Earlier this year, archeologists announced the discovery (in 2019 near the village of Cichobórz by Lublin) of a treasure containing about 1753 “pieces” (or about 2.2 pounds worth of Roman denarii) from the 1st to 2nd century A.D. The assumption is that this treasure trove was hidden around the end of the 2nd or at the beginning of the 3rd century.
Now, the above is not disputed but then comes the following statement from local archeologist and Gothomaniac Kokowski:
“Shock, incredulity, happiness and elation; but in the back of my head [the word] ‘finally!’ My whole theory about the first battle for Hrubieszów Valley [between Vandals and Goths] has been given another strong argument. The retreating or rather fleeing Vandals were in such dire straits that they were hiding their valuables. Immediately after, there was a battle at Przewodowo; they buried Vandal warriors at Podlodów, Swaryczów and Tuczapy… It appears that its precisely here that the Vandals lost the [material] means for further warfare!”
Of course, no one can blame an archeologist for getting so excited. The find is remarkable and no doubt interesting and important for the history of the region. We cana hope that the local museums can use it to give us all a sharper glimpse of the area in pre-historic times.
But, as they say, “BUT…”.
And the ‘but’ here is rather large. In fact, there are two ‘but’s.
The first objection is that the find consists of less than 2,000 denarii. The pay of a legionary in at the end of the first century reached about 300 denarii annually. It was about 400 at the time of Septimius Severus (whose coins were found at the site and whose reign, therefore, provides a possible earliest dating for the treasure) at the beginning of the 3rd century. And it was 600 denarii at the time of Caracalla who followed Severus. (Of course, because of the debasement of silver coins in the later Roman army the real pay had not improved that much). If these events were happening at the beginning of the 3rd century, even assuming that local warriors’ pay would have been far less than a Roman legionary’s (obviously it also varied among units and based on rank), it is still hard to see how this treasure could have paid for more than a few people at most. No doubt the money was worth a lot to some local tribesman, maybe even a chieftain, but to suggest that anybody’s war machine would have been impacted by the loss of even a few thousand coins is, well, silly.
There is, as readers of this site, well know, a much bigger objection to Kokowski’s characterization. There is namely no reason to believe that there were ever any such tribe as “Vandals” in Poland (with the possible – though not probable – exception of the south western portions of the country). One might even go to say that there is no reason to believe that there was such a thing as Vandals at the beginning of the 3rd century. For either of those reasons, there is, it follows, then also no evidence that Vandals and Goths fought anywhere in the region where these finds were made (and this even assuming there were “Goths in that location – also a quiet unproven hypothesis!).
Of course, Kokowski already went on the record parroting Wolfram’s and other earlier confabulators’ dreams of a “Lugian/Legian” – Vandal connection (in Wandale – Lugiowie – kultura przeworska) so his position is, if anything, consistent. For a discussion of the background of some (and, let’s be honest, possible motivations) of the authorities on which Kokowski principally relied on (for example, Mr. Martin Jahn), see this post. In any event, there is no reason to connect the Przeworsk culture to any hypothetical Vandals.
In other words, this is all made up wishful thinking to prove an existing and highly doubtful pet theory.
(And to be clear, I have no problem with Vandals or, for that matter Goths, in Poland. History is what it is but the burden of proof should be on the person positing such a claim and, so far, the burden has not even begun to be met).
Regarding “Vandals” in Poland see this series:
For a more recent work on the Vandals, you check out Roland Steinachers book of the same name. Incidentally, Steinacher says the following there about the Vandals:
“Altogether, it is difficult to believe that a single people may be responsible for such a widespread and culturally variant archeological culture. A hard to pin down more precisely mixture of proto-Suavic, Germanic-speaking and Celtic peoples may have shared a common material culture… If one could in fact establish a connection between Pliny’s and Tacitus’ Vandili* and the Przeworsk culture, if these people could be connected to those which a few centuries later appeared on the Danube and the Rhein and finally conquered Carthage, then the Vandals would have a long pre-history. Such connections, however, cannot be established.”
* As mentioned already here, Tacitus does not mention the Vandals as a tribe still in existence in his time (about 98 A.D.) and Pliny’s manuscripts are inconsistent with some mentioning Vindili and even Vandalici and Vandilici – a name that is suspiciously close to Vindilici of Vindebona.
Copyright ©2020 jassa.org All Rights Reserved