Romans In Denmark.

[Landwalker]

Yeah it was, and Denmark possibly more than the rest because it's a bit easier to get here.

According to the Goth Jordanes, the Danes (Dani) took over the area that is now Denmark + Southern Sweden from the Heruli.

On that note, take a look at Walter Goffart's article or Jordanes, the Getica, and the legitimacy of his claims about the Scandinavian origins of the Goths. I didn't pay a huge amount of attention to that part, because I was mostly interested in what he had to say about Jordanes' motives for writing the Getica in the first place, but I think the gist of it was that Jordanes was full of crap.

Cheers.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

So it's false to assume Rome was never concerned with geographic knowledge beyond her borders, even in the Principate period. They at least knew a lot about the North, more than we would expect.

[Slim_Ghost]

The Romans were trading in India as well, so I wouldn't be that suprised if someday there are Roman cemetaries discovered over there.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Yes, and a trader was sent to China during the time of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, AFAIK.

[Landwalker]

So it's false to assume Rome was never concerned with geographic knowledge beyond her borders, even in the Principate period. They at least knew a lot about the North, more than we would expect.

We've known that for quite some time. Even Late Antique authors knew about placed like Scandinavia and even Iceland (typically called Thule), not to mention the areas far to the east of the empire's borders.

Cheers.

[Labrat]

We've known that for quite some time. Even Late Antique authors knew about placed like Scandinavia and even Iceland (typically called Thule), not to mention the areas far to the east of the empire's borders.

Did they? I though Iceland was uninhabited until the Vikings colonized it.

[Landwalker]

Did they? I though Iceland was uninhabited until the Vikings colonized it.

It's pretty common academic belief that the Vikings already knew about Iceland before they "found" it, by way of the Irish. The reason for this foreknowledge is that Irish monks had a tradition of traveling into solitude, and one of their most popular destinations was Thule/Iceland. The Vikings in the British Isles found out about this, and eventually made the trip themselves. Obviously, being hermits, the Irish monk population on Iceland by the time of the Viking settlement was so low and sparse as to be unmentionable, but the point was that Iceland was known to exist long before the Vikings ever settled there.

Cheers.

[Sakkura]

On that note, take a look at Walter Goffart's article or Jordanes, the Getica, and the legitimacy of his claims about the Scandinavian origins of the Goths. I didn't pay a huge amount of attention to that part, because I was mostly interested in what he had to say about Jordanes' motives for writing the Getica in the first place, but I think the gist of it was that Jordanes was full of crap.

Cheers.

I suppose. But still, I don't see why there would not have been a lot of migration affecting Denmark just like the rest of Europe.

[cmacq]

On that note, take a look at Walter Goffart's article or Jordanes, the Getica, and the legitimacy of his claims about the Scandinavian origins of the Goths. I didn't pay a huge amount of attention to that part, because I was mostly interested in what he had to say about Jordanes' motives for writing the Getica in the first place, but I think the gist of it was that Jordanes was full of crap.

Cheers.

the problem with that is Walter Goffart's (of Yale) article may be full of crap as well. And there are many reasons for this.

We've known that for quite some time. Even Late Antique authors knew about placed like Scandinavia and even Iceland (typically called Thule), not to mention the areas far to the east of the empire's borders.

Cheers.

right, the romans sent an expedition there but failed due to high seas. the hebrideans went there all the time, once took a greek merchant, they stoped off in denmark on the return trip.

[Landwalker]

the problem with that is the Walter Goffart's (of Yale) article may be full of crap as well. And there are many reasons for this.

I'd love to hear them. And I mean this in all sincerity, not be snarky or sardonic. After all, the man's a pretty big deal in early medieval history, and since I'm using a few of his books and articles in my own research, I'm always interested in hearing particular problems people might take with his (or anyone's) research.

Cheers.

[cmacq]

I'd love to hear them. And I mean this in all sincerity, not be snarky or sardonic. After all, the man's a pretty big deal in early medieval history, and since I'm using a few of his books and articles in my own research, I'm always interested in hearing particular problems people might take with his (or anyone's) research.

Cheers.

great, but can't respond in detail now, will get back to this soon.