![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 2006 April 29. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
This article is not npov. It advocates by including too many counter-arguments. Now, I couldn't care less about the topic, but I feel that the "principle of reaching objectivity" is not taken into account during the production of the article. What "real encyclopedia" (and Wikipedia is a VERY real encyclopedia) has a conclusion in any of its articles? None that I've read. - Sigg3.net 14:30, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This theory derives from the nazi "archaeologist" Darré, Hans Reinerth and Eric Oxenstierna. The Swedish nazi amateure Carl-Otto Fast and more recent pronazi dillettants are still using this sick theory. It has nothing to do with facts. It must be deleted.
Several interesting notes have been raised against the common theory of Svealand being the ancient home of Sveas and the Ása cult, e.g. the following:
1 |
In some ancient sources (
Tacitus'
Germania), the tribe or country of Suiones, Sveoner, or Sveas, are said to be living side by side with a different people, the Sitones, who are ruled and governed by women. |
2 |
The same type of burial customs, the big mounds containing ashes in an urn, is not known in other parts of south and middle Sweden prior to the big mounds in Gamla Uppsala, but there are in fact the same type of mounds found further to the north, securely dated to the 3rd century A.D. Similar mounds are also dated to 200–300 A.D. in western Norway. This might indicate that the customs of big mounds had come from the north of Sweden to the south, rather than the opposite as could be expected for an expanding tribe of Sveas in Uppland. In fact, the burial customs could well indicate that they are the remains of the Sitones, perhaps stemming from the Bronze Age since the burial customs correspond with those of the urn field culture in Europe during the younger bronze age and pre-Roman Iron Age. |
3 |
When Odin came to the kingdom of
Gylfi, he got the land by help of
Gefjon, who "ploughed the land westwards into the sea, leaving a whole in the land that became a sea", and that this land became Sjælland, said to be the increase of
Denmark. Furthermore, the myth says that "bays of Sjælland lies like capes in the sea". Even today, any professional would find it hard to fit Sjælland of Denmark into Mälaren of Sweden. |
4 |
Written in English, the name Logen/Lagen for the great sea in Snorri's sagas is very easily deducted to be just that, not a name of a special lake, but the only real notion needed; it is the lake—the greatest of them all, Vänern. |
5 |
Adam of Bremen also described the trade center Birka, as the town where the first bishop Ansgar during the 9th century was supposed to have come to declare Christianity among the heathen people of the north.
|
This kind of promoting serves no purpose on Wikipedia. / Fred- Chess 21:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't know a lot of this "Götaland hypothesis" (which might be a better name for it than calling it a theory?), but as science mostly is right, I suppose it is right with regard to this question too. However, I find the tone of the article problematic. Between the lines I see tendencies of the author mainly wanting to ridicule and pointing fingers to the theory's supporters, rather than only presenting historical facts. It is hard for me to prove this feel though, partly as English is only my 3rd or 4th language, but I would appreciate a rewrite of some of the text's sentences/paragraphs, with regard to this issue. Even articles on the worst forms of misleading scientific nonsense (if that characterizes the Götaland hypothesis), should be written in a neutral tone. Fomalhaut76 ( talk) 09:47, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 2006 April 29. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
This article is not npov. It advocates by including too many counter-arguments. Now, I couldn't care less about the topic, but I feel that the "principle of reaching objectivity" is not taken into account during the production of the article. What "real encyclopedia" (and Wikipedia is a VERY real encyclopedia) has a conclusion in any of its articles? None that I've read. - Sigg3.net 14:30, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This theory derives from the nazi "archaeologist" Darré, Hans Reinerth and Eric Oxenstierna. The Swedish nazi amateure Carl-Otto Fast and more recent pronazi dillettants are still using this sick theory. It has nothing to do with facts. It must be deleted.
Several interesting notes have been raised against the common theory of Svealand being the ancient home of Sveas and the Ása cult, e.g. the following:
1 |
In some ancient sources (
Tacitus'
Germania), the tribe or country of Suiones, Sveoner, or Sveas, are said to be living side by side with a different people, the Sitones, who are ruled and governed by women. |
2 |
The same type of burial customs, the big mounds containing ashes in an urn, is not known in other parts of south and middle Sweden prior to the big mounds in Gamla Uppsala, but there are in fact the same type of mounds found further to the north, securely dated to the 3rd century A.D. Similar mounds are also dated to 200–300 A.D. in western Norway. This might indicate that the customs of big mounds had come from the north of Sweden to the south, rather than the opposite as could be expected for an expanding tribe of Sveas in Uppland. In fact, the burial customs could well indicate that they are the remains of the Sitones, perhaps stemming from the Bronze Age since the burial customs correspond with those of the urn field culture in Europe during the younger bronze age and pre-Roman Iron Age. |
3 |
When Odin came to the kingdom of
Gylfi, he got the land by help of
Gefjon, who "ploughed the land westwards into the sea, leaving a whole in the land that became a sea", and that this land became Sjælland, said to be the increase of
Denmark. Furthermore, the myth says that "bays of Sjælland lies like capes in the sea". Even today, any professional would find it hard to fit Sjælland of Denmark into Mälaren of Sweden. |
4 |
Written in English, the name Logen/Lagen for the great sea in Snorri's sagas is very easily deducted to be just that, not a name of a special lake, but the only real notion needed; it is the lake—the greatest of them all, Vänern. |
5 |
Adam of Bremen also described the trade center Birka, as the town where the first bishop Ansgar during the 9th century was supposed to have come to declare Christianity among the heathen people of the north.
|
This kind of promoting serves no purpose on Wikipedia. / Fred- Chess 21:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't know a lot of this "Götaland hypothesis" (which might be a better name for it than calling it a theory?), but as science mostly is right, I suppose it is right with regard to this question too. However, I find the tone of the article problematic. Between the lines I see tendencies of the author mainly wanting to ridicule and pointing fingers to the theory's supporters, rather than only presenting historical facts. It is hard for me to prove this feel though, partly as English is only my 3rd or 4th language, but I would appreciate a rewrite of some of the text's sentences/paragraphs, with regard to this issue. Even articles on the worst forms of misleading scientific nonsense (if that characterizes the Götaland hypothesis), should be written in a neutral tone. Fomalhaut76 ( talk) 09:47, 9 April 2015 (UTC)