--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
> Vassil Karloukovski wrote:
> > in fact the form "Plovdiv" is first attested only as late as in
> > the 15-th century. Before that it was called "P@...", "P@...@ldin/
> > Pop@...", "Pl@...". Could "P@..." be from "Pulpudeva" as well,
> > or it is from "Philippopolis"?
> Vassil, I made a research here and I could not find and "-din"
> there. The name of "Pulpudeva" was recorded in Bulgarian
> as "Pl&p&dib&" in the XII century and "Pl&div&" in the XI century.
> Which are the sources which speaks about this name with "-din"
> at the end?`
It seems I had to be more cautious in my claims, after some enquires
and the confusion found in the literature. - A recent work on the
historical geography of Thracia in the Middle Ages (K.
Gagova, "Trakija v b&lgarskoto srednovekovie", 2002) claims as you
say that "Plovdiv&" is first attested in the Bulgarian apocryphal
chronicle (not from the XI but probably from the XII or XIII c.). I
cannot check the original text of the chronicle, but a solid local
study on the history of Plovdiv (K. V&zv&zova-
Karateodorova, "Nepres&hvashti izvori", 1975) says that it is first
recorded only in 1553-1555, by a German traveller, Hans Dernschwam -
" ..Philippopolis is called by the Bulgarians Plovdiv, and by
others - Filibe.."
It seems "Pulpudeva" had persisted for quite a while. It appears from
Jordanes up to the time of the Third crusade. There was another name -
Poneropolis, as well. Not to mention "Philippopolis", of course. The
earliest Bulgarian mentioning of the town, BTW, in a stone
inscription in Greek of Malamir (831-836), has: ".. the archon
Malamir ... came to Philipopolis ... and met with the Phili
[popolians]."
Regards,
Vassil
> Alex