Reviewing the Beyträge zur teutschen Länder-, Völker-, Sitten- und Staaten-Kunde we’ve come across a rather interesting confession of the writers located in a small footnote:
“We must here expressly repeat that the Slavic etymon, also in the southern districts and in the mountains all the way till the Bodensee [Lacus Veneticus], is noticeably ancient [and] in our view could not [possibly] have first established itself in the recorded events of the eighth century. When in the middle of the seventh century Saint Emmeram wanted to travel from France over Bavaria to the Slavs, he picked up, already at the Rhein, as a translator [one] Vitalis, a priest capable of speaking Slavic.”
That Vitalis really did speak Slavic is likely but whether that indicated the presence of large quantities of Slavic speakers on the Rhine itself (see here) is not certain.
The Vita does say that Vitalis was an interpreter for Emmeram and Emmeram was heading to see some Slavs in the Bamberg (Babenburg). Presumably, Emmeram did not need an interpreter for the Thuringians or Bavarians…
“tunc relegiosus suus presbyter et interpres… nomine Vitalis”
Copyright ©2016 jassa.org All Rights Reserved
“…he picked up, already at the Rhein, as a translator [one] Vitalis, a priest capable of speaking Slavic” is this the opinion of the author of this “Beyträge..”? Do you know on what basis he came to such conclusions? By the way, in the Westfrankish annales Rhein/Rhenum was written by H-Rhenum –> Hren H/Gran Granica; “border river”. This etymology confirms the above and Your discovery at the Slavic villages around the Bodensee!
It was his opinion. “tunc relegiosus suus presbyter et interpres… nomine Vitalis”