--- alexandru_mg3 <
alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:
>
> >(GK)It reinforces the "complete absence" scenario
> >which is the first implication of the Kyivan
> >Chronicle.
>
> So if I understand well what you said
*****GK: You don't.*****
: Sylvester
> (30 years after
> Nestor)
****GK: Nestor chronicled events from ca. 1091 to
1115. Sylvester's redaction is of 1116. Sylvester
wrote his additions to the Kyivan Chronicle one year
after Nestor's final known redactions.******
is completly a liar
*****GK: Not more than any chronicle writer at any
time or place.*****
and Nestor not only that
> he always said
> the truth but he said in his Chronicle everything
> that could be said
*****GK: Why hold Nestor to higher standards than any
other chronicler? Because he doesn't support your
fantasies? (:=))*****
>
> (-> in this case Nestor's first version of the
> Chronicle seems to be
> self-sufficient in a higher degree than the Bible is
> considered to
> be).
*****GK: Pretty silly statement methinks.*****
>
> Good analysis!
>
> In my opinion what you said above, is mainly an
> 'ideological'
> interpretation, working with big black&white
> patterns: Sylvester-
> black Nestor-white and this only to deny what is
> written by
> Sylvester, regarding Wlachs ...
*****GK: I don't think I'm the one in denial
here.*****
>
> So first you need to prove that Sylvester is a
> liar...
*****GK: I'll leave that to you. You haven't done much
of a job on this yet except for gratuitous
imputations.*****
>
> I only want to add that if probably Sylvester
> didn't talk about
> Walllachians, in his added paragraphs, you will
> fully trust him as in
> Nestor case.
*****GK: There are only five references to Vlachs in
the Old Ukrainian chronicles. I have argued that they
are all by Sylvester, and datable to 1116. As to the
time frame of the events themselves, four (!!) of
these references are in the undated (pre-852) segment
of the Chronicle [they can roughly be dated as
pertaining to the 1rst c. AD and the early 7th c. AD].
Only one appears in the dated section s.a. 898. After
this, nothing at all, either in the Kyivan Chronicle
(which ends in 1199) or in its Galician-Volynian
continuation (which goes to 1292, but was edited in
the early 14th century.) I see no reason for Nestor,
Sylvester, or their continuators to lie about the
Vlachs. As far as they were concerned there were no
visible organized Vlach communities either in the
Hungarian State of their time (which included
Transylvania), or in the territories of the Rus'
principalities. They knew about the Vlachs of Bulgaria
and of Italy (or rather they considered Italians to be
a kind of "Vlach"). I'm sorry if this does not fit in
with your preconceived notions.*****
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Send holiday email and support a worthy cause. Do good.
http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com