōns
A   tuggōns   arbjōns   ūhtwōns
G   tuggōnō   arbjōnō   ūhtwōnō
D   tuggōm   arbjōm   ūhtwōm
             

The vowel ō has generalized throughout the declension, so that the dative, though characteristically lacking any sign of the n-stem, still maintains the vowel.

16.3. īn-Stems

The īn-stem nouns (recall [ī] is spelled ei in Gothic) are generally feminine. These nouns derive for the most part from adjectives, forming the associated abstract noun. The nouns managei 'multitude', áiþei 'mother', and frōdei 'understanding' serve to illustrate the forms.

Weak īn-Stem   Feminine        
             
Stem   managein-   áiþein-   frōdein-
             
N Sg.   managei   áiþei   frōdei
A   managein   áiþein   frōdein
G   manageins   áiþeins   frōdeins
D   managein   áiþein   frōdein
             
N Pl.   manageins   áiþeins   frōdeins
A   manageins   áiþeins   frōdeins
G   manageinō   áiþeinō   frōdeinō
D   manageim   áiþeim   frōdeim
             

The formation is similar to the declension of ōn-stems. The vowel ī has generalized throughout the declension, so that the dative maintains the vowel while losing the n.

17. Adjectives: Weak Declension

Adjectives decline according to weak or strong paradigms based on the requirements of context (cf. Section 13 on strong adjective declension). The choice is one of specificity: Gothic employs weak adjective forms to modify a definite noun, and strong forms to modify an indefinite noun. For example, ahma sa weiha 'the holy ghost' and þái ana aírþái þizái gōdōn saianans 'they that are sown on the good ground' (Mark 4.20). For comparison, weihs ahma would be 'a holy spirit', ana gōdái aírþái 'on (some) good ground', saianái 'sown'. Weak endings are generally used for nominalized adjectives: unkarjans 'careless (ones)'. Compare weihs 'holy' (strong) to weiha 'priest' (weak), literally '(the) holy one'. From a morphological point of view, weak adjective endings are simply n-stem endings. In this way, their use for definite reference parallels proper names in Latin, e.g. catus 'sly' vs. Catō (G. Catōnis) 'the Sly One', and in Greek, e.g. platús 'broad' vs. Plátōn 'the Broad (Shouldered) One'.

17.1. Weak Adjective Formation

As mentioned above, the weak declension of adjectives is actually simply n-stem declension. The weak masculine endings of a-stem adjectives exactly parallel those of the an-stem noun atta, and the neuter a-stem weak endings those of the an-stem haírtō (Section 16.1); the feminine weak endings of a-stem adjectives parallel those of the ōn-stem noun tuggō (Section 16.2). Again the adjective blinds 'blind' illustrates the declension.

Weak a-Stem   Masculine   Neuter   Feminine
             
N Sg.   blinda   blindō   blindō
A   blindan   blindō   blindōn
G   blindins   blindins   blindōns
D   blindin   blindin   blindōn
             
N Pl.   blindans   blindōna   blindōns
A   blindans   blindōna   blindōns
G   blindanē   blindanē   blindōnō
D   blindam   blindam   blindōm
             

The ja-stem adjectives decline analogously, the masculine forms following the jan-stem noun arbja, the neuter following sigljō, the feminine following arbjō. The distinctions of Group (1) and Group (2) ja-stems do not play a role in weak declension. Likewise, i-stem and u-stem adjectives follow the same weak declension as ja-stems, exhibiting the same j-augment in all forms. The adjectives niujis 'new' and wilþeis 'wild' illustrate the weak declension of ja-stems; hráins 'clean' illustrates the i-stems; hardus 'hard' illustrates the u-stems. The forms are as follows.

Masculine   ja-Stem (1)   ja-Stem (2)   i-Stem   u-Stem
                 
N Sg.   niuja   wilþja   hráinja   hardja
A   niujan   wilþjan   hráinjan   hardjan
G   niujins   wilþjins   hráinjins   hardjins
D   niujin   wilþjin   hráinjin   hardjin
                 
N Pl.   niujans   wilþjans   hráinjans   hardjans
A   niujans   wilþjans   hráinjans   hardjans
G   niujanē   wilþjanē   hráinjanē   hardjanē
D   niujam   wilþjam   hráinjam   hardjam
                 
Neuter                
                 
N Sg.   niujō   wilþjō   hráinjō   hardjō
A   niujō   wilþjō   hráinjō   hardjō
G   niujins   wilþjins   hráinjins   hardjins
D   niujin   wilþjin   hráinjin   hardjin
                 
N Pl.   niujōna   wilþjōna   hráinjōna   hardjōna
A   niujōna   wilþjōna   hráinjōna   hardjōna
G   niujanē   wilþjanē   hráinjanē   hardjanē
D   niujam   wilþjam   hráinjam   hardjam
                 
Feminine                
                 
N Sg.   niujō   wilþjō   hráinjō   hardjō
A   niujōn   wilþjōn   hráinjōn   hardjōn
G   niujōns   wilþjōns   hráinjōns   hardjōns
D   niujōn   wilþjōn   hráinjōn   hardjōn
                 
N Pl.   niujōns   wilþjōns   hráinjōns   hardjōns
A   niujōns   wilþjōns   hráinjōns   hardjōns
G   niujōnō   wilþjōnō   hráinjōnō   hardjōnō
D   niujōm   wilþjōm   hráinjōm   hardjōm
                 

The wa-stem adjectives maintain the w-augment. Few weak forms are extant. The adjective triggws 'true' exhibits only the weak N sg. triggwa and D sg. triggwin. The wa-stem adjectives lasiws 'weak', *qius 'alive', *fáus 'little', *usskáus 'vigilant' show no weak forms.

17.2. Comparative, Superlative, and Intensive Adjectives

The comparative of adjectives is formed by addition of the suffix -iz- or -ōz-. The superlative is derived by addition of the suffix -st- or -ōst-. Consider the following examples.

Meaning   Positive   Comparative   Superlative
             
'much, many'   manags   managiza   managists
'wise'   frōþs   frōdōza    
'poor'   arms       armōsts
'strong'   swinþs   swinþōza    
'old'   alþeis   alþiza    
'sweet'   suts   sutiza   sutists
'hard'   hardus   hardiza    
'high'   *háuhs       háuhists
             

As with the positive degree, the superlative degree declines either strong or weak according to the requirements of context. The superlative, however, does not take the alternate pronominal ending -ata in the neuter singular nominative or accusative. The comparative, by contrast, only assumes weak adjectival endings, regardless of context. The only difference between comparative endings and general weak adjectival endings occurs in the feminine: the feminine declines like the īn-stem managei, rather than tuggō. The adjective jūhiza 'younger', from juggs 'young', serves to illustrate comparative declension.

Comparative   Masculine   Neuter   Feminine
             
N Sg.   jūhiza   jūhizō   jūhizei
A   jūhizan   jūhizō   jūhizein
G   jūhizins   jūhizins   jūhizeins
D   jūhizin   jūhizin   jūhizein
             
N Pl.   jūhizans   jūhizōna   jūhizeins
A