Ethnic Group Definition

[Finder]

poligeek, the difference is the Celtic/Irish/Gaulic cultural never truly died out, it almost did, but was slowed down, and is being reversed. It's not starting from scratch, we know what Gaulic sounds like, and we have millions of Gaulic speakers who speak gaulic as well as english, in the orginal tongue of irish gaulic. Unlike a remaking, or a retreaval of Latin-Roman or Ancient Eygption culturals, there's nobody around who knows how to even speak the tongues properly, nor who have first hand expierance in the culture, unlike Ireland.

Ireland was pretty close to losing it's culture to the English. But luckly the Western part of Ireland isolated with small settlements which had people who only knew how to speak gaulic up to these times and who have not stop celtic traditions.

So I would argue though, Celtic/Gaulic/Irish culture was close to becoming a dead culture/tongue and being absorbed by the anglo-saxon culture I would have to say they were able to stop or at least slow down this process. The fact that everyone on the Island now speaks english and that the other offical tongue is gaulic but is treated more like a second tongue like french is in the rest of Canada kind of shows a deminishing of the gaulic cultural to that of the anglo-saxon. BUT the west still has many people who use gaulic as a living a tongue and will speak it in work watch only gaulic tv.

I'm not saying this just from what I've read but from traveling Ireland myself. It really opened my eyes to both sides. One the weakening of Irish culture by the absorbation of the culture into that of the anglo-saxon and the western use of gaulic obbssed to just a almost mystic-nationalism of the east of "Irishness" and actual Irish culture in the west.

 

[Jersay]

I'm not sure if you are asking:

a) Are the Astru a historical ethnic goup?
To which I believe the answer is yes.

b) Are the Vikings a historical ethnic group that would be a post-Astru ethnic group?
To which I believe the answer is yes.

c) Are contemporary people who self-identify as Astru and see a lineage to Viking history an ethnic group or a cultural group?
I think I would answer that: Currently they are a cultural group with the potential to become an ethnic classification.

I see cultural as something that has the potential to transcend history, we can identify Roman and Egyptian "culture" that was the "culture" a thousand and two thousand years ago without transcribing that culture onto today's Romans and Egyptians which now have a quite different and distinct culture to the historical culture.

Cultural markers can be studied and made tangiable through a careful study of anthropological history.

However ethnicity seems more contemporary and is not only how one self-identifies but also how one is outwardly identifiable.

In that way an ancient culture has the potential to become an ethnicity if enough people choose to revive that culture in contemporary times. Which seems to be what the Celtic/Gaulish/Irish are attempting to do.

Cultural group almost becoming an ethnic group makes sense.

Got a question, geopgraphy doesn't explain this, but what would be the requirement for a potential ethnicity? Because Asatru is recognized as a religion in Denmark, Norway and Iceland.

And it has from, 35,000 to 100,000 followers?

What would make up an ethnic group as a reconstruction of Asatru and Viking lineage?

 

[Jersay]

Here is a list of all ethnic groups in the world. I have to tell you it is an extremely long one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups

 

[Jersay]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Norse_language#Dialects_and_texts

Link to Old Norse

 

[Finder]

You have to remember though wikipedia is a nice tool, it can basically be edited by anyone. So for instance if I wanted to make my own ethnic group. Lets say, Torontatian Black Irish, I'd just jump in there and edit the document. Now I don't think I'd consider this an ethnic group. There's many groups in there I don't think are ethnic groups really and others which are dead.

The Irish one is the closet one I can think about to one which was on the edge of being lost and still has problems of being absourbed into another ethnic group, but can still be called an ethnic group for now.

Now if tomorrow 5 thousand, or whatever Italins living in Rome, decided that they'd speak latin, and then do what they believe to be as Roman traditions, I would not consider themselves an ethinic group. They have the right to do this. Two things

a. I think a group would have to be around for generations with there new traditions as these would be new traditions as they do not directly come from living romans but they adopted the beliefs of ancient romans beliving they are emulating them. But they have not seen or heard from a living roman so it's a new group not a countuation of an old one. Roman-Latin culture is dead. This group however if it did last a few generations would be an ethnic group but only of the new Roman-Latin one and not of the old ancient one.

b. As said you can not restore a dead culture/ethnic group. You can only make new ones based on older ones. However if the culture did not die, like the Irish, you may try to revitalize that group.

brb

 

[Jay]

Actually I'm currently reading a book with that type of analasys in mind. So far it's pretty good. I'll have to fill you in with it when I'm done.

This is what it is:

That was on TV here just a few weeks ago....

 

[Toro]

RE: Ethnic Group Definiti

I am a member of a marginalized group. I'm a "Canadian-American". Well, I'm not an American, but you get the idea.

 

[poligeek]

poligeek, the difference is the Celtic/Irish/Gaulic cultural never truly died out, it almost did, but was slowed down, and is being reversed.

I understand the point you are trying to make, but I think you seriously misintrepreted what I was saying.

I was not saying that the Irish culture could not be revived. In fact, I was saying pretty much the opposite. I also never claimed that the Irish culture had fully died out. I am fairly familiar with the work done by Queen's University Belfast to encourage re-vitalization of the native-Irish culture.

That being said when we are speaking of cultures and ethnicities I think you are correct to identify that a modern day culture cannot take the place of a culture that has died out.

But I think it is also important to empahsize that cultures and ethnicities are living non-static things. In this way even though the Irish culture may not have fully died out, even if it was a dominant culture, the Irish / Celtic / Gaulish culture and ethnicity that are evident and present today are not the same culture that was present 100, 1,000 and 2,000 years ago.

Likewise with Jersey's question about the Astru.

No movement can become the Astru culture that existed in the past. This does not mean that a new Astru culture cannot be re-created and become an existing ethnicity.

 

[poligeek]

Cultural group almost becoming an ethnic group makes sense.

Got a question, geopgraphy doesn't explain this, but what would be the requirement for a potential ethnicity? Because Asatru is recognized as a religion in Denmark, Norway and Iceland.

And it has from, 35,000 to 100,000 followers?

What would make up an ethnic group as a reconstruction of Asatru and Viking lineage?

The difference between a cultures and ethnicities can either be historic or living.

There can also be cultures and ethnicities that are both. For example the British culture / ethnicity is both historical and contemporary. We can recognize historical and contemporary British culuture both as a continum and as seperate realisms.

In this way I think it is perfectly clear that Astru exists as a historical culture and as a historical ethnicity.

There is probably a strong argument that there is a contemporary Astru culture.

What is not clear is if there is a contemporary Astru ethnicity, the largest requirement of an ethnic identity being outside recognition of the self-identified ethnic group.

 

[Finder]

poligeek, the difference is the Celtic/Irish/Gaulic cultural never truly died out, it almost did, but was slowed down, and is being reversed.

I understand the point you are trying to make, but I think you seriously misintrepreted what I was saying.

I was not saying that the Irish culture could not be revived. In fact, I was saying pretty much the opposite. I also never claimed that the Irish culture had fully died out. I am fairly familiar with the work done by Queen's University Belfast to encourage re-vitalization of the native-Irish culture.

That being said when we are speaking of cultures and ethnicities I think you are correct to identify that a modern day culture cannot take the place of a culture that has died out.

But I think it is also important to empahsize that cultures and ethnicities are living non-static things. In this way even though the Irish culture may not have fully died out, even if it was a dominant culture, the Irish / Celtic / Gaulish culture and ethnicity that are evident and present today are not the same culture that was present 100, 1,000 and 2,000 years ago.

Likewise with Jersey's question about the Astru.

No movement can become the Astru culture that existed in the past. This does not mean that a new Astru culture cannot be re-created and become an existing ethnicity.

Ok then we mostly agree then.

 

[Jersay]

Yeah I was posing the question of the Vikings as an ethnic group, Asatru, to two of my professors they were warm to the idea. They accepted it, as well as Asatru now adays as an ethnic group.

So it kind of interesting to me, cultural group and ethnic group seems to be the same exact thing especially when you are of the same race, and even if you are not. Kind of confusing! :?

 

[Finder]

I don't know. Saying the Asatru is alive and well is very mis leading really. Since there is no connection to the orginal group. You can easyly make linkes to the old ancient Irish group since the group never did die out.

To me anyone who thinks there a Viking or a member of the Asatru group, is diluding themselves if they believe this is an unbroken group and that there beliefs match to those of the orginal, nor an understnading. Really it would be a neo-Asatru culture which is emulating that of the acient Asatru culture to the best of there knowledge.

 

[jimmoyer]

By the way, since you mentioned the Vikings, I want
to know if you ever heard of a group of mercenaries
that the Vikings hired at one point ?

The group's name lived in infamy because an english
word owes its roots to it.

The Berserkers !

Look this story up. Absolutely fascinating.
When you say you're going beserk or someone else is
going beserk, you are paying homage to an infamous
legend of olde.

 

[Citizen]

His men went to battle without armor and acted like mad dogs or wolves.

!

 

[jimmoyer]

My gawd, YOU do know the legend.

Any more readers of the Beserkers ?

 

[Citizen]

I have to confess, your post was intriguing so I googled the term.

 

[Finder]

yeah I watched the episiod on the history channel about the Beserkers.

 

[Jersay]

I don't know. Saying the Asatru is alive and well is very mis leading really. Since there is no connection to the orginal group. You can easyly make linkes to the old ancient Irish group since the group never did die out.

To me anyone who thinks there a Viking or a member of the Asatru group, is diluding themselves if they believe this is an unbroken group and that there beliefs match to those of the orginal, nor an understnading. Really it would be a neo-Asatru culture which is emulating that of the acient Asatru culture to the best of there knowledge.

It could be what you say. It could be a neo-Asatru culture which is emulating from the former one. So maybe in a hundred years it could be considered an ethnic group, but I do believe it is a cultural group.

The group's name lived in infamy because an english
word owes its roots to it.

The Berserkers !

They are really interesting. If I was back in that timeperiod I wouldn't want to face those guys. What is interesting though, is that it is believed that it was a mushroom that overwhelmed their senses that made them go insane if you would want to call it that and lead them into their violent tendencies.

However, what is more interesting, when Christianity took over Northern Scandanavia they waited until the Viking leaders tried to curtail Berserkers which led to strife between what you call the mercenaries and regular Viking followers which allowed the Christian missionaries and soldiers to finish it off.

 

[Doryman]

Re: RE: Ethnic Group Definition

Actually, from what I've heard/learned, the idea of a Berserker seems to have been a myth that arose from stories about the Norhmen. And just to be anal, Viking isn't an adequate term to describe a people. It means "raiding"; so one isn't a Viking, one goes Viking.

Really Viking is a term similar to... say...Driving. Using it is wrong, It's like saying you're studying the history of the Drivings, to learn more about the Driving religion. It's a misused term that has entered into the English language. A Dane or Norseman was only a Viking when he was raiding sea-borne towns, when he settled thost towns, or went home, he was again a Dane or Norsemen.

 

[jimmoyer]

Doryman, Finder --- that history channel show on the
Beserkers says exactly what Doryman says about
the mis-understanding of the term Viking.

And it was due to the story of the Beserkers that
the Viking name, misused as it is, got the Rape-Rob-
and Pillage rap, especially when many of the Norse
were farmers and many had peaceful lives.

Viking was missused as a noun when it really was
a verb and was misused even more to label a very
diverse group.