ITT: The Germanic Peoples
Early Middle Ages Power Rankings:
Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Friscians. Heptarchy Masterace.
Norsemen and their Norman and Rus offspring
Ostrogoths, Visigoths, and Lombards
Guess the language
Skēp end Hrusse: Skēp ne hebend wulle sah hrusse
ān tēhend habig wagen, end ān berend mikile hlast, end ān berend mann.
Skēp sagde at hrusse: mīn hearte sēre mik, sehend mann drēbend hrusse.
Hrusse sagde: hēre, skēp! Unser herten sēre uns sehend hit:
Mann, fade, make wulle ab skēp warme klāþe fore sik. End skēp ne habe wulle.
Þat herid skēp flāh at felþ.
I like that tribe who painted themselves black and attacked on moonless nights, screaming like creatures from the netherworld
And the ones who made boys kill bears with only a knife as a rite of passage
Visigoths got absolutely wrecked by an army of goat herders and desert raiders from North Africa. They couldn't have been that powerful
Visigoths had influence in Spain. the point is that they came from Gotland to go and help dismantle the roman Empire and establish an interesting kingdom. BUT their language is gone and their influence non-identifiable.
so Mid Tier
Sorry friend, please speak in a way that we may understand.
>He keeps speaking a Latin language in a Germanic thread!
Therefore it has no place in this thread.
Now kindly remove yourself, my swarthy Latin freond.
>They spoke a Romance language, they were not Germanic.
That's not even a coherent sentence you enormous retard. Language does not define ethnicity.
Every thread, the butthurt just won't stop.
>family name comes from Lancashire
Mine too, do you mind sharing what it is?
>tfw neither my direct patrilineal or matrilineal descent are Germanic, as the family name is from my dad's stepdad
Feels bad to have both shitty Celt mDNA and Y Chromosome.
Normans, Angels, Non Continental Saxons, Jutes, and Lombards should all be lower than low tier for not speaking their own language anymore. Instead taking up a Latin, Slav, or Mongrel tongue.
Both these accounts are exaggerated, there was no tribe that made boys kill bears as a rite of passage.
That said, the other tribe your looking for is the Harii, who did indeed painted themselves black and raided only at night.
That said, GOAT Germanic tribes are the Batavi, Cimbri, Teutones and Cherusci.
Greatest soldiers Romans ever faced. Were used as special forces in the Roman army and provided the emperors bodyguard. Had a somewhat successful revolt where they managed to easily defeat several legions until Vespasian sent about two dozen legions to their territory and they were forced to surrender.
>Cimbri & Teutones
Two un-extraordinary tribes that wandered into Roman territory and fucked up the Romans so bad they had to reform the entire military system, see battle of Arausio.
Arminius and Teutoburg, changed history forever.
>I'll happily debate it with you.
No way no time. In short however, Augustus was already re-thinking his plans to expand the border to the Elbe before Teutoburg in front of the expense required, and Teutoburg didn't mark the end of the attempts to conquer Germania Magna either. Arminius was just a bitchboy with no relevant success of any sort aside from his one ambush victory who was murdered by his own a few years after the battle.
Germanicus' campaigns were devastating for the germs, but Rome couldn't afford to tie down the amount of troops required to keep the germs pacified in such a worthless region literally only relevant as a larger buffer zone against the barbarian lands as a whole especially when the secondary aim of conquering it (german manpower) was accomplishable with a few denarii in mercs instead, and that's why Tiberius reset the border to the Rhine. Not Teutoburg, not Arminius.
All this relevance is the fruit of 19th century meme historians (sounds familiar? Should be. That century's academia is to history what tumblrites are to politics) interpreting ancient history to suit national propaganda.
>Augustus was already re-thinking his plans to expand the border to the Elbe before Teutoburg in front of the expense required, and Teutoburg didn't mark the end of the attempts to conquer Germania Magna either.
Augustus was against expansion later in his life and wanted to consolidate his territories, this however does not include Germania as it was being colonized by his orders.
>Teutoburg didn't mark the end of the attempts to conquer Germania Magna either.
Yes it did, when else did they try? The aftermath of Teutoburg led to the wholescale abandonment of turning Germania into a Roman province, greatly altering history seeing it was the Germanic tribes that eventually conquered Rome (and their descends i.e. the Germans, Dutch and British leaving huge marks on history).
>Germanicus' campaigns were devastating for the germs,
Said literally nobody ever but Roman fanboys. Germanicus campaigns did no damage to the tribes he was hoping to hurt whatsoever. He only managed to recover 2/3 eagles when allied tribes helped him, and made no significant gains or victories whatsoever. One tribe he claimed to have destroyed attacked him a month later with 20,000 men, this is an example of how ineffective his raids were (due to the decentralized nature of the tribes).
>and that's why Tiberius reset the border to the Rhine. Not Teutoburg, not Arminius.
The border was reset to the Rhine after Teutoburg, not before Teutoburg, when it was set at the Elbe, this is key.
The only point I'll give you is that Arminius only accomplishment was Teutoburg, but this was a pretty big accomplishment nonetheless.
>The ones who conquered Albion aren't that relevant for this thread.
Why not? They're exponentially more influential than their continental cousins.
Also you listed Angles and Jutes who also spoke Old English and now speak either English or Danish.
Franks have to be their own tier. They pretty much dominated the time period in question. No other tribe came even close. Only the Romans of Constantinople and the Muslim Invaders.
The colonization of Great Britain was an accomplishment comparable to the colonization of nowaday's Austria by the Bavarians. And no one ITT even considers them.
Angles, Jutes and Frisians were tiny and irrelevant tribes that were dominated and eventually even mostly assimilated by their bigger neighbours (Saxons, Danes, Franks).
Contenders for 2nd place would be:
- The Norse. The scale of their colonization and trade was just huge.
- The continental Saxons who dominated Central Europe in the later Early Middle Ages.
- Maybe even the Lombards.
>Visigoths got absolutely wrecked by an army of goat herders and desert raiders from North Africa
In 711, Tariq ibn Ziyad, a Muslim Berber client of Musa bin Nusair, the governor of Islamic Africa, invaded Spain with about 7,000 men, while Roderic was in the north fighting the Basques. The tale of Julian, Count of Ceuta facilitating the invasion, because one of his daughters had been dishonored by Roderic, is both late and mythical. By late July, a battle took place at the Guadalete River in the province of Cádiz. Roderic was betrayed by his troops, who sided with his enemies, and the king was killed in battle. The Muslims then took much of southern Spain with little resistance, and went on to capture Toledo, where they executed several Visigothic nobles. In 712, Musa, the governor of Ifriqiya, arrived with another army of 18,000, with large Arab contingents. He took Mérida in 713 and invaded the north, taking Saragossa and León, which were still under King Ardo, in 714. After being recalled by the Caliph, Musa left his son Abd al-‘Aziz in command. By 716, most of the Iberian Peninsula was under Islamic rule, with Gallia Narbonensis taken between 721 and 725. The only effective resistance was in Asturias, where a Visigothic nobleman named Pelagius (Pelayo) revolted in 718, allied with the Basques and defeated the Muslims at the battle of Covadonga. Resistance also continued in the regions around the Pyrenees and the mountainous regions of northern Spain, where the Muslims were uninterested or unable to establish their authority. The Berbers settled in the south and the Meseta Central in Castile. Initially, the Muslims generally left the Christians alone to practise their religion, although non-Muslims were subject to Islamic law and treated as second-class citizens.
So the whole reason for Al-Andalus in the first place was due to Visigothic cucks letting in the Muzzies because how much they hated Roderic.
>Franks have to be their own tier. They pretty much dominated the time period in question. No other tribe came even close.
If we ignore that it was the Saxon King Otto who founded the Holy Roman Empire.
The Saxons who moved to England simply ceased to be. When they are remembered they are always mentioned along the Angles, as proto-Englanders. The continental tribe is pretty much still there though.Their current habitat is Lower Saxony.
The fact that England is called England and not Saxonland is considered by historians one of the strangest accidents of historical naming. The Angles weren't even the most dominant tribal group in lowland Britain, mostly focusing on East Anglia and some inland regions. The Saxons meanwhile settled all of southern England, the north, Sussex, Essex etc. It's quite bizarre.
>The Saxons who moved to England simply ceased to be
Then how do you explain the kingdoms of Mercia and Wessex?
> When they are remembered they are always mentioned along the Angles
Who are also Germanic.
Much like US states with a German majority. They aren't German. Those Island-Saxons may have been some sort of tribal power projection at first. But since there's no connection to their home, they are a different Thing. A memory of Saxony if you will.
And yes, Angles were a Germanc tribe. Much like hundreds of others. Are they still there? Are Mercia or Wessex? Saxony is.
>Much like US states with a German majority. They aren't German.
They are German-American.
>Those Island-Saxons may have been some sort of tribal power projection at first. But since there's no connection to their home, they are a different Thing
I don't dispute the cultural differences between continental and insular Saxons, however their genetic connection is undeniable.
>I don't dispute the cultural differences between continental and insular Saxons
Different fag here. Those differences are pretty much down to the early Christianisation of the English, before then, the pagan Old Englisc were very like the Old Saxons and the later Norse cultures.
oi wot u jus say to me m8 cheeky cunt ill mash ur ead in
Hwat! Wīz Gaiza‐Danjǫ̂ in jērǫ̂ dagamaz
þeuda-kuningǫ̂ þrummį gafrēgun
hwō þai aþalingôz aljaną framidēdun.
Ufta Skelduz Skēbingaz skaþanǫ̂ þrautamaz
managamaz mēgiþōmaz medu-setlǫ̂ aftauh,
agisōdē erlanz, sīþą þan airist warþ
fawa-skaftaz fundanaz: Hiz þas frōbrǭ gabaid,
wōhs under wulknamaz, werþa-mundimaz þanh
unþa þat himmai aiwa-hwilīkaz þaizǫ̂ umbi-sitjandaizǫ̂
uber hrana-raidōi hauzijaną skuldē,
gumbōnų geldaną: þat was gōdaz kuningaz!
þammai abarô was after kannidaz
jungaz in gardamaz, þanǭ gudą sandidē
fulkai tō frōbrōi; firina-þarbǭ anagat
þat hīz airiz drugun aldra-lausai
langǭ hwīlǭ. Himmai þas lība-frawô
wuldras waldandz, weraldi-aizǭ fragab
Bīōnwulfaz was brōmiz (blēdaz wīdē sprang)
Skeldauz abarô Skadin-landamaz in.
Swa skal jungaz gumô, gōdō gawurkijaną,
framamiz fehu-giftimiz ana fadurz barmai
þat hinǭ ana aldī aftiz gawunijain
wiljan-gasinþôz, þan wīgą kwemai,
liudīz galaistijain: luba-dēdimiz skal
in mēgiþǫ̂ gahwezōi manô gaþinhaną.
Him þan Skelduz gewait tō gaskapa-hwīlōi
felu-hrōzaz fōrijaną ana frawani wērōi
hīz hinǭ þan atbērun tō brimas faraþai.
Angles and Saxons both came from continental Europe and became culturally identical to each other, both soaking Old English. Continental Saxons stayed behind, they were historically the same but split apart.
Mercia and Northumbria were considered Angle, Wessex was Saxon. Kent was Jute. Really now, they were all a heptarchy blob.
Mercia was not really either. They were a border people more than anything else, and they don't quite fit either Saxon, Briton or Angle, more a hodgepodge of the three.
Also, Jutes did fuck all. They got the isle of white under Whitgar and Stuff (That's a fucking name)
Just strong warrior culture, men were kinda like professional soldiers, exceptionally well trained. They could indeed cross rivers in full armor and launch 'amphibious' assaults, which they did for Caesar in Britain. Also one Roman historian wrote several pages on one of their soldiers who could shoot an arrow in the air and then hit it again and some other tricks. Tacitus said that they were "like weapons only used to be used for war", and they didn't have to pay taxes, only provide soldiers, including the emperors cavalry guard.
That wasn't at all the purpose of the Visigoths. The Visigoths entered Iberia as foederati, charged with the task of dealing with the troublesome Vandals and Alans. When the Visigoths established their kingdom they didn't view themselves as the opponents of Rome, but the heirs and successors.
As to their influence, why don't you ask Spanish and Portuguese historians what the influence of the Visigoths was? Most will tell you that the fruit of the Visigothic tree was a short, largely unsuccessful kingdom marked by regicide followed by 700 years of war with Moors.
Maybe Old Low Franconian/Old Dutch.
Doesn't show Ingvaeonic nasal spirant so can't be Old English, Old Frisian or Old Saxon. Doesn't show High German consonant shifts so not Old High German.
>befriend a literal retard
>lure and betray said retard in the middle of a forrest
It was an achievement but it was literally done on easy difficulty
Also I think Marcus Aurelius also tried to campaign into Germania