From: george knysh
>>******GK: I don't remember Keza. But I do remember the
> >GK: In effect all we have here are statements
> >made in ca. 1200 and ca. 1275. The less said about
> >"lost internal royal sources" the better. The
> >Hungarian royals had very close contacts with their
> >Rus' counterparts in the 12th and 13th centuries
> >friendly and hostile). I for one am fairly certain
> >that the Anonymous' account of "the siege of Kyiv"
> >the Arpadians is borrowed from a misunderstood
> >in the Kyivan Chronicle (repeated in the Suzdalian
> >Chronicle) s.a. 898, which itself is only a brief
> >commentary about the name of a Kyivan hill...
> But what event in the anonymous P (P�sa?) notary's
> account as well as in the second chronicler's
> (Simon of K�za) could be put in connection with that
> belligerent events all over Hungary, the Balkans as*****GK: Some of these reflected real events, others
> well as central Europe (esp. South Germany, where
> of the 1st echelon Hung. chieftains were slain).
>*****GK: My point was that the Suzdalian mention of
> AFA the anonymous notary's story is concerned, the
> political statehood of Vlachs is that under a duke
> Gelou in Transylvania proper, i.e. East of the
> western mountains (already mentioned here today) and
> the dense forests over there (the "Igfon forest").
> story of the defeat of Gelou's weak army doesn't
> like that of a Kyivan siege.