From: alexmoeller@...
Message: 15262
Date: 2002-09-08
----- Original Message -----
From: "george knysh" <gknysh@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2002 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Toponymy and ethnic Realities at the Lower
Danube by Brezeanu Stelian
> *****GK: Shlapak's article is an abbreviated extract
> mentions. According to her "one may doubt the attempts
> to identify the Bilhorod citadel with the abandoned
> fortress of Aspron mentioned in the mid-10th century
> by Constantine Porphyrogenitus. For even if one
> assumes that Aspron is Bilhorod-on-the-Dnister, the
> "abandoned" fortress in the 10th century would more
> than likely have been the ancient fortifications of
> Tira". In other words, Porphyrogenitus may have
> confused an existing fort (Aspron) with nearby ruins.
[Moeller] but there are more deserted cities not just only one
in the region Prophyrogenetus speaks about. Curious,
Brezeanu's argumentation fits for all cities not just for
Asporn.
> (Unless he was talking about the Lower Dnipro and not
> the Dnister-- GK) Shlapak also implies that this
> possible Dnister Aspron would not have been under
> Pecheneg control (but does not state whom it belonged
> to), unlike the ruins of Tira. That's all one can
> gather from the abbreviation.*******
[Moeller] thank you George.
I have my headaches now with the "romantic way" of bizantine
writtings. If I understood it for Chalcocondiles who wrote
relative late, I never tought Prophyrogenetus can be too
considered a romantic or that the Suida's lexicon cann be seen
too in the same way.
The words from Suida "the Dacians, that now are called as
Pechenegues" are as stilistic figure to understand. So I would
be adviced to read it, I guess. Hmm, I am curiously if in the
Codex Cummanus is something about the "weak one" there, where
"weak one" is the expresion from Mauropus interpreted by
Brezeanu as the "local population" in the theritory conquered
by Pechenegues..