--- m_iacomi <
m_iacomi@...> wrote:
> Of course, if both cities were white-shaped, the
> dichotomy
> in names could only arise from geographical reasons.
> However,
> Constantine doesn't speak about a "Black" city, only
> about a
> white one in a definitely colour-based
> interpretation. That's
> why I think more plausible the "colour link" to
> C.A./B.D..
****GK:And the fact that Constantine doesn't speak of
a "black" city across the river from the "white" city
would be an additional argument in favour of Dnipro
rather than Dnister being the correct location for
this passage, since we know nothing of a "black" city
on the Lower Dnipro.*****
>
> Summarizing, I think the material is still
> subjected to
> one or another interpretation, and one cannot
> dismiss or
> totally sustain any of the two possibilities
> previously
> discussed (Dnestr/Dnepr). If you agree on this
> point, I
> think it would be about time to finish this thread.
>
> Regards,
> Marius Iacomi
*****GK: I am comfortable with Shlapak's view about
the impossibility of concluding anything definitive
about the history of Bilhorod Dnistrovs'kyj prior to
the second half of the 13th c. (I'll have a brief
follow up on this shortly). I am also convinced by her
claim that even if Constantine Porphyrogenitus was
thinking about a city on the Dnister called "Aspron",
that city, as a functioning fortress in the 10th c.,
would not have been an "abandoned" city (in other
words Constantine might have confused the Tira ruins
with "Aspron".) As for the reasons for J/M's choice of
manuscript readings I'll leave that open for a bit
until I've had the opportunity to look at their
edition again. Perhaps there are indications which
would preclude speculation about their
motivations.*****
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com