The
uniqueness perceived by specific groups was based on common political and
economic interests, rather than biological or racial distinctions.
The role of language in constructing and maintaining group identity can be ephemeral, since large-scale language shifts occur commonly in history. The barbarian polities are social constructs, rather than changeless lines of blood kinship. The stimulus for forming tribal polities is perpetuated by a small nucleus of people, who were a military or aristocratic elite. This core group form a standard for larger units, gathering adherents by employing amalgamative metaphors such as kinship and aboriginal commonality and claiming that they perpetuate an ancient, divinely-sanctioned lineage.
A capable soldier would be able to assume the group identity without being born into the "tribe". A victorious campaign confirmed the leaders right to rule and drew to them an ever-growing people who accepted and shared in their identity. In time, these heterogeneous armies grow into a new people possessing a strong belief in a common biological origin. The only common factor in defining ethnicity is belief: in the reality of your group and the difference to others.
During the Migration Period people could live in circumstances of "ethnic ambiguity". Given that ethnicity is important for the upper classes, they could adopt multiple ethnicities to secure the allegiance of their partners and followers. To advance socially, one need to grow into a dominating group with high prestige, to copy its lifestyle. The process of assimilation could produce a wide variety of transitional stages. Followers could also disband from larger units. Factions arose, challenging the right to lead the people and uphold their traditions. Conversely defeat by an external power could mean the end of a ruler and his people, who are absorbed into the victorious confederacy. 'ethnic' identity among barbarians is extraordinarily fluid, as new groups emerged and old ones disappeared.
The process of assimilation and appropriation of new group identity varies from group to group. Some are prepared (after a given period) to accept prisoners as full and free members of their tribal groups; on the other hand, the Huns (although incorporating non-Hun groups) keep them separate and subordinate. The identity of tribal groups is maintained by a contingent of "notables" and freemen. Most of the times conquered groups held a subordinate status either as otherwise-autonomous tribute-payers or as disadvantaged strata within mixed settlements. Even when a homogeneous material culture arose, disparate groups are likely to preserve their unique identity and language.[31]
Whatever the case, this process of building large-scale group identity is particularly evident along the Roman frontier, prompted by the example of Roman provincial life and the threat of Roman attack. Ethnicity is a complex, subjective and multi-layered process, and the Migration Period will see groups rise and fall. Confederations like the Huns and the Vandals will arise, to vanish abruptly within a few generations. Other, previously-obscure groups (like the Angles and the Franks) will create enduring polities. Even ancient groups like the Goths (who existed from late antiquity until the Middle Ages) will underwent profound transformation (Given constant migrations, changing allegiances, and new cultural appropriations, all that remained constant was their Gothic name) Tribes are no longer imagined to have been "marching for centuries at a time in ordered ranks with homogeneous ethnic compositions" from a distant, localized homeland across Europe into a settlement on Roman soil”.
Germanic kingship
Terminology
The Common Germanic *kuningaz. is notably different from the word for "king" in other Indo-European languages (*rēks "ruler"; Latin rēx, Sanskrit rājan and Irish ríg, but see Gothic reiks). It is a derivation from the term *kunjom "kin") by the -inga- suffix. The literal meaning is that of a "scion of the [noble] kin", or perhaps "son or descendant of one of noble birth".
Earl/jarl is a title for a chieftain or leader of a small force of men below the level of kingship.
Germanic pre-Christianization kingship[edit]
The Germanic king originally had three main functions:
To serve as judge during the popular assemblies.
To serve as a priest during the sacrifices.
To serve as a military leader during wars.
The office is received hereditarily, but a new king require the consent of the people before assuming the throne. All sons of the king have the right to claim the throne, which often lead to co-rulership (diarchy) where two brothers are elected kings at the same time. This evolved into the territories being considered the hereditary property of the kings, patrimonies, a system which will fuel feudal wars, because the kings could claim ownership of lands beyond their de facto rule.
As a sort of pre-Christianization high priest, the king often claim descent from some deity. He administer pagan sacrifices (blóts) at important cult sites. Refusal to administer the blóts could lead to the king losing power.
According to Tacitus (Germania), the early Germanic peoples had an elective monarchy already in the 1st century. "They choose their kings by birth, their generals for merit. These kings have not unlimited or arbitrary power, and the generals do more by example than by authority."
Germanic society have three levels, the king, the nobility and the free men. Their respective political influence is negotiated at the thing. According to the testimony of Tacitus,"About minor matters the chiefs deliberate, about the more important the whole tribe. Yet even when the final decision rests with the people, the affair is always thoroughly discussed by the chiefs. at the assembly, when the multitude think proper, they sit down armed. Silence is proclaimed by the priests, who have on these occasions the right of keeping order. Then the king or the chief, according to age, birth, distinction in war, or eloquence, is heard, more because he has influence to persuade than because he has power to command. If his sentiments displease them, they reject them with murmurs; if they are satisfied, they brandish their spears."
History
The principle of election, which determined Germanic succession, will be abandoned in those kingdoms under the heaviest influence from the papacy, such as Merovingian Gaul, where hereditary succession and the divine right of the reigning dynasty was recognised. In Anglo-Saxon Britain, the principle survived: Anglo-Saxon kings were elected by the witena gemót.
Thing (assembly)
A thing (þing; German) is the governing assembly of a Germanic society, made up of the free people of the community presided over by lawspeakers. Its meeting-place is called a thingstead.
Etymology
Derive from Proto-Germanic *þingą meaning "appointed time", and some suggest an origin in Proto-Indo-European *ten-, "stretch", as in a "stretch of time for an assembly".
Medieval society
In the pre-Christian clan-culture of Germania a balancing structure is necessary to reduce tribal feuds and avoid social disorder. That the balancing institution is the thing.
The thing is the assembly of the free men of a country, province or a hundred. There are consequently hierarchies of things, so that the local things are represented at the higher-level thing, for a province or land. At the thing, disputes are solved and political decisions are made. The place for the thing is often also the place for public religious rites and for commerce.
The thing meet at regular intervals, legislate, elect chieftains and kings, and judge according to the law, which is memorized and recited by the "law speaker" (the judge). The thing's negotiations are presided over by the law speaker and the chieftain or the king. In reality the thing is dominated by the most influential members of the community, the heads of clans and wealthy families, but in theory one-man one-vote is the rule.
The assembly of the thing is typically held at a specially-designated place, often a field or common.
The role of language in constructing and maintaining group identity can be ephemeral, since large-scale language shifts occur commonly in history. The barbarian polities are social constructs, rather than changeless lines of blood kinship. The stimulus for forming tribal polities is perpetuated by a small nucleus of people, who were a military or aristocratic elite. This core group form a standard for larger units, gathering adherents by employing amalgamative metaphors such as kinship and aboriginal commonality and claiming that they perpetuate an ancient, divinely-sanctioned lineage.
A capable soldier would be able to assume the group identity without being born into the "tribe". A victorious campaign confirmed the leaders right to rule and drew to them an ever-growing people who accepted and shared in their identity. In time, these heterogeneous armies grow into a new people possessing a strong belief in a common biological origin. The only common factor in defining ethnicity is belief: in the reality of your group and the difference to others.
During the Migration Period people could live in circumstances of "ethnic ambiguity". Given that ethnicity is important for the upper classes, they could adopt multiple ethnicities to secure the allegiance of their partners and followers. To advance socially, one need to grow into a dominating group with high prestige, to copy its lifestyle. The process of assimilation could produce a wide variety of transitional stages. Followers could also disband from larger units. Factions arose, challenging the right to lead the people and uphold their traditions. Conversely defeat by an external power could mean the end of a ruler and his people, who are absorbed into the victorious confederacy. 'ethnic' identity among barbarians is extraordinarily fluid, as new groups emerged and old ones disappeared.
The process of assimilation and appropriation of new group identity varies from group to group. Some are prepared (after a given period) to accept prisoners as full and free members of their tribal groups; on the other hand, the Huns (although incorporating non-Hun groups) keep them separate and subordinate. The identity of tribal groups is maintained by a contingent of "notables" and freemen. Most of the times conquered groups held a subordinate status either as otherwise-autonomous tribute-payers or as disadvantaged strata within mixed settlements. Even when a homogeneous material culture arose, disparate groups are likely to preserve their unique identity and language.[31]
Whatever the case, this process of building large-scale group identity is particularly evident along the Roman frontier, prompted by the example of Roman provincial life and the threat of Roman attack. Ethnicity is a complex, subjective and multi-layered process, and the Migration Period will see groups rise and fall. Confederations like the Huns and the Vandals will arise, to vanish abruptly within a few generations. Other, previously-obscure groups (like the Angles and the Franks) will create enduring polities. Even ancient groups like the Goths (who existed from late antiquity until the Middle Ages) will underwent profound transformation (Given constant migrations, changing allegiances, and new cultural appropriations, all that remained constant was their Gothic name) Tribes are no longer imagined to have been "marching for centuries at a time in ordered ranks with homogeneous ethnic compositions" from a distant, localized homeland across Europe into a settlement on Roman soil”.
Germanic kingship
Terminology
The Common Germanic *kuningaz. is notably different from the word for "king" in other Indo-European languages (*rēks "ruler"; Latin rēx, Sanskrit rājan and Irish ríg, but see Gothic reiks). It is a derivation from the term *kunjom "kin") by the -inga- suffix. The literal meaning is that of a "scion of the [noble] kin", or perhaps "son or descendant of one of noble birth".
Earl/jarl is a title for a chieftain or leader of a small force of men below the level of kingship.
Germanic pre-Christianization kingship[edit]
The Germanic king originally had three main functions:
To serve as judge during the popular assemblies.
To serve as a priest during the sacrifices.
To serve as a military leader during wars.
The office is received hereditarily, but a new king require the consent of the people before assuming the throne. All sons of the king have the right to claim the throne, which often lead to co-rulership (diarchy) where two brothers are elected kings at the same time. This evolved into the territories being considered the hereditary property of the kings, patrimonies, a system which will fuel feudal wars, because the kings could claim ownership of lands beyond their de facto rule.
As a sort of pre-Christianization high priest, the king often claim descent from some deity. He administer pagan sacrifices (blóts) at important cult sites. Refusal to administer the blóts could lead to the king losing power.
According to Tacitus (Germania), the early Germanic peoples had an elective monarchy already in the 1st century. "They choose their kings by birth, their generals for merit. These kings have not unlimited or arbitrary power, and the generals do more by example than by authority."
Germanic society have three levels, the king, the nobility and the free men. Their respective political influence is negotiated at the thing. According to the testimony of Tacitus,"About minor matters the chiefs deliberate, about the more important the whole tribe. Yet even when the final decision rests with the people, the affair is always thoroughly discussed by the chiefs. at the assembly, when the multitude think proper, they sit down armed. Silence is proclaimed by the priests, who have on these occasions the right of keeping order. Then the king or the chief, according to age, birth, distinction in war, or eloquence, is heard, more because he has influence to persuade than because he has power to command. If his sentiments displease them, they reject them with murmurs; if they are satisfied, they brandish their spears."
History
The principle of election, which determined Germanic succession, will be abandoned in those kingdoms under the heaviest influence from the papacy, such as Merovingian Gaul, where hereditary succession and the divine right of the reigning dynasty was recognised. In Anglo-Saxon Britain, the principle survived: Anglo-Saxon kings were elected by the witena gemót.
Thing (assembly)
A thing (þing; German) is the governing assembly of a Germanic society, made up of the free people of the community presided over by lawspeakers. Its meeting-place is called a thingstead.
Etymology
Derive from Proto-Germanic *þingą meaning "appointed time", and some suggest an origin in Proto-Indo-European *ten-, "stretch", as in a "stretch of time for an assembly".
Medieval society
In the pre-Christian clan-culture of Germania a balancing structure is necessary to reduce tribal feuds and avoid social disorder. That the balancing institution is the thing.
The thing is the assembly of the free men of a country, province or a hundred. There are consequently hierarchies of things, so that the local things are represented at the higher-level thing, for a province or land. At the thing, disputes are solved and political decisions are made. The place for the thing is often also the place for public religious rites and for commerce.
The thing meet at regular intervals, legislate, elect chieftains and kings, and judge according to the law, which is memorized and recited by the "law speaker" (the judge). The thing's negotiations are presided over by the law speaker and the chieftain or the king. In reality the thing is dominated by the most influential members of the community, the heads of clans and wealthy families, but in theory one-man one-vote is the rule.
The assembly of the thing is typically held at a specially-designated place, often a field or common.