PDA

View Full Version : The Vandals



White Falcon
Saturday, April 24th, 2004, 07:40 PM
Who were they and where did they vanished? Does anyone have something about the subject?

All I know is that they crossed into Africa and found a kingdom around 476 A.D.
and that they provably were of Germanic origin.

Attached map shows area of their kingdom.

Do you think that in areas of today Algeria , Tunisia , Sardinia or Corsica
there can be found a people wich ancestors are Vandals, or at least some genetic mark? How many numbers of Vandals have crossed into Africa?

Thanks


https://forums.skadi.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=112734&stc=1&d=1480492632

Vestmannr
Saturday, April 24th, 2004, 11:16 PM
I've heard it claimed that the Vandals were the same as the Wends, and thus a West Slavic people. I'd be interested to hear as well any info on the Vandals.

Awar
Sunday, April 25th, 2004, 12:30 AM
If I'm not mistaken, the Slavs make an appearance in Beowulf as 'the Wendols'.

White Preservationist
Sunday, April 25th, 2004, 09:18 AM
The vandals were one of the more amazing people of ancient times. At the time the huns invaded central europe the germanics could all understand each other and only slight dialects existed within so-called proto germanic. When the huns invaded the vandals took them selves upp and fled the huns. They went to spain via france and everywhere they went they had war with the people they met. They would rob the people so not to starve and when they left they would burn the houses, hence the word 'vandalism'.

In spain they lived for a time and andalucia is derived from them. Catalonia again is derived from Gothislandia or the land of the Goths.

The nation of 60 000 crossed the gibraltar straight after having worked for two years builing a fleet. As the had crossed they utterly subjugated the people they met and this germanic christian nation built a civilazation that would last about two centuries. Much like the vikings they would raid foriegn lands and so they pestered the romans who became irritated. After the fall of the rome Justintinous went with an army of 100 000 against the vandals, those who weren't killed were enslaved and assimilated into eastern roman empire and that was the end of the great vandals.

Odin Of Ossetia
Wednesday, May 12th, 2004, 08:50 PM
You make the very dubious connection between the Goths and Catalonia, in spite of that there is really very little resemblance between the two names, yet, at the same time, you blatantly overlook the very obvious similarity between the Vends (Wends) or Vendels and Vandals!


Incredible arrogance and Germanic ethno-centrism!


Not only the Goths were of Iranian and the Vandals of Slavic origin, but even the Suevis might have been Slavs; does not Suevi sound a lot like Slaveni or Sloveni? Eh?


Check this page to learn more:


http://michalw.narod.ru/SlavicSpain.html




PS - How come you spell Goths with a capital "G", but you don't spell Vandals with a capital "V"?

Do you like Iranians more than Slavs perhaps? :D

Vestmannr
Wednesday, May 12th, 2004, 09:23 PM
The Goths did have a Germanic language though, so if they are Iranian... I'd like to know how that happened. Maybe you mean they are kin to the Alans/Ossetians (Scythians) ? You do know that the Romans settled Alans (Ossetians) in certain places in France, Hungary, Italy, and Spain?

I'm sure the Vandals were Wends, a Slavic folk. But 'Suebi'? Their folklore says they are Celts. I think the genetic evidence suggests the same.. IOW, another Germanic/Celtic group.

Awar
Thursday, May 13th, 2004, 12:12 AM
The Goths did have a Germanic language though, so if they are Iranian... I'd like to know how that happened. Maybe you mean they are kin to the Alans/Ossetians (Scythians) ? You do know that the Romans settled Alans (Ossetians) in certain places in France, Hungary, Italy, and Spain?

I'm sure the Vandals were Wends, a Slavic folk. But 'Suebi'? Their folklore says they are Celts. I think the genetic evidence suggests the same.. IOW, another Germanic/Celtic group.

Actually, I'm pretty convinced that Serbs and Croats were Sarmatian ( Scythian Alan Iranian ) tribes that became Slavicized. Maybe there's a relation between the Serboi and the Suebi: one became Slavicized, the other maybe went through a different type of assimilation process.

Alans were present in the medieval Serbia, known as Yass mercenaries who even became Serbian nobles ( but that's beside the point, since it happened a lot later ).

Perhaps the name used for Alans in the Balkan area - the Yass... is in some way connected to the Yaziges ( another tribe who went into the Balkans ). Does anyone have some info about Yaziges?

Vojvoda
Thursday, May 13th, 2004, 12:42 AM
http://www.fastload.org/sl/Slavs.html

Odin Of Ossetia
Thursday, May 13th, 2004, 04:24 AM
Actually, I'm pretty convinced that Serbs and Croats were Sarmatian ( Scythian Alan Iranian ) tribes that became Slavicized. Maybe there's a relation between the Serboi and the Suebi: one became Slavicized, the other maybe went through a different type of assimilation process.

Alans were present in the medieval Serbia, known as Yass mercenaries who even became Serbian nobles ( but that's beside the point, since it happened a lot later ).

Perhaps the name used for Alans in the Balkan area - the Yass... is in some way connected to the Yaziges ( another tribe who went into the Balkans ). Does anyone have some info about Yaziges?



"Awar" Croats were originally an Indo-Aryan tribe from the north-western part of the Indian subcontinent. The Serbs might have been of Indo-Scythian origin.

But in any case, your claim is incorrect in that the Sarmatians were Iranians, but not really Alans per se; the latter were a separate Iranian people.

I also think that there is a greater similarity between Suevi and Sloveni (or Slaveni) than Serbi. If you pronounce these names you will see what I mean.

I think the Yaziges livedi in ancient times in what is now the big flat plain of central Hungary and Vojvodina. They were Iranians.


About the link provided by "Vojvoda" - I think the (mis-?)information it provides serves more to confuse people, than inform.



1) The "explanation" on the connection between the Vends and Vandals does not really explain anything. Typical example of what I mentioned above; "...the similarity of the names may be accidental" is a rather cynical and narrow-minded statement when one sees the clear Vend-Vendel-Vandal connection.


2) The Polish name for Silesia has nothing to do with Silingi. It is Slask and is derived from an old Slavic word for a slow flowing river. Whoever coined the Latin name for the region (and they did it a long time after the Silingi disappeared) intentionally made it look similar to the name of this tribe in order to create a non-existent connection.


3) Jordanes got it wrong. The Venedi and Sclaveni are not (and never were) two different branches of the Slavs, just two different names for Slavs used in different periods of time (the former in antiquity, the latter afterwards). The Antes were not even Slavs to begin with, but an Iranian people, perhaps a branch of the Alans.


4) Masurians are not even a separate nationality, just Poles who settled in Masuria. One might also want to add that Kashubians and Slovincians are both really Pomeranians, so they're not really separate nationalities either.



Check this page:


http://michalw.narod.ru/SlavicSpain.html



Thus, neither Croats nor Serbs were really Alans, but a certain people known as the Rus were.

beowulf_
Saturday, September 25th, 2004, 06:25 PM
The Vandales were for sure Germanic. I read that the Vandales only contributed
1% to the whole population of their empire in nortern Africa. Maybe anyone
here can provide a genetic study which provides informations about
"Germanic genes" like R1a in Northern Africa.

http://www.namweb.com.na/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Vandals
in German: http://www.kraeuter-und-gewuerze.de/Vandalen

PS I strongly recommend to set Odin of Ossetia and his Slavo-centric crap
on "ignore".

Vestmannr
Saturday, September 25th, 2004, 07:17 PM
Maybe anyone
here can provide a genetic study which provides informations about
"Germanic genes" like R1a in Northern Africa.

The only problem with that would be that R1a is *Slavic* genes, not Germanic. I is much more common with Germans than R1a, though many Germans are R1b (Celtic haplogroup.) Roughly, however R1a is Northern Germanics (Scandinavians) and Eastern Slavs (Russians), I is Southern Germanics, Southern and Western Slavs, and R1b is Celtics, Iberians, and Western Germanics. That leaves N3 as Finns, Hungarians, Estonians and Urals-folk, E3b/J2/F/G as various Mediterranean folk (Southern Spain, Southern Italy, Greece, etc.)

The linguistic evidence also still points towards Vandal = Wendel = Wends, and that the Vandals of North Africa originated in Wendish territory. So, most probably the folk of Mecklenberg/Western Pomerania today are the long lost cousins of the Vandals who stayed home. ;)

BTW - I'm R1b, from a subclade that is specific to Frisia... my best guess being with family history that I am a descendant of the Frisian cavalry on Hadrian's Wall. That's 'Germanic', right??? ;)

King Yngvar
Friday, October 22nd, 2004, 12:22 AM
Not only the Goths were of Iranian and the Vandals of Slavic originThe Goths were of Germanic origin and so was the Vandals.
Do you reject the link between Gøtaland or the Island of Gotland with the Goths that invaded the Roman Empire?

Triglav
Friday, October 22nd, 2004, 03:22 AM
The Vandales were for sure Germanic. I read that the Vandales only contributed
1% to the whole population of their empire in nortern Africa. Maybe anyone
here can provide a genetic study which provides informations about
"Germanic genes" like R1a in Northern Africa.

http://www.namweb.com.na/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Vandals
in German: http://www.kraeuter-und-gewuerze.de/Vandalen

PS I strongly recommend to set Odin of Ossetia and his Slavo-centric crap
on "ignore".

Yes. I concur that we should ignore his biased "Slavo-centric crap" and your "Germano-centric crap" (to use your wording) just as well. R1a is a common Slavic haplogroup, present in virtually all Slavic nations to a high degree, even though it was found in Scandinavians/Vikings as well. Attempting to postulate a Germanic genetic link on the basis of a common Slavic marker is ludicrous, though.

Take a look at these figures:

HG3 Frequencies in European, Central Asian and Mediterranean groups:

Poles...........54%
Russians........47%
Slovaks.........47%
Belarusians.....39%
Czechs..........38%
Slovenians......37%
Latvians........41%
Lithuanians.....34%
Norwegians......31%
Ukrainians......30%
Mari............29%
Estonians.......27%
Germans.........23%
Hungarians......22%
Lapps...........21%
Icelanders......21%
Romanians.......20%
Swedes..........18%
Chuvash.........18%
Yugoslavs.......16%
Dutchmen........13%
Bulgarians......12%
Finns...........10%
East Anglians....9%
Greeks...........8%
Scots............7%
Danes............7%
Georgians........6%
Armenians........6%
Turks............5%
Frenchmen........5%
Belgians.........4%
Ossetians........2%
Cypriots.........2%
Spaniards........2%
Italians.........1%
Portuguese.......1%
Irishmen.........1%
Cornish..........0%
Basques..........0%
Algerians........0%
North Africans...0%


(Rosser et al., Am J Hum Genet, 2000)

R1a in Scandinavia:
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2004-07/1090823397

...and many, many more.

NumberOne
Friday, October 22nd, 2004, 11:44 AM
Odin of Ossetia-

You stated that the Croats were originally an Indo-Aryan tribe from the northwestern Indian subcontinent. Could you provide a link to a source, or at least provide a little more details? Thanks.

:)

Odin Of Ossetia
Friday, October 22nd, 2004, 08:12 PM
The Goths were of Germanic origin and so was the Vandals.
Do you reject the link between Gøtaland or the Island of Gotland with the Goths that invaded the Roman Empire?





I have already presented my case on this page:


http://michalw.narod.ru/SlavicSpain.html



And there is also some additional evidence like:


Talking of genetics, a recent genetic study found that the Gothlanders are more closely related to Croats and Serbs, than they are to the Swedes-proper from northern Sweden. Don't you think this rings a bell?




(:o

Johannes de León
Friday, October 22nd, 2004, 08:30 PM
I have already presented my case on this page:

http://michalw.narod.ru/SlavicSpain.html
Have you ever wrote a post where this link wasn't included? :scratch

Triglav
Friday, October 22nd, 2004, 08:58 PM
Talking of genetics, a recent genetic study found that the Gothlanders are more closely related to Croats and Serbs, than they are to the Swedes-proper from northern Sweden. Don't you think this rings a bell?


(:o

Please post that study. Recent, you say? I hope it doesn't refer to Y-chromosome haplogroup I.

Genetics is still in its infancy, and can still not reliably prove such questionable links. One should not jump to conclusions.

Vojvoda
Friday, October 22nd, 2004, 10:12 PM
I hope it doesn't refer to Y-chromosome haplogroup I I think it does.Remeber Bora Milutinovic? I posted it on another forum ;) :D The website doesn't exist anymore but the author claimed that Cro-Magnids in Serbia have the sam accent as Gothlanders as well (:o Actually,check this link out...

http://www.angelfire.com/film/antro

Watch the movie

Odin Of Ossetia
Friday, October 22nd, 2004, 10:55 PM
I think it does.Remeber Bora Milutinovic? I posted it on another forum ;) :D The website doesn't exist anymore but the author claimed that Cro-Magnids in Serbia have the sam accent as Gothlanders as well (:o Actually,check this link out...

http://www.angelfire.com/film/antro




Actually, I don't know what you are talking about. The site you provided link to does not have this study, and I do not know what does it have to do with the subject.


The study was done by Western geneticists, not by any Serbs.


It was a while since I checked it, and do not remember where it was; sorry about it. Perhaps it is no longer around on the net. :(



;(

Vojvoda
Friday, October 22nd, 2004, 10:58 PM
Actually, I don't know what you are talking about Of course you don't.I replied to Triglav's post,not yours.

Odin Of Ossetia
Friday, October 22nd, 2004, 11:11 PM
Of course you don't.I replied to Triglav's post,not yours.




Do you know if this genetic study I mentioned is still on the Web, and if that is the case, where we can find it?



Link to my forum:


http://asaland.proboards26.com



:(

Triglav
Saturday, October 23rd, 2004, 12:38 AM
Do you know if this genetic study I mentioned is still on the Web, and if that is the case, where we can find it?



Here's a link to the study I was referring to:

http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/AJHG_2004_v75_Semino.pdf

As you can see, your far-fetched claims hold no water, unless, of course, you can prove the opposite.

Odin Of Ossetia
Saturday, October 23rd, 2004, 01:27 AM
Here's a link to the study I was referring to:

http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/AJHG_2004_v75_Semino.pdf

As you can see, your far-fetched claims hold no water, unless, of course, you can prove the opposite.




What claims are you referring to?


Is this really the study I was referring to?



I already proved a great deal.


:P



PS - Are you sure you really are a Slovene? Or are you just pretending to be one?

Triglav
Saturday, October 23rd, 2004, 01:33 AM
What claims are you referring to?


Is this really the study I was referring to?


You don't know which study you were referring to?



I already proved a great deal.


:P

I beg your pardon?



PS - Are you sure you really are a Slovene? Or are you just pretending to be one?

:lmao

Are you really a Pole and an Osset or just pretending to be one?

beowulf_
Saturday, October 23rd, 2004, 01:48 PM
[QUOTE=Triglav]Yes. I concur that we should ignore his biased "Slavo-centric crap" and your "Germano-centric crap" (to use your wording) just as well. R1a is a common Slavic haplogroup, present in virtually all Slavic nations to a high degree, even though it was found in Scandinavians/Vikings as well. Attempting to postulate a Germanic genetic link on the basis of a common Slavic marker is ludicrous, though.

Actually, I meant hg I1a (and hg I1c), not R1a as Frontiersmann corrected me.

android
Sunday, November 20th, 2005, 02:17 PM
were they east germanic?

Zyklop
Sunday, November 20th, 2005, 02:33 PM
Yes.

android
Sunday, November 20th, 2005, 02:51 PM
thank you, do you have more information on them?
maybe links?

Zyklop
Sunday, November 20th, 2005, 02:56 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandals

Gorm the Old
Sunday, November 20th, 2005, 03:49 PM
Fascinating. I had no idea that the Vandals were such an important and interesting folk. Live and learn !

Sigurdr
Saturday, December 17th, 2005, 02:33 PM
The first origin of the germanic tribe of the vandals go straight in the Jutlandic peninsula(demmark)in the nothern coastal district of Vendsyssel.
The sinister name is derivated from Van-daaler (men of the valleys),and a first ethno-genetic influx of that people could come from west sweden(actual coastal district of Halland?).
After let its original lands in jutland,the vandals go in central germany and from there another more consistent nucleus emigrated in poland,where meet and fight with slavic and celto-germanic tribes.
Then,they migrate in north italy,south france and finally in south west iberian peninsula,where they founded a kingdom that was called "andalusia".Another nucleus,from iberian peninsula,migrated in south italy(sardinia and sicily).
They,for a short time were allied(confaederati)of the romans,and the most influent and important chief was Genseric.

Weg
Saturday, December 17th, 2005, 03:47 PM
Also Vandals founded a Kingdom in Northern Africa including the Balearic islands, Corsica and Sardinia.

Nseag
Sunday, February 5th, 2006, 09:05 AM
The first origin of the germanic tribe of the vandals go straight in the Jutlandic peninsula(demmark)in the nothern coastal district of Vendsyssel.
The sinister name is derivated from Van-daaler (men of the valleys),and a first ethno-genetic influx of that people could come from west sweden(actual coastal district of Halland?).
After let its original lands in jutland,the vandals go in central germany and from there another more consistent nucleus emigrated in poland,where meet and fight with slavic and celto-germanic tribes.
Then,they migrate in north italy,south france and finally in south west iberian peninsula,where they founded a kingdom that was called "andalusia".Another nucleus,from iberian peninsula,migrated in south italy(sardinia and sicily).
They,for a short time were allied(confaederati)of the romans,and the most influent and important chief was Genseric.

The name of "Andalusia" leaves Vandalusia and this of Vandalus.

Nowadays even vandals descendants can be found with nórdic or semi-nórdic characteristics by andalusia

Johannes de León
Sunday, February 5th, 2006, 12:26 PM
The name of "Andalusia" leaves Vandalusia and this of Vandalus.
Where have you been the last fifty years? The Vandal link is largely, and I really mean largely, disregarded now. Plus it was somehow started by a Dutch author Reinhardt Dozy in the 19th century.


Nowadays even vandals descendants can be found with nórdic or semi-nórdic characteristics by andalusia
That's pretty amazing, taking into account they have been there for some twenty two years...

some_one_number_one
Friday, September 1st, 2006, 02:49 PM
In the Middle Ages and later there persisted a false belief that the Vandals were ancestors of the Poles and Slavic peoples. The belief seems to have originated for two reasons: first, confusion of the Venedes with Vandals, and second because the Venedes and Vandals lived in areas later settled by Poles. In 796 in the Annales Alamanici it is even stated: Pipinus ... perrexit in regionem Wandalorum, et ipsi Wandali venerunt obvium ("Pippin went to the region of the Vandals and the Vandals came to meet him"). In the Annales Sangallenses the same raid (dated to 795 is curtly summarised as Wandali conquisiti sunt ("The Vandals were destroyed")). This indicates unequivocally, that it is not the Vandals but the Avars who are being referred to.

Soon after, in the chronicles "Vandal" started to mean "Slav" (eg. in the same Annales Alamanici about a raid of Charlemagne in the country of the Polabian Slavs: perrexit in regionem Wandalorum). In 1056 Annales Augustani mentioned defeat of Germans with Slavic Lucics (?) as exercitus Saxonum a Wandalis trucidatur ("an army of Saxons is destroyed by Vandals"). In the chronicle of Adam of Bremen there is a longer sentence:

Sclavania igitur, amplissima Germaniae provintia, a Winulis incolitur, qui olim dicti sum Wandali; decies maior esse fertur nostra Saxonia, presertim si Boemiam et eos, qui trans Oddaram sunt, Polanos, quaia nec habitu nec lingua discrepant, in partem adiecreris Sclavaniae
that is: "Slavania (Slavic lands), the biggest from Germanic countries, is inhabited by Winnils, who were formerly called Vandals. It is supposed to be bigger than our Saxony, especially when it would include Bohemians and Polans across the Oder, since they are no different in customs and language".

In 983-993 Gerhard of Augsburg in Miracula Sancti Oudalrici (about saint Udalric) called Mieszko I dux Wandalorum, Misico nomine.

Probably the first man who directly mentioned supposedly Vandalic roots of Poland was the Polish chronicler Wincenty Kadlubek in the 12th century, who wrote that Poles were once called Vandals, because they live next to the river Vandalus (Vistula), and that river received its name from the mythical queen Vanda who committed suicide by drowning in it. A similar story was told by the author of Wielkopolska chronicle from the 14th century, and then Dzierzwa from Krakow in the 14th century, who tried to give Slavic etymology to all known Vandalic names, like deriving Vanda from węda, that is fishing-rod.

In 12th century also Gerwazy from Tilbury, English writer in Otia imperialia wrote that citizens of Poland are called and are calling themselves Vandals. Similar thoughts gave German historian Albert Krantz (1450-1517) in Wandalia sive historia de Wandalorum vera origine, variis gentibus, crebris a aptria migrationibus, regnis item, etc where who consequently connected history of ancient Vandals and Slavs. The same was repeated by Falvio Blondi from Italy, and then Maciej Miechowita in Tractatus de duabus Sarmatiis... from 1517. Other arguments that Vandals were Polish ancestors were supplied by Marcin Bielski in 15th century. The first Polish historian to deny any connection to Vandals and to criticise that idea was Marcin Kromer, bishop of Warmia, author of De origine et rebus gestis Polonorum from 1555.


from Wikipedia

I think Poles and Slovakians - the Weneds/Wenets(the lechian group without Czechs) are descendants of Slavs and German Wandals!

Dagna
Tuesday, October 9th, 2007, 11:37 AM
The Vandals


The Invasion of Gaul and Spain

Of the origins of the eastern Germanic Vandals, little is known. The term 'Vandilii' is used by Tacitus in his Germania, completed in AD 98 and seems to have been a general term applied to Eastern Germans.

They burst on to the stage of European history in dramatic fashion in AD 406 when, together with the Alans, the Suebi, the Alamanni and the Burgundians, they crossed the ice-bound Rhine into the Roman Empire. Two branches of the Vandal confederacy are mentioned; the Silings and the Asdings.

For the next two-and-a-half years, these various barbarian bands roamed unchecked across large parts of Gaul, in an orgy of devastation so vivid, that their name has remained synonymous with wanton destruction ever since. In 409 they crossed the Pyrenees into Spain and within two years we find the various conquering tribes dividing up their spoils, apparently by lot; While the Siling Vandals took the richest area, Baetica in the south, the Asdings, in company with the Suebi, had to make do with Galicia.

Attempts were made by the Romans to evict the Silings from southern Spain; this, after all, contained such important cities as Cordoba and Cadiz. Wallia and his Visigoths were sponsored to drive out the Vandals but in c.420, the Asdings moved south to rejoin their kindred, and the joint kingdom proved strong enough to be viable. In fact, the Vandals seem to have been content to plunder rather than to rule and they raided as far afield as Mauretania and the Balearic Islands. Only when they had exhausted even the riches of southern Spain did they move on, no doubt to hearty sighs of relief from the native population.

The Invasion of Africa

The Vandals were invited into Africa by a rebellious Roman warlord, Bonifatius, who was keen to recruit their support. Two brothers, Guntheric and Gaiseric, responded by organising an expedition which proved to be the largest ever sea-borne movement of a barbarian peoples. Guntheric died before the plans came to fruition but in Gaiseric the Vandals were left with a leader of immense ability - one of the ablest of all barbarian leaders.

So it was that in 428, some 80,000 Vandals and Alans, of whom probably 20,000 were combatants, landed near Tangier. There was little opposition and within two years, only Carthage and a couple of other cities were still holding out. By this time, the Vandals had been joined by a number of Spaniards and Moors, and a land which had known nothing but peace and prosperity for centuries was given over to plunder and massacre.

Carthage finally fell in 439, giving the Vandals a major naval base from which to raid the Western Mediterranean. This they did with their customary ferocity, culminating in the sack of Rome itself in 455.

Downfall

But in the end, the Vandals amounted to nothing more than raiders and plunderers. Unlike the Goths and the Franks, they proved unable to put down roots and enjoy the fruits of the lands they had conquered. When, in 533, Justinian sent Belisarius to invade the Vandal Kingdom, the great general destroyed it utterly. It left barely a trace behind.

"Vanity of vanities," Gelimer, the last King of the Vandals is said to have murmured, as he grovelled at Justinian's feet, "all is vanity."

See also: Gaiseric

http://www.fernweb.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mf/vandals.htm

Oswiu
Monday, July 7th, 2008, 03:06 PM
Of the origins of the Eastern Germanic Vandals, little is known. The term 'Vandilii' is used by Tacitus in his Germania, completed in AD 98 and seems to have been a general term applied to Eastern Germans.
The name deserves some attention. It looks suspiciously like Wenden/Venedii - terms used to describe Slavonic peoples before the Slav word became widespread (the Finns and Estonians still use it for the Russians).
Could it be that the Vandals had a Slavonic component? Might the name merely have been a nickname applied to them by Germanics living further west, jokingly confusing them with the Wends proper? Would the -il or -al in the name reflect the latter hypothesis, being a diminuitive marker (e.g. Hansel and Gretel)?
Have you heard any better theories?!? :confused:

Here's one, but lacking in argument:
VANDAL
1663, "willful destroyer of what is beautiful or venerable,"
from Vandals, name of Gmc. tribe that sacked Rome, 455, under Genseric,
from L. Vandalus (pl. Vandali), from the tribe's name for itself (O.E. Wendlas), from P.Gmc. *Wandal- "Wanderer."

"There does not seem to be in the story of the capture of Rome by the Vandals any justification for the charge of willful and objectless destruction of public buildings which is implied in the word 'vandalism.' It is probable that this charge grew out of the fierce persecution which was carried on by [the Vandal king] Gaiseric and his son against the Catholic Christians, and which is the darkest stain on their characters." ["Encyclopedia Britannica," 13th ed., 1926]

Vandalism is attested from 1798, from Fr. vandalisme, first used by Henri Grégoire, Bishop of Blois, c.1793. The verb vandalize is first recorded 1845.
From http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=vandal&searchmode=none


For the next two-and-a-half years, these various barbarian bands roamed unchecked across large parts of Gaul, in an orgy of devastation so vivid, that their name has remained synonymous with wanton destruction ever since.
I believe the orthodoxy is that they got the reputation because of what they allegedly did in Rome. Smashing statues and architecture. I doubt they made the effort in Gallia.

Two brothers, Guntheric and Gaiseric, responded by organising an expedition which proved to be the largest ever sea-borne movement of a barbarian peoples. Guntheric died before the plans came to fruition but in Gaiseric the Vandals were left with a leader of immense ability - one of the ablest of all barbarian leaders.
...
But in the end, the Vandals amounted to nothing more than raiders and plunderers. Unlike the Goths and the Franks, they proved unable to put down roots and enjoy the fruits of the lands they had conquered.
SO, able leaders, organisational skills, and yet nothing came out of it other than death and destruction? :confused:


When, in 533, Justinian sent Belisarius to invade the Vandal Kingdom, the great general destroyed it utterly. It left barely a trace behind.

Have the Vandals been getting undeserved bad press for centuries? Is it our duty to rehabilitate our dead kin?

The quote from the encyclopaedia above would appear to clear them of the charges connected with the sack of Rome, but what about North Africa?

To paraphrase a certain famous Internet Spaniard...;) here is the anti-Vandal view:
Northern Africa was long one of the richest provinces of the Imperium...
Until our cousins the Vandals got hold of it, that is! So important was the province to the Roman Government, that virtually all of the efforts of the Empire during the peak of the Barbarian invasions, were directed to save the provinces of the East and Tingitania. In 100 years of rule, the Vandals plundered and pillaged North Africa for all it was worth, halting the prosperity of that region, which never again recovered, and was easy prey to the advancing Arabs.

SO! Is this a fair reading of history, or is it a vile slander on our kin? Or is the truth far more complex? Was a potentially successful Vandal state in the making, or was the whole thing doomed from the beginning? Is Belisarius to blame?

Vingolf
Monday, July 7th, 2008, 10:47 PM
The name deserves some attention. It looks suspiciously like Wenden/Venedii - terms used to describe Slavonic peoples before the Slav word became widespread (the Finns and Estonians still use it for the Russians). Could it be that the Vandals had a Slavonic component? Might the name merely have been a nickname applied to them by Germanics living further west, jokingly confusing them with the Wends proper? Would the -il or -al in the name reflect the latter hypothesis, being a diminuitive marker (e.g. Hansel and Gretel)? Have you heard any better theories?!?
The Vandals came from Scandinavia, and may have left their name to the tiny region of Vendsyssel in the extreme north of Jutland, Denmark, possibly Vendel in Sweden. Their language seems to have been an East Germanic dialect similar to Gothic. Archaeology indicates similarities between the material found in Vendsyssel and that found in Silesia, the first attested settlement of the Vandals at the end of the 1st century BC.

The Norwegian landscape Hallingdal (*Haddingjadalr) refers to the Hasdings or Asdings (*hazdaz), applied to the royal family and one of two peoples of the Vandals, meaning "the long haired" (the other being the Silings, having bequeathed their name to Silesia). From the 3rd century to the 5th these two tribes led parallel, but separate, existences.

Oswiu
Monday, July 7th, 2008, 11:34 PM
The Norwegian landscape Hallingdal (*Haddingjadalr) refers to the Hasdings or Asdings (*hazdaz), applied to the royal family and one of two peoples of the Vandals, meaning "the long haired" (the other being the Silings, having bequeathed their name to Silesia). From the 3rd century to the 5th these two tribes led parallel, but separate, existences.
Sorry to be a pain, but can I press you for more detailed discussions of the etymologia? Even in another language would be alright, as I suppose I'd be able to follow it near enough. On the face of it, Silengen > Schlesien seems a bit of a stretch, after all. :confused:

Vingolf
Tuesday, July 8th, 2008, 11:09 AM
Sorry to be a pain, but can I press you for more detailed discussions of the etymologia?
All my sources tell the same above mentioned story, but you can check this out here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silingi):


According to most scholars, the Silingi lived in Lower Silesia, the term "Silesia" itself perhaps being derived from "Silingi" - from Silingi tribe the near river was named Silingula. [...] The name of the territory Silesia either derives from the Sleza River, or from Mount Sleza. The hill was a religious center of the Silingi, and derives its name from them. The hill that was the Silingi religious groove and which possibly lent the entire region the name Silesia, is situated south-south-east of modern day Wroclaw (Breslau). The Silingi lived north of the Carpathian Mountains, in what now is Silesia, the name of which can be traced back to the Silingi from the regional name "Schlesien" through intermediate Slavic forms.

Dagna
Thursday, July 10th, 2008, 07:33 PM
Procopius of Caesarea:
Gaiseric & The Vandal Conquest of North Africa, 406 - 477 CE

History of the Wars [written c. 550 CE], Book III, chapters iii-vii

Now the Vandals, dwelling about the Maeotic Lake [the Sea of Azov], since they were pressed by hunger, moved to the country of the Germans, who are now called Franks, and the river Rhine, associating with themselves the Alans, a Gothic people [Arkenberg: actually, they were one of the Indo-Iranian peoples]. Then from there, under the leadership of Godigisclus, they moved and settled in Hispania, which is the first land of the Roman Empire on the side of the ocean [406-07 CE]. At that time Honorius made an agreement with Godigisclus that they should settle there on condition that it should not be to the detriment of the country. But there was a law among the Romans, that if any persons should fail to keep their property in their own possession, and if, meanwhile, a time amounting to thirty years should pass, that these persons should thenceforth not be entitled to proceed against those who had forced them out, but they were excluded by demurrer from access to the court; and in view of this he established a law that whatever time should be spent by the Vandals in the Roman domain should not be spent by the Vandals in the Roman domain should not by any means be counted toward this thirty-year demurrer. And Honorius himself, when the West had been driven by him to this pass, died of disease [August 27, 423 CE].

Now before this, as it happened, the royal power had been shared by Honorius with Constantius, the husband of Placidia [Galla Placidia], the sister of Arcadius and himself; but he lived to exercise the power only a few days, and then, becoming seriously ill, he died [421 CE] while Honorius was still living, having never succeeded in saying or in doing anything worth recounting; for the time was not sufficient during which he lived in possession of the royal power. Now a son of this Constantius, Valentinian, a child just weaned, was being reared in the palace of Theodosius, but the members of the imperial court in Rome chose one of the soldiers there, John by name, as emperor. This man was both gentle and well-endowed with sagacity and thoroughly capable of valorous deeds. At any rate he held the tyranny five years [actually he only ruled eighteen months] and directed it with moderation, and he neither gave ear to slanderers nor did he do any unjust murder, willingly at least, nor did he set his hand to robbing men of money; but he did not prove able to do anything at all against the barbarians, since his relations with Byzantium were hostile. Against this John, Theodosius, the son of Arcadius [Theodosius II, reigned 408-450 CE], sent a great army and Aspar and Ardaburius, the son of Aspar, as generals, and wrested from him the tyranny and gave over the royal power to Valentinian, who was still a child [Valentinian III, reigned 423-455 CE].

And Valentinian took John alive, and he brought him out in the hippodrome of Aquileia with one of his hands cut off and caused him to ride in state on an ass, and then after he had suffered much ill treatment from the stage-performers there, both in word and in deed, he put him to death. Thus Valentinian took over the power of the West. But Placidia, his mother, had reared this emperor and educated him in an altogether effeminate manner, and in consequence he was filled with wickedness from childhood. For he associated mostly with sorcerers and those who busy themselves with the stars, and, being an extraordinarily zealous pursuer of love affairs with other men's wives, he conducted himself in a most indecent manner, although he was married to a woman of exceptional beauty. And not only was this true, but he also failed to recover for the empire anything of what had been wrested from it before, and he both lost Libya in addition to the territory previously lost and was himself destroyed. And when he perished, it fell to the lot of his wife and children to become captives. Now the disaster in Libya came about as follows.

There were two Roman generals, Aetius and Bonifacius, especially valiant men and in experience of many wars inferior to none of that time at least. These two came to be at variance in regard to matters of state, but they attained to such a degree of high-mindedness and excellence in every respect that if one should call either of them "the last of the Romans" he would not err, so true was it that all the excellent qualities of the Romans were summed up in these two men. One of these, Bonifacius, was appointed by Placidia general of all Libya. Now, this was not in accord with the wishes of Aetius, but he by no means disclosed the fact that it did not please him. For their hostility had not as yet come to light, but was concealed behind the countenance of each.

But when Bonifacius had got out of the way, Aetius slandered him to Placidia, saying that he was setting up a tyranny and had robbed her and the emperor of all Libya, and he said that it was very easy for her to find out the truth; for if she should summon Bonifacius to Rome, he would never come. And when the woman heard this, Aetius seemed to her to speak well and she acted accordingly. But Aetius, anticipating her, wrote to Bonifacius secretly that the mother of the emperor was plotting against him and wished to put him out of the way. And he predicted to him that there would be convincing proof of the plot; for he would be summoned very shortly for no reason at all. Such was the announcement of the letter. And Bonifacius did not disregard the message, for as soon as those arrived who were summoning him to the emperor, he refused to give heed to the emperor and his mother, disclosing to no one the warning of Aetius. So when Placidia heard this, she thought that Aetius was exceedingly well-disposed towards the emperor's cause and took under consideration the question of Bonifacius.

But Bonifacius, since it did not seem to him that he was able to array himself against the emperor, and since if he returned to Rome there was clearly no safety for him, began to lay plans so that, if possible, he might have a defensive alliance with the Vandals, who, as previously stated, had established themselves in Hispania not far from Libya. There Godigliscus had died and the royal power had fallen to his sons, Gontharis, who was born to him from his wedded wife, and Gaiseric, of illegitimate birth. But the former was still a child and not of very energetic temper, while Gaiseric had been excellently trained in warfare, and was the cleverest of all men. Bonifacius accordingly sent to Hispania those who were his own most intimate friends and gained the adherence of each of the sons of Godigisclus on terms of complete equality, it being agreed that each one of the three, holding a third part of Libya, should rule over his own subjects; but if a foe should come against any one of them to make war, that they should in common ward off the aggressors. On the basis of this agreement the Vandals crossed the strait at Gades [modern Cadíz] and came into Libya, and the Visigoths in later times settled in Hispania.

But in Rome the friends of Bonifacius, remembering the character of the man and considering how strange his action was, were greatly astonished to think that Bonifacius was setting up a tyranny, and some of them at the order of Placidia went to Carthage. There they met Bonifacius and saw the letter of Aetius, and after hearing the whole story they returned to Rome as quickly as they could and reported to Placidia how Bonifacius stood in relation to her. And though the woman was dumbfounded, she did nothing unpleasant to Aetius nor did she upbraid him for what he had done to the emperor's house, for he himself wielded great power and the affairs of the empire were already in an evil plight; but she disclosed to the friends of Bonifacius the advice Aetius had given, and, offering oaths and pledges of safety, entreated them to persuade the man, if they could, to return to his fatherland and not to permit the empire of the Romans to lie under the hand of barbarians.

And when Bonifacius heard this, he repented of his act and of his agreement with the barbarians, and he besought them incessantly, promising them everything, to remove from Libya. But since they did not receive his words with favor, but considered that they were being insulted, he was compelled to fight with them, and being defeated in battle, he retired to Hippo Regius [modern Bona], a strong city in the portion of Numidia that is on the sea. There the Vandals made camp under the leadership of Gaiseric and began a siege; for Gontharis had already died. And they say that he perished at the hand of his brother. The Vandals, however, do not agree with those who make this statement, but say that Gontharis was captured in battle by Germans in Hispania and impaled, and that Gaiseric was already sole ruler when he led the Vandals into Libya. This, indeed, I have heard from the Vandals, stated in this way. But after much time had passed by, since they were unable to secure Hippo Regius either by force or by surrender, and since at the same time they were being pressed by hunger, they raised the siege. And a little later Bonifacius and the Romans in Libya, since a numerous army had come from both Rome and Byzantium and Aspar with them as general, decided to renew the struggle, and a fierce battle was fought in which they were badly beaten by the enemy, and they made haste to flee as each one could. And Aspar betook himself homeward, and Bonifacius, coming before Placidia, acquitted himself of the suspicion, showing that it had arisen against him for no true cause.

So the Vandals, having wrested Libya from the Romans in this way, made it their own. And those of the enemy whom they took alive they reduced to slavery and held under guard. Among these happened to be Marcian, who later upon the death of Theodosius assumed the imperial power. At that time, however, Gaiseric commanded that the captives be brought into the king's courtyard, in order that it might be possible for him, by looking at them, to know what master each of them might serve without degradation. And when they were gathered under the open sky, about midday, the season being summer, they were distressed by the sun and sat down. And somewhere or other among them Marcian, quite neglected, was sleeping. Then an eagle flew over him spreading out his wings, as they say, and always remaining in the same place in the air he cast a shadow over Marcian alone. And Gaiseric, upon seeing from the upper storey what was happening, since he was an exceedingly discerning person, suspected that the thing was a divine manifestation, and summoning the man enquired of him who he might be. And he replied that he was a confidential adviser of Aspar; such a person the Romans call a "domesticus" in their own tongue. And when Gaiseric heard this and considered first the meaning of the bird's action, and then remembered how great power Aspar exercised in Byzantium, it became evident to him that the man was being led to royal power. He therefore by no means deemed it right to kill him, reasoning that, if he should remove him from the world, it would be very clear that the thing which the bird had done was nothing (for he would not honor with his shadow a king who was about to die straightaway), and he felt, too, that he would be killing him for no good cause; and if, on the other hand, it was fated that in later times the man should become king, it would never be within his power to inflict death upon him; for that which has been decided upon by God could never be prevented by a man's decision. But he bound Marcian by oaths that, if it should be in his power, he would never take up arms against the Vandals at least. Thus, then, Marcian was released and came to Byzantium, and when at a later time Theodosius died he received the empire. And in all other respects he proved himself a good emperor [reigned 450-457 CE], but he paid no attention at all to affairs in Libya. But this happened in later times.

At that time Gaiseric, after conquering Aspar and Bonifacius in battle, displayed a foresight worth recounting, whereby he made his good fortune most thoroughly secure. For fearing lest, if once again an army should come against him from both Rome and Byzantium, the Vandals might not be able to use the same strength and enjoy the same fortune (since human affairs are wont to be overturned by Heaven and to fail by reason of the weakness of men's bodies), he was not lifted up by the good fortune he had enjoyed, but rather became moderate because of what he feared, and so he made a treaty with the Emperor Valentinian providing that each year he should pay to the emperor tribute from Libya, and he delivered over one of his sons, Huneric, as a hostage to make this agreement binding. So Gaiseric both showed himself a brave man in the battle and guarded the victory as securely as possible, and, since the friendship between the two people increased greatly, he received back his son Huneric. And at Rome Placidia had died before this time, and after her, Valentinian, her son, also died, having no male offspring, but two daughters had been born to him from Eudoxia, the child of Theodosius. And I shall now relate in what manner Valentinian died.

There was a certain Maximus [Petronius Maximus, reigned 455 CE], a Roman senator, of the house of that Maximus [Emperor in Gaul, Britain, and Spain 383-388] who, while usurping the imperial power, was overthrown by the elder Theodosius [Theodosius I] and put to death, and on whose account also the Romans celebrate the annual festival named from the defeat of Maximus. This younger Maximus was married to a woman discreet in her ways and exceedingly famous for her beauty. For this reason a desire came over Valentinian to have her to wife. And since it was impossible, much as he wished it, to meet her, he plotted an unholy deed and carried it to fulfillment. For he summoned Maximus to the palace and sat down with him to a game of draughts, and a certain sum was set as a penalty for the loser; and the emperor won in this game, and receiving Maximus' ring as a pledge for the agreed amount, he sent it to his house, instructing the messenger to tell the wife of Maximus that her husband bade her come as quickly as possible to the palace to salute the queen Eudoxia. And she, judging by the ring that the message was from Maximus, entered her litter and was conveyed to the emperor's court. And she was received by those who had been assigned this service by the emperor, and led into a certain room far removed from the women's apartments, where Valentinian met her and raped her, much against her will. And she, after the outrage, went to her husband's house weeping and feeling the deepest possible grief because of her misfortune, and she cast many curses upon Maximus as having provided the cause for what had been done.

Maximus, accordingly, became exceedingly aggrieved at that which had come to pass, and straightway entered into a conspiracy against the emperor; but when he saw that Aetius was exceedingly powerful, for he had recently conquered Attila [at the Battle of Chalôns in 451 CE], who had invaded the Roman domain with a great army of Massagetae [i.e., Huns] and the other Scythians, the thought occurred to him that Aetius would be in the way of his undertaking. And upon considering this matter, it seemed to him that it was the first, paying no heed to the fact that the whole hope of the Romans centered in him. And since the eunuchs who were in attendance upon the emperor were well-disposed toward him, he persuaded the emperor by their devices that Aetius was setting on foot a revolution. And Valentinian, judging by nothing else than the power and valor of Aetius that the report was true, put the man to death [September 21, 454 CE]. Whereupon a certain Roman made himself famous by a saying which he uttered. For when the emperor enquired of him whether he had done well in putting Aetius to death, he replied saying that, as to this matter, he was not able to know whether he had done well or perhaps otherwise, but one thing he understood exceedingly well, that he had cut off his own right hand with the other.

Later on Maximus slew the emperor with no trouble and secured the tyranny [455 CE], and he married Eudoxia by force. For the wife to whom he had been wedded had died not long before. And on one occasion in private he made the statement to Eudoxia that it was all for the sake of her love that he had carried out all that he had done. And since she felt a repulsion for Maximus even before that time, and had been desirous of exacting vengeance from him for the wrong done Valentinian, his words made her swell with rage still more against him, and led her on to carry out her plot, since she had heard Maximus say that on account of her the misfortune had befallen her husband. And as soon as day came, she sent to Carthage entreating Gaiseric to avenge Valentinian, who had been destroyed by an unholy man, in a manner unworthy both of himself and of his imperial station, and to deliver her, since she was suffering unholy treatment at the hand of the tyrant. And she impressed it upon Gaiseric that, since he was a friend and ally and so great a calamity had befallen the imperial house, it was not a holy thing to fail to become an avenger. For from Byzantium she thought no vengeance would come, since Theodosius had already departed from the world and Marcian had taken over the empire [March 17, 455 CE].

And Gaiseric, for no other reason than that he suspected that much money would come to him, set sail for Italy with a great fleet. And going up to Rome, since no one stood in his way, he took possession of the palace. Now while Maximus was trying to flee, the Romans threw stones at him and killed him, and they cut off his head and each of his other members and divided them among themselves. But Gaiseric took Eudoxia captive, together with Eudocia and Placidia, the children of herself and Valentinian, and placing an exceedingly great amount of gold and other imperial treasure in his ships sailed to Carthage, having spared neither bronze nor anything else whatsoever in the palace. He plundered also the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, and tore off half of the roof. Now this roof was of bronze of the finest quality, and since gold was laid over it exceedingly thick, it shone as a magnificent and wonderful spectacle. But of the ships with Gaiseric, one, which was bearing the statutes, was lost, they say, but with all the others the Vandals reached port in the harbor of Carthage. Gaiseric then married Eudocia to Huneric, the elder of his sons; but the other of the two women, being the wife of Olybrius, a most distinguished man in the Roman senate, he sent to Byzantium together with her mother, Eudoxia, at the request of the emperor. Now the power of the East had fallen to Leo [Leo I, reigned 457-474 CE], who had been set in this position by Aspar, since Marcian had already passed from the world.

Afterwards Gaiseric devised the following scheme. He tore down the walls of all the cities in Libya except Carthage, so that neither the Libyans themselves, espousing the cause of the Romans, might have a strong base from which to begin a rebellion, nor those sent by the emperor have any ground for hoping to capture a city and by establishing a garrison in it to make trouble for the Vandals. Now at that time it seemed that he had counseled well and had ensured prosperity for the Vandals in the safest possible manner; but in later times when these cities, being without walls, were captured by Belisarius all the more easily and with less exertion, Gaiseric was then condemned to suffer much ridicule, and that which for the time he considered wise counsel turned out for him to be folly. For as fortunes change, men are always accustomed to change with them their judgments regarding what had been planned in the past. And among the Libyans all who happened to be men of note and conspicuous for their wealth he handed over as slaves, together with their estates and all their money, to his sons Huneric and Genzon. For Theodorus, the youngest son, had died already, being altogether without offspring, either male or female. And he robbed the rest of the Libyans of their estates, which were both very numerous and excellent, and distributed them among the nations of the Vandals, and as a result of this these lands have been called "Vandals' estates" up to the present time.

And it fell to the lot of those who had formerly possessed these lands to be in extreme poverty and to be at the same time free men; and they had the privilege of going away wheresoever they wished. And Gaiseric commanded that all the lands which he had given over to his sons and to the other Vandals should not be subject to any kind of taxation. But as much of the land as did not seem to him good he allowed to remain in the hands of the former owners, but assessed so large a sum to be paid on this land for taxes to the government that nothing whatever remained to those who retained their farms. And many of them were constantly being sent into exile or killed. For charges were brought against them of many sorts, and heavy ones too; but one charge seemed to be the greatest of all, that a man, having money of his own, was hiding it. Thus the Libyans were visited with every form of misfortune.

The Vandals and the Alans he arranged in companies, appointing over them no less than eighty captains, whom he called "chiliarchs" [i.e., "leaders of a thousand"], making it appear that his host of fighting men in active service amounted to eighty thousand. And yet the number of the Vandals and Alans was said in former times, at least, to amount to no more than fifty thousand men. However, after that time by their natural increase among themselves and by associating other barbarians with them they came to be an exceedingly numerous people. But the names of the Alans and all the other barbarians, except the Mauretanii, were united in the name of Vandals. At that time, after the death of Valentinian, Gaiseric gained the support of the Mauretanii, and every year at the beginning of spring he made invasions into Sicily and Italy, enslaving some of the cities, razing others to the ground, and plundering everything; and when the land had become destitute of men and of money, he invaded the domain of the emperor of the East. And so he plundered Illyricum and the most of the Peloponnesus and of the rest of Greece and all the islands which lie near it. And again he went off to Sicily and Italy, and kept plundering and pillaging all places in turn. And one day when he had embarked on his ship in the harbor of Carthage, and the sails were already being spread, the pilot asked him, they say, against what men in the world he bade them go. And he in reply said: "Plainly against those with whom God is angry." Thus without any cause he kept making invasions wherever chance might lead him.

And the Emperor Leo, wishing to punish the Vandals because of these things, was gathering an army against them; and they say that this army amounted to about one hundred thousand men. And he collected a fleet of ships from the whole of the eastern Mediterranean, showing real generosity to both soldiers and sailors, for he feared lest from a parsimonious policy some obstacle might arise to hinder him in his desire to carry out his punishment of the barbarians. Therefore, they say, thirteen hundred centenaria were expended by him to no purpose. But since it was not fated that the Vandals should be destroyed by this expedition, he made Basiliscus commander-in-chief, the brother of his wife Berine, a man who was extraordinarily desirous of the royal power, which he hoped would come to him without a struggle if he won the friendship of Aspar. For Aspar himself, being an adherent of the Arian faith, and having no intention of changing it for another, was unable to enter upon the imperial office, but he was easily strong enough to establish another in it, and it already seemed likely that he would plot against the Emperor Leo, who had given him offence. So they say that since Aspar was then fearful lest, if the Vandals were defeated, Leo should establish his power most securely, he repeatedly urged upon Basiliscus that he should spare the Vandals and Gaiseric.

Now before this time [468 CE.] Leo had already appointed and sent Anthemius as Emperor of the West [reigned 467-472 CE], a man of the senate of great wealth and high birth, in order that he might assist him in the Vandalic war. And yet Gaiseric kept asking and earnestly entreating that the imperial power be given to Olybrius, who was married to Placidia, the daughter of Valentinian [III], and on account of his relationship [his son-in-law] well-disposed toward him, and when he failed in this he was still more angry and kept plundering the whole land of the emperor. Now there was in Dalmatia a certain Marcellianus, one of the acquaintances of Aetius and a man of repute, who, after Aetius had died in the manner told above [III.iv.27], no longer deigned to yield obedience to the emperor, but beginning a revolution and detaching all the others from allegiance, held the power of Dalmatia himself, since no one dared encounter him. But the Emperor Leo at that time won over Marcellianus by very careful wheedling, and bade him go to the island of Sardinia, which was then subject to the Vandals. And he drove out the Vandals and gained possession of it with no great difficulty. And Heracleius was sent from Byzantium to Tripolis in Libya, and after conquering the Vandals of that district in battle, he easily captured the cities, and leaving his ships there, led his army on foot toward Carthage. Such, then, was the sequence of events which formed the prelude of the war.

But Basiliscus with his whole fleet put in at a town distant from Carthage no less than two hundred and eighty stades (now it so happened that a temple of Hermes had been there from of old, from which fact the place was named Mercurium; for the Romans called Hermes "Mercurius"), and if he had not purposely played the coward and hesitated, but had undertaken to go straight for Carthage, he would have captured it at the first onset, and he would have reduced the Vandals to subjection without their even thinking of resistance; so overcome was Gaiseric with awe of Leo as an invincible emperor, when the report was brought to him that Sardinia and Tripolis and been captured, and he saw the fleet of Basiliscus to be such as the Romans were said never to have had before. But, as it was, the general's hesitation, whether caused by cowardice or treachery, prevented this success. And Gaiseric, profiting by the negligence of Basiliscus, did as follows. Arming all his subjects in the best way he could, he filled his ships, but not all, for some he kept in readiness empty, and they were the ships which sailed most swiftly. And sending envoys to Basiliscus, he begged him to defer the war for the space of five days, in order that in meantime he might take counsel ad do those things which were especially desired by the emperor. They say, too, that he sent also a great amount of gold without the knowledge of the army of Basiliscus and thus purchased this armistice. And he did this, thinking, as actually did happen, that a favoring wind would rise for him during this time. And Basiliscus, either as doing a favor to Asper in accordance with what he had promised, or selling the moment of opportunity for money, or perhaps thinking it the better course, did as he was requested and remained quietly in the camp, awaiting the moment favorable to the enemy.

But the Vandals, as soon as the wind had arisen for them which they had been expecting during the time they lay at rest, raised their sails and, taking in tow the boats which, as has been stated above, they had made ready with no men in them, they sailed against the enemy. And when they came near, they set fire to the boats which they were towing, when their sails were bellied by the wind, and let them go against the Roman fleet. And since there were a great number of ships there, these boats easily spread fire wherever they struck, and were themselves readily destroyed together with those with which they came in contact. And as the fire advanced in this way the Roman fleet was filled with tumult, as was natural, and with a great din that rivaled the noise caused by the wind and the roaring of the flames, as the soldiers together with the sailors shouted orders to one another and pushed off with their poles the fire-boats and their own ships as well, which were being destroyed by one another in complete disorder. And already the Vandals too were at hand ramming and sinking the ships, and making booty of such of the soldiers as attempted to escape, and of their arms as well. But there were also some of the Romans who proved themselves brave men in this struggle, and most of all John, who was a general under Basiliscus and who had no share whatever in his treason. For a great throng having surrounded his ship, he stood on the deck, and turning from side to side kept killing very great numbers of the enemy from there, and when he perceived that the ship was being captured, he leaped with his whole equipment of arms from the deck into the sea. And though Genzon, the son of Gaiseric, entreated him earnestly not to do this, offering pledges and holding out promises of safety, he nevertheless threw himself into the sea, uttering this one word, that John would never come under the hands of dogs.

So this war came to an end, and Heracleius departed for home; for Marcellianus had been destroyed treacherously by one of his fellow-officers. And Basiliscus, coming to Byzantium, seated himself as a suppliant in the sanctuary of Christ the Great God, and although, by the intercession of Berine, the queen, he escaped this danger, he was not able at that time to reach the throne, the thing for the sake of which everything had been done by him. For the Emperor Leo not long afterwards destroyed both Aspar and Ardaburius in the palace, because he suspected that they were plotting against his life [471 CE]. Thus, then, did these events take place.

Now Anthemius, the emperor of the West, died at the hand of his son-in-law Ricimer [August 11, 472 CE], and Olybrius, succeeding to the throne, a short time afterward suffered the same fate. And when Leo also had died in Byzantium [October 10, 472 CE], the imperial office was taken over by the younger Leo [Leo II], the son of Zeno and Ariadne, the daughter of Leo I, while he was still only a few days old. And his father [Zeno, reigned 474-491 CE] having been chosen as partner in the royal power, the child forthwith passed from the world. Majorinus also deserves mention, who had gained the power of the West before this time [reigned 456-461 CE]. For this Majorinus, who surpassed in every virtue all who have ever been emperors of the Romans, did not bear lightly the loss of Libya, but collected a very considerable army against the Vandals and came to Liguria, intending himself to lead the army against the enemy. For Majorinus never showed the least hesitation before any task and least of all before the dangers of war. But thinking it not inexpedient for him to investigate first the strength of the Vandals and the character of Gaiseric and to discover how the Mauretanii and the Libyans stood with regard to friendship or hostility toward the Romans, he decided to trust no eyes other than his own in such a matter.

Accordingly he set out as if an envoy from the emperor to Gaiseric, assuming some fictitious name. And fearing lest, by becoming known, he should himself receive some harm and at the same time prevent the success of the enterprise, he devised the following scheme. His hair, which was famous among all men as being so fair as to resemble pure gold, he anointed with some kind of dye, which was especially invented for this purpose, and so succeeded completely in changing it for the time to a dark hue. And when he came before Gaiseric, the barbarian attempted in many ways to terrify him, and, in particular, while treating him with engaging attention, as if a friend, he brought him into the house where all his weapons were stored, a numerous and exceedingly noteworthy array. Thereupon they say that the weapons shook of their own accord and gave forth a sound of no ordinary or casual sort, and then it seemed to Gaiseric that there had been an earthquake, but when he got outside and made enquiries concerning the earthquake, since no one else agreed with him, a great wonder, they say, come over him, but he was not able to comprehend the meaning of what had happened.

So Majorinus, having accomplished the very things he wished, returned to Liguria, and, leading his army on foot, came to the Pillars of Hercules, purposing to cross over the strait at that point, and then to march by land from there against Carthage. And when Gaiseric became aware of this, and perceived he had been tricked by Majorinus in the matter of the embassy, he became alarmed and made his preparations for war. And the Romans, basing their confidence on the valor of Majorinus, already began to have fair hopes of recovering Libya for the empire. But meantime Majorinus was attacked by the disease of dysentery and died [461 CE], a man who had shown himself moderate toward his subjects, and an object of fear to his enemies.

And another emperor, Nepos, upon taking over the empire [July 24, 474 CE], living to enjoy it only a few days, died of disease, and Glycerius after him entered into this office and suffered a similar fate [474-475 CE]. And after him Augustus [Romulus Augustulus, 475-476 CE] assumed the imperial power. There were, moreover, still other emperors in the West before this time, but though I know their names well, I shall make no mention of them whatever. For it so fell out that they lived only a short time after attaining the office, and as a result of this accomplished nothing worthy of mention. Such was the course of events in the west.

But in Byzantium Basiliscus, being no longer able to master his passion for royal power, made an attempt to usurp the throne, and succeeded without difficulty, since Zeno, together with his wife, sought refuge in Isauria, which was his native home. And while he was maintaining his tyranny for a year and eight months he was detested by practically everyone and in particular by the soldiers of the court on account of the greatness of his avarice. And Zeno, perceiving this, collected an army and came against him. And Basiliscus sent an army under the general Harmatus in order to array himself against Zeno. But when they had made camp near one another, Harmatus surrendered his army to Zeno, on the condition that Zeno should appoint as Caesar Harmatus' son Basiliscus, who was a very young child, and leave him as successor to the throne upon his death. And Basiliscus, deserted by all, fled for refuge to the same sanctuary as formerly. And Acacius, the priest of the city, put him into the hands of Zeno, charging him with impiety and with having brought great confusion and many innovations into the Christian doctrine, having inclined toward the heresy of Eutyches. And this was so. And after Zeno had thus taken over the empire a second time, he carried out his pledge to Harmatus formally by appointing his son Basiliscus Caesar, but not long afterwards he stripped him of the office and put Harmatus to death. And he sent Basiliscus together with his children and his wife into Cappadocia in the winter season, commanding that they should be destitute of food and clothes and every kind of care. And there, being hard pressed by both cold and hunger, they took refuge in one another's arms, and embracing their loved ones, perished. And this punishment overtook Basiliscus for the policy he had pursued. These things, however, happened in later times.

But at that time Gaiseric was plundering the whole Roman domain just as much as before, if not more, circumventing his enemy by craft and driving them out of their possessions by force, as has been previously said, and he continued to do so until the emperor Zeno came to an agreement with him and an endless peace was established between them, by which it was provided that the Vandals should never in all time perform any hostile act against the Romans nor suffer such a thing at their hands. And this peace was preserved by Zeno himself and also by his successor in the empire, Anastasius. And it remained in force until the time of the emperor Justinus. But Justinian, who was the nephew of Justinus, succeeded him in the imperial power, and it was in the reign of this Justinian that the war with which we are concerned came to pass, in the manner which will be told in the following narrative.

Gaiseric, after living on a short time, died at an advanced age, having made a will in which he enjoined many things upon the Vandals and in particular that the royal power among them should always fall to that one who should be the first in years among all the male offspring descended from Gaiseric himself. So Gaiseric, having ruled over the Vandals thirty-nine years from the time when he captured Carthage, died, as I have said [477 CE]

Source:

From: Procopius, History of the Wars, 7 vols., trans. H. B. Dewing (Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard University Press & Wm. Heinemann, 1914; reprint ed., 1953-54), II.23-73.

Scanned by: J. S. Arkenberg, Dept. of History, Cal. State Fullerton. Prof. Arkenberg has modernized the text.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/procopius-vandals.html

Dagna
Saturday, October 24th, 2009, 12:33 AM
Exhibition explores Vandal legacy

Being billed as the most comprehensive exhibition about the Vandal civilisation ever, a new show about the notorious Germanic tribe opens on Friday at Baden's state museum in Karlsruhe.

The word “vandal” these days is associated with acts of senseless violence and destruction. However, this new exhibition explores the history behind the actual Vandals, a Germanic civilisation that stretched across Eastern Europe to North Africa in the 5th century. "The Vandal Kingdom" hopes to offer visitors a new perspective on this unfamiliar culture and infamous word.

Curator Astrid Wenzel said the show in Karlsruhe is the first of its kind. “Throughout the world, there has never been such an exhibition about the Vandals,” said Wenzel, who is an archaeologist. The museum employed a ten-strong team to prepare the unique items sent from Tunisia, Algeria, Italy, Spain and the United States.

http://www.thelocal.de/gallery/news/705/.

Despite the Vandals' terrible reputation, Wenzel said the violence they administered across much of Europe was "no worse than other migrating tribes.”

In the 4th and 5th centuries AD, raiding and plundering was the most common way to acquire material assets for various Germanic groups and the rich but weakened Roman Empire seemed particularly appealing to the Vandals. Wenzel said the Vandals performed a "logistical masterpiece" in 429 when 80,000 tribesmen crossed from Spain to North Africa in commandeered ships.

The exhibition shows how the Vandals also adopted the Christian faith on their journey from the area that is today’s Poland, across Germany, France, Italy, Spain and finally to Africa. It features early Christian relics from Tunisia, in addition to some 300 other items, such as stone sarcophagi, precious jewellery, mosaics and ceramics.

The exhibition will runs until February 21.

http://www.thelocal.de/society/20091023-22779.html

Mærwig
Sunday, May 23rd, 2010, 10:48 AM
After the Vandals were finally defeated and their North African Kingdom annihilated, the survivors didn't just vanish. Some of them fled to the nearby mountains and remained there, interbreeding with the local Berbers. The Berbers themselves are not a tribe but an alliance of local tribes among which are the Kabyles. If you see Kabyles today, a lot of them have fair hair and blue eyes. This may be what is left of Genseric's folks.

BMWkid
Friday, May 4th, 2012, 03:39 AM
[Moderation note: Merged threads]

So what ever happen to these people? When the Vandals arrived in North Africa they set up a kingdom but I suppose they don't exist anymore they intermarried with the local Berber people. Although I have seen photos of Nordic looking North Africans with blonde hair and blue eyes so maybe they live on.

Halldorr
Friday, May 4th, 2012, 10:40 PM
If you want to learn the history of the Vandals, go to You-Tube. The History channel had a series on the Germanic tribes and one of the shows was about the Vandals. It is on You-Tube now. It is called Barbarians-The Vandals. Videos are always better than reading about them.

There were 2 groups of Vandals who lived around the Baltic sea around the 1st century. One group called themselves the Siling Vandals. The 2nd group called themselves the Asdings. According to the Encyclopedia Brittianica, they spoke the Gothic language. This is the time that they first came into contact with the Goths. The Goths moved them out of the area the Goths wanted to live in.
In 406, the Vandals crossed the Rhine into Gaul and raided for 2 years without hindrance. Then they crossed the Pyrenees into Spain. 2 more years of raiding passed before they ran into the Goths for a 2nd time. Apparently hired by the Romans to stop the raiding. The Goths almost completely annihilated the Silings. This was right after the Goths had sacked Rome in 410. At this time the Goths had a reputation all across Europe for being almost invincible. One would think they would have avoided the Goths, but they didn't and it cost them.

The Asding Vandals under Gaerisic fled into southern Spain and sacked the coastal towns and "acquired" the ships in their harbors. Then they were able to cross into north Africa. You can pick up the story from there on You-Tube.

Above info from "Everyday Life of the Barbarians, Goths, Vandals and Franks".

BMWkid
Saturday, May 5th, 2012, 08:27 AM
Thank you! I will definitely watch the video! The history behind it is fascinating. I think it's really cool that they went from the Baltic and eventually established a kingdom in North Africa.

Catterick
Monday, April 18th, 2016, 05:45 PM
Carleton Coon suggested the Shawia to be particularly Vandal, don't know how much this is borne out by genetics though. Usually the only Berber group genetics anthros reference is the Mozabites assuming they represent all Berber speakers which is a bit unwarranted.

Thulean Imperial Inquisitor
Monday, July 18th, 2016, 09:08 PM
I didn´t know Germanics had conquered Africa in ancient times.

Catterick
Wednesday, July 20th, 2016, 12:48 AM
I didn´t know Germanics had conquered Africa in ancient times.

Only Tunisia and such. Not much remains of the Vandal era but they were respected as poets.