Re: [tied]valah+nestor ( was for ignorants)

----- Original Message -----
From: "george knysh" <gknysh@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 7:35 AM
Subject: Re: [tied]valah+nestor ( was for ignorants)


>
> --- alexmoeller@... wrote:
> > Goerge, you have the Nestor's cronicle there
> > somewhere on your
> > desk. I just try to remember well now about a
> > statement of
> > Nestor about Panonia and slavs.
>
> *****GK: If you could get ahold of The Bukovynian
> Journal (Bukovyns'kyj Zhurnal) for 1995 (ns. 3-4), you
> would find an article by me (in Ukrainian) on
> everything one can squeeze out of Nestor about the
> Vlachs. The title is "The Rumanian question in the
> light of the Tale of Bygone years" (pp. 97-119). The
> BZh is a publication of the University of Chernivtsi
> (Cernauti).=== I'm afraid I don't have time at the
> moment to comment on your theories in detail. Keep in
> mind that "Nestor" (actually it was Sylvester, his
> continuator) pretty consistently mixed up Italians and
> proto-Rumanians under the label "Vlachs"

[Moeller] at this point is uninteresant to me what a people
the valach was and who were their ancestors. From this point
are important just the fact the vlahs conquested or overruned
the land in Panonia where the slavs have been and that there
in Panonia as well as well in north of danube were not so
strong . No more , no less.

>. The Vlach
> assault against the Slavs you refer to below is the
> Roman conquest of Pannonia, Thrace, and Dacia in the
> 1rst and 2nd cs. AD

[Moeller] Be serious George.. You do not really belive that in
the XI century a ruthenian writer will write about events from
2 centuries implying there the slavonians and where? In
Panonia, Thrace and Dacia. telling these lands belonged to
slavs. No no, there is no another proiection in time. Nestor
speak about more recents events and if we will think about
these lands as beeing the lands of slavs, we cann asume just
begingin with the V or VI century. Or you will think that
there where the huns the rulers have been Nestor should have
tought that was the land of slavs?No no. here is no place for
interpretations. I indeed want to see your article. I will
call in this evening in Chisinau to ask someone to find it for
me.

>. with the subsequently Slavonized
> populations thereof retroactively treated as autochton
> Slavs. The later Vlachs on both sides of the Danube
> are viewed by them (N/S)as descendants of these Roman
> conquistadors. It's a complex treatment, with many
> interesting insights, and many erroneous perspectives
> ******

[Moeller] here I have to agree with you. It is a brisant
thema:-)


> > It seems there was not a continuum of slavic pover
> > but there
> > was some big centres where the slavs put them
> > together
> > becoming strong and a big power. But it seems in
> > Panonia this
> > was not the case. So far I remeber Nestor says about
> > the
> > Hungarians which are brought by ruthenian people to
> > a "land
> > which once belonged to the slovenians (properly
> > etonym of the
> > old slavs in their language) which were overruned by
> > valachs.Then the hungarian defeated the valahian and
> > scattered
> > them up, settling themselves there and intermingling
> > with the
> > slavs which remained ."
>
> ******GK: This (some of your details need correction)
> is the Hungarian "landnaehme" as described s.a. 898 by
> N/S.******

[Moeller]
No . I dont have the cronicle here on the table but I guess I
do not confunde. It seems unlikely for a hungarian to write
about the "lands of slovenian which are overruned by vlachs".
I am pretty sure this one is from Nestor, but I must verify
it.