Re: [tied] Moses of Khoren's "Geography"

--- Vassil Karloukovski <v.karloukovski@...>
wrote:

> ...
> > > GK: DAI was written as a handbook for his
> son re
> > > foreign policy. So there would not be that much
> > > incentive to describe the internal situation in
> the
> > > Empire except in so far as it might involve the
> prime
> > > focus. I don't remember offhand if
> Porphyrogenitus
> > > mentions ALL other components of the Empire
> except the
> > > Vlachs. I don't think he does, but this can
> easily be
> > > verified.Actually what is even more interesting
> is
> > > that he does not mention the Vlachs as relevant
> for
> > > Byzantine foreign policy. And indeed why should
> he?
> > > There was no Vlach presence North of the Danube
> in his
> > > time which needed to be taken into account.*****
>
>
> (VK)However, it has been suggested that parts of

DAI, a

> chapter(s) about
> the Bulgars as well as the Rus', the Khazars, are
> missing (not
> finished, taken out) and not written for certain
> reasons .

*****GK: The hypothesis of a "missing" part is
gratuitous. "Not written for certain reasons" is much
better. The Bulgaria of Tsar Peter was no threat to
Constantinople, and its "management" a relatively easy
affair. I'm sure there were reports etc. about it in
the imperial archives, but hardly much incentive to
work these up into a special chapter of DAI. As to the
Vlachs, again, there was no particular need to mention
those within the boundaries of the Empire.Had they
been a significant presence north of the Danube they
would doubtless have received a notice.*****



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com