--- In cybalist@..., tgpedersen@... wrote:
> From the commentary in H.E.Davidson's translation
> 2.6 The Rutenians wre the inhabitants of Russia. The continued in
use
> up to recent times for Russians living on the south-west flanks of
> the Carpathians, formerly part of Czekoslovakia and now included in
> the USSR.
> TP: What a silly woman. This is obviously wrong.
I don't know who Mr.Davidson is (but obviously NOT a Slavic
ethnogenesis expert) and why you probably think it's a killer name
here. You perfectly know that a reference to an authority (?) is an
argument in a religious, political, well, may be family discussion,
but isn't a proper substitute for facts and logical conclusions.
Since it's getting ridiculous, would you (you and Mr. Davidson)
clarify the situation before we go any further:
1. to what time do you ascribe the events described by Saxo (within a
century, at least). This is the most important point of our desperate
discussion.
2. When travelling around the West Ukraine (especially on the south-
west flanks of the Carpathians) please don't tell them they're
Russians - you'll have to run for your life. Please think of them as
West Ukrainians. And of course they live in the Rebublic of Ukrain,
not the non-existing USSR.
> 2.8 [...] Elton identified Rotala with Rötel in Estonia (modern
> Haapsalu)
> 2.9 Saxo's Paltisca is Polotsk in Russia. A hill-fort existed there
> at an early date, and the settlement became a trading centre in te
> course of the Viking Age.
That's exactly what I wrote (but please infrom Mr. Davidson or Elton
it's in Byelorussia, not Russia and it's official Byelorussian name
is Polack, Polotsk being it's Russian name); but, unlike you and Mr.
X, I didn't use the verb IS. 'Probably', one should say. Let me
repeat: Old Russian (ancestor of both Russian and Byelorussian, in
case you or Mr. X don't know) form of this toponym is PolotIskU (not
**PoltIskU). It's a problem.
Then, I'm 100% sure that these Mr. D and Mr. E. didn't comment the
name of the ruler of Poltsk Ruthenians (Vespasius). Guess why.
Slavic etymologies don't fit here, but a Baltic fits perfectly -
*Veis'patis 'lord', which Saxo's informer took for a proper name
(that's very probably typologically). Plain latin {s} for Baltic {s'}
may indicate Yatvingians or Latgals here (unless just a lack of an
orthographical device, but Latgals don't fit by other reasons I
mentioned in one of the previous postings). Yatvingians (Suduvians),
Balt. *Ja:tvi-, are not the Slavs but the Balts.
Sergei.