History of Slavs
Alex
OldWilmington
"Alex" <aagr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3ed403c6$1...@news.microsoft.com...
> What are the best English-language books on the subject?
>
DON'T know?)
Didn't Dmitri Obolensky specialize in the ancient Slavs, and in English?
I think someone over at Amazon.com compiled a list. I did have a book but
have to go back and see which one it was.
On the matter of Slavs traditionally at each others' throats, I noticed a
post regarding the Poles and Ukrainians over on soc.culture.polish, but
wading into those discussions is like entering a mix of fire and oil!
Donata Lewandowski Guerra (one part Slovak/one part Polish)
BernardZZ
Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > What are the best English-language books on the subject?
> >
> I'm surprised you're asking (what is it you and other folks around here
> DON'T know?)
>
Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
Basically say to being Western European history although over time
medieval history seems to be including more regions.
Alex
> "Alex" <aagr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3ed403c6$1...@news.microsoft.com...
> > What are the best English-language books on the subject?
> >
> I'm surprised you're asking (what is it you and other folks around here
> DON'T know?)
>
We don't know a lot but, anyway, this is a new "Alex", not me. :-)
OldWilmington
19 used & new from $10.00
Have one to sell?
Here's a book I recently scanned, and probably will purchase:
The Slavs in European History and Civilization
by Francis Dvornik
"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f8e58188.03052...@posting.google.com...
OldWilmington
"BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
message news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
I'd argue that Medieval studies should include the other countries,
particularly Slavic ones, and Poland, in particular, since this country took
its cues from Rome rather than Byzantium.
>
>
>
>
erilar
Notice how Bermuda Trianglish his definition is?
The German Holy Roman Empire, which included Bohemia to the east and
Sicily to the south, was bigger than any of those named . . .
...and what's so unmedieval about Poland, Ukraine, Russia, Hungary.....?
--
Mary Loomer Oliver(aka erilar)
Erilar's Cave Annex:
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
Alex
> In article <draBa.95020$5M.73...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > > What are the best English-language books on the subject?
> > >
> > I'm surprised you're asking (what is it you and other folks around here
> > DON'T know?)
> >
>
> Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
Yes.
>
> Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain
>and a few other regions.
It's interesting to notice that your "list" does not include HRE, which was
a far more prominent part of the medieval landscape than England. And in
the very middle of HRE you had a Slavic state (which capital was for a while
the Emperor's seat).
> Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> medieval history seems to be including more regions.
Why do you consider yourself competent to make this type of a pronouncement?
Uwe Müller
"BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> schrieb im
Newsbeitrag news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
> snip >
> Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
Yes, definitely, they had a crusade mounted against them, had dealings with
Byzanz, Rome and the Vikings, and fit in the right time slot.
>
> Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
> Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> medieval history seems to be including more regions.
Is that the view of American Medieval history?
have fun
Uwe Müller
Uwe Müller
"Alex" <aagr...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3ed403c6$1...@news.microsoft.com...
> What are the best English-language books on the subject?
>
>
Have a look at
Florin Curta, The Making of the Slavs : History and Archaeology of the Lower
Danube Region, c. 500-70. (2001)
or
Paul Barford, The Early Slavs : Culture and Society in Early Medieval
Eastern Europe. (2001).
have fun
Uwe Mueller
Alex
> In article <291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews>, BernardZZ
> <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote:
>
> > In article <draBa.95020$5M.73...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > > > What are the best English-language books on the subject?
> > > >
> > > I'm surprised you're asking (what is it you and other folks around here
> > > DON'T know?)
> > >
> >
> > Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
> >
> > Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
> > Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> > medieval history seems to be including more regions.
> >
> >
>
> Notice how Bermuda Trianglish his definition is?
Notice how delicate he is? Instead of saying "the regions below the
waist line" he used "other regions". :-)
>
> The German Holy Roman Empire, which included Bohemia
As everybody knows, the bohemians REALLY live in the certain parts of
London and Paris.
>to the east and
> Sicily
Again, does not really exist because, as EVERYBODY knows, all Sicilians
live in US (see 'Goodfather').
>to the south, was bigger than any of those named . . .
But did not really exist because it is not a part of BT.
>
> ...and what's so unmedieval about Poland, Ukraine, Russia, Hungary.....?
Well, at least Russia and Ukraine jumped to the socialism directly from
a stone age (had been hybernating somewhere during all MA).
Paul J Gans
>> snip >
As I've said many many times, medieval history in England
and the US pertained to France and England and strayed outside
these areas only when the need arose.
Of course there were always some few exceptions, but that was
the situation for many many years up to quite recently.
To see this one only need pick up a book written in English
dealing with medieval history and see what the subject matter
is.
In the last 10 to 15 years the situation has changed somewhat,
but in general medieval histories written in English deal
primarily with western Europe. This does not stop medievalists
from making comparisons outside of western Europe when they
feel the need, but the emphasis is on western Europe nevertheless.
---- Paul J. Gans
Alex
> "Uwe Müller" <uwemu...@snafu.de> wrote:
>
> >"BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> schrieb im
> >Newsbeitrag news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
>
> >> snip >
>
> >> Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
>
> >Yes, definitely, they had a crusade mounted against them, had dealings with
> >Byzanz, Rome and the Vikings, and fit in the right time slot.
> >>
> >> Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
> >> Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> >> medieval history seems to be including more regions.
>
> >Is that the view of American Medieval history?
>
> As I've said many many times, medieval history in England
> and the US pertained to France and England and strayed outside
> these areas only when the need arose.
My impression was that Bernard is from Australia or NZ but I can be
wrong.
>
> Of course there were always some few exceptions, but that was
> the situation for many many years up to quite recently.
>
> To see this one only need pick up a book written in English
> dealing with medieval history and see what the subject matter
> is.
>
> In the last 10 to 15 years the situation has changed somewhat,
> but in general medieval histories written in English deal
> primarily with western Europe. This does not stop medievalists
> from making comparisons outside of western Europe when they
> feel the need, but the emphasis is on western Europe nevertheless.
AFAIK, HRE WAS "Western" Europe with the Emperor being the highest
ranking "Western" monarch.
A second issue is that Spain and Portugal are (AFAIK) more "Western"
(geographically) than many other places in BT.
erilar
<ga...@panix.com> wrote:
> In the last 10 to 15 years the situation has changed somewhat,
> but in general medieval histories written in English deal
> primarily with western Europe. This does not stop medievalists
> from making comparisons outside of western Europe when they
> feel the need, but the emphasis is on western Europe nevertheless.
>
It helps if you can read German medieval history books 8-)
Paul J Gans
>Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com> wrote in message news:<bb808o$o1t$3...@reader1.panix.com>...
>> "Uwe Müller" <uwemu...@snafu.de> wrote:
>>
>> >"BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> schrieb im
>> >Newsbeitrag news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
>>
>> >> snip >
>>
>> >> Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
>>
>> >Yes, definitely, they had a crusade mounted against them, had dealings with
>> >Byzanz, Rome and the Vikings, and fit in the right time slot.
>> >>
>> >> Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
>> >> Basically say to being Western European history although over time
>> >> medieval history seems to be including more regions.
>>
>> >Is that the view of American Medieval history?
>>
>> As I've said many many times, medieval history in England
>> and the US pertained to France and England and strayed outside
>> these areas only when the need arose.
>My impression was that Bernard is from Australia or NZ but I can be
>wrong.
Which has what to do with the use of the term "medieval history"
in the US and England?
>>
>> Of course there were always some few exceptions, but that was
>> the situation for many many years up to quite recently.
>>
>> To see this one only need pick up a book written in English
>> dealing with medieval history and see what the subject matter
>> is.
>>
>> In the last 10 to 15 years the situation has changed somewhat,
>> but in general medieval histories written in English deal
>> primarily with western Europe. This does not stop medievalists
>> from making comparisons outside of western Europe when they
>> feel the need, but the emphasis is on western Europe nevertheless.
>AFAIK, HRE WAS "Western" Europe with the Emperor being the highest
>ranking "Western" monarch.
But the "Empire" is rarely discussed in most of those medieval
history books I was talking about.
>A second issue is that Spain and Portugal are (AFAIK) more "Western"
>(geographically) than many other places in BT.
Makes no difference. Please look at several books on medieval
history published in the US or the UK before 1980. You will
find that they do not discuss Spain very much at all, except where
Spain affected French or English policy.
----- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
>In article <bb808o$o1t$3...@reader1.panix.com>, Paul J Gans
><ga...@panix.com> wrote:
>> In the last 10 to 15 years the situation has changed somewhat,
>> but in general medieval histories written in English deal
>> primarily with western Europe. This does not stop medievalists
>> from making comparisons outside of western Europe when they
>> feel the need, but the emphasis is on western Europe nevertheless.
>>
>It helps if you can read German medieval history books 8-)
No, it doesn't, since very few of them were written in
English. :-)
Each nation, in writing about its own history, focusses on
that history. The US, having no medieval history, has chosen
to focus on the English Middle Ages. So what is written here
was for a long time what was written there.
>--
>Mary Loomer Oliver(aka erilar)
---- Paul J. Gans
BernardZZ
Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
>
> "BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
> message news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
> > In article <draBa.95020$5M.73...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > > > What are the best English-language books on the subject?
> > > >
> > > I'm surprised you're asking (what is it you and other folks around here
> > > DON'T know?)
> > >
> >
> > Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
> >
> > Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
> > Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> > medieval history seems to be including more regions.
> >
>
> I'd argue that Medieval studies should include the other countries,
> particularly Slavic ones, and Poland,
It has been said that to be Polish is a political statement! Whereas for
Russians it is not so important to be considered European but for Polish
people it is important that we do consider them Europeans.
> in particular, since this country took
> its cues from Rome rather than Byzantium.
So what!
BernardZZ
@hotmail.com said...
>
> > Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> > medieval history seems to be including more regions.
>
> Why do you consider yourself competent to make this type of a pronouncement?
>
Yes. I have noticed that the newer books on Medieval studies include
more regions. But if you do not believe me, we have some *heavy weights*
here on medieval history in this forum, ask them if they agree with my
statement.
Soren Larsen
"BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> skrev i en
meddelelse news:7dc9e767d32aff75...@free.teranews.com...
Or we could cheat and ask the FAQ:
"It is expected that the geographical range of discussion will focus on
Europe and the Mediterranean. Discussion about European interaction
with other cultures is appropriate as well. Questions on the Crusades,
the Viking voyages to North America, the influence of Arabic
philosophy and science on Europe, the Mongol conquest of Russia,
etc. are welcome on the group, as well as for example the post-Roman
developments in Britain and France, the Byzantine Empire, the empire
of Charlemagne, the development of the Italian city states, the War of
the Roses, the 100 Years War, the Reconquista and so on."
No specific mentioning of the Slavs, but it is pretty clear that
they are on topic.
Cheers
Soren Larsen
erilar
<ga...@panix.com> wrote:
> erilar <erila...@spamchibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> >It helps if you can read German medieval history books 8-)
>
> No, it doesn't, since very few of them were written in
> English. :-)
That was not my implication, as you well know 8-). Because I can read
both German and English, I'm not caught in the Bermuda Triangle. Besides
that, many excellent works on medieval history written in German HAVE
been translated into English, which also tends to make them easier to
find in this country.
Of course, a really good university library with a good collection of
medieval history will have the originals. Most of my German ILL requests
are filled by the University of Wisconsin in Madison.
--
Mary Loomer Oliver(aka erilar)
Alex
> In article <f8e58188.03052...@posting.google.com>, am05
> @hotmail.com said...
> >
> > > Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> > > medieval history seems to be including more regions.
> >
> > Why do you consider yourself competent to make this type of a pronouncement?
> >
>
> Yes. I have noticed that the newer books on Medieval studies include
> more regions. But if you do not believe me, we have some *heavy weights*
> here on medieval history
And these "heavy weights" being who exactly?
>in this forum, ask them if they agree with my
> statement.
As a matter of fact, while ago there was a prolonged discussion on this
particular subject. You may check the results.
Alex
> Alex <am...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com> wrote in message news:<bb808o$o1t$3...@reader1.panix.com>...
> >> "Uwe Müller" <uwemu...@snafu.de> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> schrieb im
> >> >Newsbeitrag news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
>
> >> >> snip >
>
> >> >> Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
>
> >> >Yes, definitely, they had a crusade mounted against them, had dealings with
> >> >Byzanz, Rome and the Vikings, and fit in the right time slot.
> >> >>
> >> >> Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
> >> >> Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> >> >> medieval history seems to be including more regions.
>
> >> >Is that the view of American Medieval history?
> >>
> >> As I've said many many times, medieval history in England
> >> and the US pertained to France and England and strayed outside
> >> these areas only when the need arose.
>
> >My impression was that Bernard is from Australia or NZ but I can be
> >wrong.
>
> Which has what to do with the use of the term "medieval history"
> in the US and England?
Nothing, except for the fact that the notion of BT had it tentacles
spreaded more widely than you are assuming. :-)
>
> >>
> >> Of course there were always some few exceptions, but that was
> >> the situation for many many years up to quite recently.
> >>
> >> To see this one only need pick up a book written in English
> >> dealing with medieval history and see what the subject matter
> >> is.
> >>
> >> In the last 10 to 15 years the situation has changed somewhat,
> >> but in general medieval histories written in English deal
> >> primarily with western Europe. This does not stop medievalists
> >> from making comparisons outside of western Europe when they
> >> feel the need, but the emphasis is on western Europe nevertheless.
>
> >AFAIK, HRE WAS "Western" Europe with the Emperor being the highest
> >ranking "Western" monarch.
>
> But the "Empire" is rarely discussed in most of those medieval
> history books I was talking about.
Indeed. However, I suspect that it is discussed in the German-language
books. BTW, I found that the subject was rather popular in the end of
XIX - early XX even among the English-speaking authors.
>
> >A second issue is that Spain and Portugal are (AFAIK) more "Western"
> >(geographically) than many other places in BT.
>
> Makes no difference. Please look at several books on medieval
> history published in the US or the UK before 1980. You will
> find that they do not discuss Spain very much at all, except where
> Spain affected French or English policy.
We discussed this more than once and we are in an agreement on this.
However, Bernard's statement was not about the books but about the
subject itself, which (IMO) is different: it's understandable that the
books may have a national bias but a particular bias should not define
a scope of the terminology even if some areas are rarely discussed.
For example, most of the Soviet books about WWII were mostly about the
"Great Patriotic War" (with US and UK being almost absent). OTOH, the
American books on the same subject were "American-heavy". Do these biases
define the scope of the term "WWII"? I don't think so.
OldWilmington
"BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
> In article <1asBa.7305$jp.5...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> >
> > "BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
> > message news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
> > > In article <draBa.95020$5M.73...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > > > > What are the best English-language books on the subject?
> > > > >
> > > > I'm surprised you're asking (what is it you and other folks around
here
> > > > DON'T know?)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
> > >
> > > Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
> > > Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> > > medieval history seems to be including more regions.
> > >
> >
> > I'd argue that Medieval studies should include the other countries,
> > particularly Slavic ones, and Poland,
>
> It has been said that to be Polish is a political statement!
By whom? Poland was a country, and managed to retain its "national
consciousness" despite three partitions and "occupation" by foreign powers.
Whereas for
> Russians it is not so important to be considered European but for Polish
> people it is important that we do consider them Europeans.
>
Who gives you the authority to speak for Polish people. I suggest you read
a few good histories. Try Zamoyski's and Norman Davies.
> > in particular, since this country took
> > its cues from Rome rather than Byzantium.
>
> So what!
>
Your argument seems to be based on the notion "Because I don't know anything
about it, such does not exist." A very poor approach, critical
thinking-wise.
>
>
OldWilmington
>
> However, Bernard's statement was not about the books but about the
> subject itself, which (IMO) is different: it's understandable that the
> books may have a national bias but a particular bias should not define
> a scope of the terminology even if some areas are rarely discussed.
>
> For example, most of the Soviet books about WWII were mostly about the
> "Great Patriotic War" (with US and UK being almost absent). OTOH, the
> American books on the same subject were "American-heavy". Do these biases
> define the scope of the term "WWII"? I don't think so.
I agree with your reasoning concerning the subject of Medieval History. In
the interest of knowledge, it seems scholars should be willing to expand the
boundaries of the subject.
I personally feel ashamed that I did not know more about Eastern Europe's
history for so many years. However, introductory European history courses
in American high schools and colleges typically have focused on "Western"
Europe. Almost this seems to be another case of "If we don't pay attention
to it, it doesn't exist."
Donata
Paul J Gans
>In article <bb9ah2$9t4$5...@reader1.panix.com>, Paul J Gans
><ga...@panix.com> wrote:
>> erilar <erila...@spamchibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
>> >It helps if you can read German medieval history books 8-)
>>
>> No, it doesn't, since very few of them were written in
>> English. :-)
> That was not my implication, as you well know 8-). Because I can read
>both German and English, I'm not caught in the Bermuda Triangle. Besides
>that, many excellent works on medieval history written in German HAVE
>been translated into English, which also tends to make them easier to
>find in this country.
Sure. None of us are bound to the Bermuda Triangle. My point,
and ONLY point was that the term "Medieval History", when seen
in a book title, meant that it was very likely that the book
was about England and (northern) France. That's all.
> Of course, a really good university library with a good collection of
>medieval history will have the originals. Most of my German ILL requests
>are filled by the University of Wisconsin in Madison.
Books on other regions during the Middle Ages have always
been around.
----- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
It was then and is now a rather silly discussion. Once, quite
a while ago, I posted the titles of a fair number of (at the time)
well known history books titled "Medieval History" or some variant
of that. Essentially all of them were about England and France.
Now nobody has to like that. But that's the way it was and it
can'
It was then and is now a rather silly discussion. Once, quite
a while ago, I posted the titles of a fair number of (at the time)
well known history books titled "Medieval History" or some variant
of that and written in England or the US. Essentially all of them
were about England and France.
Now one does not have to like this, but that's the way it was
and there is no point in arguing about it, unless one just
want's to argue.
----- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
>"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:f8e58188.03053...@posting.google.com...
>>
>> However, Bernard's statement was not about the books but about the
>> subject itself, which (IMO) is different: it's understandable that the
>> books may have a national bias but a particular bias should not define
>> a scope of the terminology even if some areas are rarely discussed.
>>
>> For example, most of the Soviet books about WWII were mostly about the
>> "Great Patriotic War" (with US and UK being almost absent). OTOH, the
>> American books on the same subject were "American-heavy". Do these biases
>> define the scope of the term "WWII"? I don't think so.
>I agree with your reasoning concerning the subject of Medieval History. In
>the interest of knowledge, it seems scholars should be willing to expand the
>boundaries of the subject.
Scholars are more than willing to expand their views. That's not
the question here. The question is what did a certain term mean
when one saw it on a book?
It doesn't tell much about the kind of work that scholars do.
>I personally feel ashamed that I did not know more about Eastern Europe's
>history for so many years. However, introductory European history courses
>in American high schools and colleges typically have focused on "Western"
>Europe. Almost this seems to be another case of "If we don't pay attention
>to it, it doesn't exist."
It is again a reflection of what "Medieval History" meant back then.
---- Paul J. Gans
Alex
> In article <1asBa.7305$jp.5...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> >
> > "BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
> > message news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
> > > In article <draBa.95020$5M.73...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > > > > What are the best English-language books on the subject?
> > > > >
> > > > I'm surprised you're asking (what is it you and other folks around here
> > > > DON'T know?)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
> > >
> > > Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
> > > Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> > > medieval history seems to be including more regions.
> > >
> >
> > I'd argue that Medieval studies should include the other countries,
> > particularly Slavic ones, and Poland,
>
> It has been said that to be Polish is a political statement!
What this has to do (besides being not a very funny joke) with the fact
that Poland was a prominent part of the Medieval Europe?
>Whereas for
> Russians it is not so important to be considered European
A number of comments:
(a) This has very little to do with Medieval History.
(b) Unless a particular Russian lives East from Ural, he/she is an "European"
by a virtue of a geography. It looks like in your blissful ignorance you are
mixing "European" and "Western European".
>but for Polish
> people it is important that we do consider them Europeans.
>
> > in particular, since this country took
> > its cues from Rome rather than Byzantium.
>
> So what!
A lot of things. For example, "stop writing nonsense". :-)
Alex
> "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f8e58188.03053...@posting.google.com...
>
> >
> > However, Bernard's statement was not about the books but about the
> > subject itself, which (IMO) is different: it's understandable that the
> > books may have a national bias but a particular bias should not define
> > a scope of the terminology even if some areas are rarely discussed.
> >
> > For example, most of the Soviet books about WWII were mostly about the
> > "Great Patriotic War" (with US and UK being almost absent). OTOH, the
> > American books on the same subject were "American-heavy". Do these biases
> > define the scope of the term "WWII"? I don't think so.
>
> I agree with your reasoning concerning the subject of Medieval History. In
> the interest of knowledge, it seems scholars should be willing to expand the
> boundaries of the subject.
IMO, it's fine when a particular author writes about some reasonably
narrow area because otherwise he/she/it risks to end up with something
extremely superficial (of course, this type of the "general" books can
be very useful for getting a general picture).
What I'm arguing against is a perception you mentioned below.
>
> I personally feel ashamed that I did not know more about Eastern Europe's
> history for so many years. However, introductory European history courses
> in American high schools and colleges typically have focused on "Western"
> Europe.
>Almost this seems to be another case of "If we don't pay attention
> to it, it doesn't exist."
The short name for it is "BT". :-)
Alex
> "BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
> message news:4b58aec8f329cdfd...@free.teranews.com...
> > In article <1asBa.7305$jp.5...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > >
> > > "BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
> > > message news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
> > > > In article <draBa.95020$5M.73...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > > > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > > > > > What are the best English-language books on the subject?
> > > > > >
> > > > > I'm surprised you're asking (what is it you and other folks around
> here
> > > > > DON'T know?)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
> > > >
> > > > Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
> > > > Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> > > > medieval history seems to be including more regions.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'd argue that Medieval studies should include the other countries,
> > > particularly Slavic ones, and Poland,
> >
> > It has been said that to be Polish is a political statement!
>
> By whom? Poland was a country, and managed to retain its "national
> consciousness" despite three partitions and "occupation" by foreign powers.
4 partitions, including one of 1939.
I quite agree that the whole statement is tastless.
>
>
> Whereas for
> > Russians it is not so important to be considered European but for Polish
> > people it is important that we do consider them Europeans.
> >
>
> Who gives you the authority to speak for Polish people. I suggest you read
> a few good histories. Try Zamoyski's and Norman Davies.
>
I distinctly disliked Davies' "Europe". This, however, has very little to
do with the fact that Poland was a part of the "European World" even when
it did not exist as an independent entity.
Inger E Johansson
"Uwe Müller" <uwemu...@snafu.de> skrev i meddelandet
news:bb73vr$2l5$1...@news.eusc.inter.net...
Uwe,
no wonder that some Americans calling themselves Scholars of Medieval
History haven't a clue about what happened in Scandinavia, the Baltic,
Poland and Germany areas in earlier days.....
Inger E
>
>
>
OldWilmington
news:<CU3Ca.7122$_w.45...@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
> > "BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
> > message news:4b58aec8f329cdfd...@free.teranews.com...
> > > In article <1asBa.7305$jp.5...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > > >
> > >
> > consciousness" despite three partitions and "occupation" by foreign
powers.
>
> 4 partitions, including one of 1939.
>
Thank you...
> >
>
> I distinctly disliked Davies' "Europe".
I would enjoy hearing why! Have you read Zamoyski?
Could you recommend a good book for me?
OldWilmington
> >
> > I personally feel ashamed that I did not know more about Eastern
Europe's
> > history for so many years. However, introductory European history
courses
> > in American high schools and colleges typically have focused on
"Western"
> > Europe.
> >Almost this seems to be another case of "If we don't pay attention
> > to it, it doesn't exist."
>
> The short name for it is "BT". :-)
I'm dense. What does BT" stand for? ;-)
Along with feeling cheated as a student, I feel cheated as a tourist. I've
sworn to my husband, so madly in love with Paris, that I'll never set foot
in that town again before I revisit Warsaw (my idea of heaven on earth) or
lay eyes on St. Petersburg (or any spot in Russia, for that matter). I'd
rather spend my tourist dollars with folks who appreciate the business, and
who are warm and friendly!
BernardZZ
>
> "BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
> message news:4b58aec8f329cdfd...@free.teranews.com...
> > In article <1asBa.7305$jp.5...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > >
> > > "BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
> > > message news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
> > > > In article <draBa.95020$5M.73...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > > > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > > > > > What are the best English-language books on the subject?
> > > > > >
> > > > > I'm surprised you're asking (what is it you and other folks around
> here
> > > > > DON'T know?)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
> > > >
> > > > Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
> > > > Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> > > > medieval history seems to be including more regions.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'd argue that Medieval studies should include the other countries,
> > > particularly Slavic ones, and Poland,
> >
(a)
> > It has been said that to be Polish is a political statement!
>
> By whom? Poland was a country, and managed to retain its "national
> consciousness" despite three partitions and "occupation" by foreign powers.
I agree. It was a country and then was not and it became one again.
While occupied several of the occupying powers tried to destroy Polish
culture. So see (a) above.
>
>
> Whereas for
> > Russians it is not so important to be considered European but for Polish
> > people it is important that we do consider them Europeans.
> >
>
> Who gives you the authority to speak for Polish people.
It works both ways, who gave you the right to disagree with me.
> I suggest you read
> a few good histories. Try Zamoyski's and Norman Davies.
I liked Norman Davies but I don't see what it has to do with the
conversation.
>
> > > in particular, since this country took
> > > its cues from Rome rather than Byzantium.
> >
> > So what!
> >
>
> Your argument seems to be based on the notion "Because I don't know anything
> about it, such does not exist." A very poor approach, critical
> thinking-wise.
I actually know a lot about Polish history.
BernardZZ
@hotmail.com said...
> BernardZZ <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in message news:<4b58aec8f329cdfd...@free.teranews.com>...
> > In article <1asBa.7305$jp.5...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > >
> > > "BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in
> > > message news:291381cdc65c55567e9917c374aa569a@TeraNews...
> > > > In article <draBa.95020$5M.73...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> > > > Oldwil...@nc.rr.com said...
> > > > > > What are the best English-language books on the subject?
> > > > > >
> > > > > I'm surprised you're asking (what is it you and other folks around here
> > > > > DON'T know?)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Would the folks here consider Slavs to be part of medieval history!
> > > >
> > > > Medieval history was Italy, France, Britain and a few other regions.
> > > > Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> > > > medieval history seems to be including more regions.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'd argue that Medieval studies should include the other countries,
> > > particularly Slavic ones, and Poland,
> >
> > It has been said that to be Polish is a political statement!
>
> What this has to do (besides being not a very funny joke) with the fact
> that Poland was a prominent part of the Medieval Europe?
It was. But that is not my point. My point being is that for reasons of
national pride it is very important for a Polish nationalist that his
countries history being considered to being part of European history.
And by the way the comment is actually a quote by a Polish historian.
An example of a point that I made in an earlier discussion that history
often serves political purposes.
>
> >Whereas for
> > Russians it is not so important to be considered European
>
> A number of comments:
>
> (a) This has very little to do with Medieval History.
But would for Medieval European history.
> (b) Unless a particular Russian lives East from Ural, he/she is an "European"
> by a virtue of a geography. It looks like in your blissful ignorance you are
> mixing "European" and "Western European".
1) The borders of Europe have never been fixed as the book Davies'
"Europe" makes it quite clear.
2) Many eminent Russian have denied that they are a European country.
>
> >but for Polish
> > people it is important that we do consider them Europeans.
> >
> > > in particular, since this country took
> > > its cues from Rome rather than Byzantium.
> >
> > So what!
>
> A lot of things. For example, "stop writing nonsense". :-)
Since when is a criteria for being European is that you that your cues
from Rome or Byzantium?
BernardZZ
said...
>
> "BernardZZ" <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> skrev i en
> meddelelse news:7dc9e767d32aff75...@free.teranews.com...
> > In article <f8e58188.03052...@posting.google.com>, am05
> > @hotmail.com said...
> > >
> > > > Basically say to being Western European history although over time
> > > > medieval history seems to be including more regions.
> > >
> > > Why do you consider yourself competent to make this type of a
> pronouncement?
> > >
> >
> > Yes. I have noticed that the newer books on Medieval studies include
> > more regions. But if you do not believe me, we have some *heavy
> weights*
> > here on medieval history in this forum, ask them if they agree with my
> > statement.
> >
>
>
> "It is expected that the geographical range of discussion will focus on
> Europe and the Mediterranean. Discussion about European interaction
> with other cultures is appropriate as well. Questions on the Crusades,
> the Viking voyages to North America, the influence of Arabic
> philosophy and science on Europe, the Mongol conquest of Russia,
> etc. are welcome on the group, as well as for example the post-Roman
> developments in Britain and France, the Byzantine Empire, the empire
> of Charlemagne, the development of the Italian city states, the War of
> the Roses, the 100 Years War, the Reconquista and so on."
>
> No specific mentioning of the Slavs, but it is pretty clear that
> they are on topic.
I would like to see this scope of this statement widened! But taking it
as it stands, they are just in.
Alex
A number of reasons:
(a) Too superficial.
(b) Too enamored with the Poland (up to a complete loss of a historic
objectivity and balance).
(c) Due to (b), too Rusophobic, up to a complete loss of a historic balance.
The phobias and philias are OK if an auther manages to present something
beyond the black and white picture. Davies definitely does not.
>Have you read Zamoyski?
> Could you recommend a good book for me?
'Potop'? :-)
Alex
>
> > (b) Unless a particular Russian lives East from Ural, he/she is an "European"
> > by a virtue of a geography. It looks like in your blissful ignorance you are
> > mixing "European" and "Western European".
>
> 1) The borders of Europe have never been fixed as the book Davies'
> "Europe" makes it quite clear.
I would tell you what my opinion about this book is but there are ladies
around. :-)
BTW, his book mentions that there also were the questions about England
being a part of Europe.
OTOH, for quite a while (at least couple of centuries), the borders of
Europe are set rather firmly: the Eastern one is on Ural Mountains.
> 2) Many eminent Russian have denied that they are a European country.
Yes. There were numerous political and cultural reasons for this but their
opinions did not change the fact that the European part of Russia is in
Europe (by definition). Which makes tehm all "europeans" regardless of their
wishes.
>
>
> >
> > >but for Polish
> > > people it is important that we do consider them Europeans.
> > >
> > > > in particular, since this country took
> > > > its cues from Rome rather than Byzantium.
> > >
> > > So what!
> >
> > A lot of things. For example, "stop writing nonsense". :-)
>
> Since when is a criteria for being European is that you that your cues
> from Rome or Byzantium?
Actually, it's important because, IIRC, whatever was equivalent of the
cultural "european" notion during the MA, it was based on being a part
of the "Catholic World".
There could be questions about the non-Catholics belonging to this entity
(Greeks, Russians, Bulgarians) but the Catholics were "in". Which means
that the Czechs and Poles had been "in" by any criteria of the time (of
course, at this time nobody knew that they lived in MA).
Actually, the Czechs were more "in" than, say, England. The "center" of the
medieval world was HRE and they had been in the center of HRE, with the
King of Bohemia being the only king within HRE and Prague being more than
once the imperial "capital".
Alex
> "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f8e58188.03053...@posting.google.com...
> > "OldWilmington" <Oldwil...@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:<G_3Ca.7183$
> > What I'm arguing against is a perception you mentioned below.
> > >
> > > I personally feel ashamed that I did not know more about Eastern
> Europe's
> > > history for so many years. However, introductory European history
> courses
> > > in American high schools and colleges typically have focused on
> "Western"
> > > Europe.
> > >Almost this seems to be another case of "If we don't pay attention
> > > to it, it doesn't exist."
> >
> > The short name for it is "BT". :-)
>
> I'm dense. What does BT" stand for? ;-)
Now, this IS the thing you must learn. :-)
You may find a detailed explanation in SHM FAQ's.
>
> Along with feeling cheated as a student, I feel cheated as a tourist. I've
> sworn to my husband, so madly in love with Paris, that I'll never set foot
> in that town again before I revisit Warsaw (my idea of heaven on earth)
A beautiful city. Visited it more than a decade ago.
> or
> lay eyes on St. Petersburg (or any spot in Russia, for that matter).
AFAIK, they did a lot of the restorations recently so this may be a good
time to visit it.
Moscow is, of course, another obvious target. Probably they still have an
express overnight train between these two cities.
>I'd
> rather spend my tourist dollars with folks who appreciate the business, and
> who are warm and friendly!
You mean "not French"? :-)
[I suspect that the $$ still can buy a lot of friendliness and good will in
both of these countries.]
Alex
> "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f8e58188.03053...@posting.google.com...
> > "OldWilmington" <Oldwil...@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:<G_3Ca.7183$
> > What I'm arguing against is a perception you mentioned below.
> > >
> > > I personally feel ashamed that I did not know more about Eastern
> Europe's
> > > history for so many years. However, introductory European history
> courses
> > > in American high schools and colleges typically have focused on
> "Western"
> > > Europe.
> > >Almost this seems to be another case of "If we don't pay attention
> > > to it, it doesn't exist."
> >
> > The short name for it is "BT". :-)
>
> I'm dense. What does BT" stand for? ;-)
Now, this IS the thing you must learn. :-)
You may find a detailed explanation in SHM FAQ's.
>
> Along with feeling cheated as a student, I feel cheated as a tourist. I've
> sworn to my husband, so madly in love with Paris, that I'll never set foot
> in that town again before I revisit Warsaw (my idea of heaven on earth)
A beautiful city. Visited it more than a decade ago.
> or
> lay eyes on St. Petersburg (or any spot in Russia, for that matter).
AFAIK, they did a lot of the restorations recently so this may be a good
time to visit it.
Moscow is, of course, another obvious target. Probably they still have an
express overnight train between these two cities.
>I'd
> rather spend my tourist dollars with folks who appreciate the business, and
> who are warm and friendly!
You mean "not French"? :-)
Grethe Bachmann
"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:f8e58188.03060...@posting.google.com...
Do you know if there was made some TV-documentary
in connection with the 300-years jubilee of St. Petersburg?
We have only had a short review in our Today's News here
in DK.
Sometimes you have mentioned History Channel in shm,
(is it a British or US-channel?) where they seem to have some
good documentaries, ( maybe there has been one about
St. Petersburg already). In fact I don't understand that we've heard
so little about it on TV. Unfortunately I can't see History Channel,
but I wonder if some of their documentaries might be sent on
Discovery Channel later on?
I found a good link to Saint Petersburg with beautiful pictures
of the whole city and of the Hermitage with the Winter Palace.
And with English text too - Russian is so bloody difficult!
I once tried to follow a course in Russian. Oh dear!
Cheers
Grethe
Alex
> OldWilmington <Oldwil...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> >I personally feel ashamed that I did not know more about Eastern Europe's
> >history for so many years. However, introductory European history courses
> >in American high schools and colleges typically have focused on "Western"
> >Europe. Almost this seems to be another case of "If we don't pay attention
> >to it, it doesn't exist."
>
> It is again a reflection of what "Medieval History" meant back then.
One would think that what the American educators/historians think on this
particular subject is not as relevant as the ideas of the european ones.
Out of this last group, the British historians are only a minority.
So, unless there is some positive proof that the German, Italian, Spanish,
etc. historians and public don't think that the term "Medieval" is applicable
to their countries, the rest does not matter.
Alex
> erilar <erila...@spamchibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> >In article <bb9ah2$9t4$5...@reader1.panix.com>, Paul J Gans
> ><ga...@panix.com> wrote:
>
> >> erilar <erila...@spamchibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> >> >It helps if you can read German medieval history books 8-)
> >>
> >> No, it doesn't, since very few of them were written in
> >> English. :-)
>
> > That was not my implication, as you well know 8-). Because I can read
> >both German and English, I'm not caught in the Bermuda Triangle. Besides
> >that, many excellent works on medieval history written in German HAVE
> >been translated into English, which also tends to make them easier to
> >find in this country.
>
> Sure. None of us are bound to the Bermuda Triangle.
> My point,
> and ONLY point was that the term "Medieval History",
>when seen
> in a book title,
In English?
>meant that it was very likely that the book
> was about England and (northern) France.
IIRC, the course of "Medieval History" was taught in the Soviet schools.
I can assure you that it was not predominantly about the England or
France. With a total number of the manuals ammounting (over the decades)
to the tens (or even hundreds) of millions, it's quite a few books.
But I'll grant you that the title was not in English so your case probably
helds. :-)
Alex
> In article <bb9ah2$9t4$5...@reader1.panix.com>, Paul J Gans
> <ga...@panix.com> wrote:
>
> > erilar <erila...@spamchibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > >It helps if you can read German medieval history books 8-)
> >
> > No, it doesn't, since very few of them were written in
> > English. :-)
>
> That was not my implication, as you well know 8-). Because I can read
> both German and English, I'm not caught in the Bermuda Triangle.
It goes this way: if the book is about the Middle Ages AND Paul can
read it, it's about England or France. :-)
[digging a really deep shelter]
Alex
> "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:f8e58188.03060...@posting.google.com...
> > "OldWilmington" <Oldwil...@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:<kPeCa.10601$_w.58...@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
> > > lay eyes on St. Petersburg (or any spot in Russia, for that matter).
> >
> > AFAIK, they did a lot of the restorations recently so this may be a good
> > time to visit it.
>
> Do you know if there was made some TV-documentary
> in connection with the 300-years jubilee of St. Petersburg?
> We have only had a short review in our Today's News here
> in DK.
I saw only some rather incomprehensible Russian and US news. Russian were
showing some views of Peterhoff and St-P. and telling in some length
how President Putin communicated with various foreign leaders (as I
understand, when all done and said, they s----d him on the issue of a
non-visa travel between Russia and Eu). Maybe they'll produce some documentary
afterwards. AFAIK, the "natives" are mostly banned from the city center so
most of the celebration is a show for the foreign visitors.
>
> Sometimes you have mentioned History Channel in shm,
> (is it a British or US-channel?)
US
>where they seem to have some
> good documentaries,
Some about the US history were good. About some subjects I simply don't
know enough to comment competenltly. The documentaries I saw on the Russian
old history were terrible. There were some interesting ones on the Soviet
history but a habit of the indiscriminate showing the old documentaries
is sometimes annoying: Stalin in epaulets (introduced in the beginning of
'43) in pre-WWII period or the Soviet militaries with the collar rank
insignia during discussion of 1944-45, etc.
Those about the pre-Revolutionary Russia usually are a peculiar mixture of
the supreficial (and often plain wrong) comments by some "experts" and
even peculiarer mixture of the related and unrelated artifacts.
> ( maybe there has been one about
> St. Petersburg already).
I don't recall anything worth remembering. Actually, there was one about
the architects of XVIII but, unfortunately, I saw only the last 10 minutes of
it.
> In fact I don't understand that we've heard
> so little about it on TV. Unfortunately I can't see History Channel,
> but I wonder if some of their documentaries might be sent on
> Discovery Channel later on?
>
> I found a good link to Saint Petersburg with beautiful pictures
> of the whole city and of the Hermitage with the Winter Palace.
> And with English text too - Russian is so bloody difficult!
You can't even imagine how difficult it REALLY is: most of the Soviet
leaders, from Stalin to Gorby and Yeltsin, could not learn it. :-)
> I once tried to follow a course in Russian. Oh dear!
>
You make me feel REALLY good about my own intellectual capacities:
even as a child, I was able to learn it reasonably well. :-)
Grethe Bachmann
"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:f8e58188.03060...@posting.google.com...
> "Grethe Bachmann" <grethe....@mail.tele.dk> wrote in message
news:<3eda4549$0$32520$edfa...@dread16.news.tele.dk>...
> > "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
> > news:f8e58188.03060...@posting.google.com...
> > > "OldWilmington" <Oldwil...@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:<kPeCa.10601$_w.58...@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
> []
> > > > lay eyes on St. Petersburg (or any spot in Russia, for that matter).
> > >
> > > AFAIK, they did a lot of the restorations recently so this may be a
good
> > > time to visit it.
> >
> > Do you know if there was made some TV-documentary
> > in connection with the 300-years jubilee of St. Petersburg?
> > We have only had a short review in our Today's News here
> > in DK.
>
> I saw only some rather incomprehensible Russian and US news. Russian were
> showing some views of Peterhoff and St-P. and telling in some length
> how President Putin communicated with various foreign leaders (as I
> understand, when all done and said, they s----d him on the issue of a
> non-visa travel between Russia and Eu). Maybe they'll produce some
documentary
> afterwards. AFAIK, the "natives" are mostly banned from the city center so
> most of the celebration is a show for the foreign visitors.
>
the restoration of the Winter Palace - only Putin and Bush talking.
It's a shame if they don't use this jubilee-occasion to do a fine
documentary about their great city.
>
>
> > Sometimes you have mentioned History Channel in shm,
> > (is it a British or US-channel?)
>
> US
>
> >where they seem to have some
> > good documentaries,
>
> Some about the US history were good. About some subjects I simply don't
> know enough to comment competenltly. The documentaries I saw on the
Russian
> old history were terrible. There were some interesting ones on the Soviet
> history but a habit of the indiscriminate showing the old documentaries
> is sometimes annoying: Stalin in epaulets (introduced in the beginning of
> '43) in pre-WWII period or the Soviet militaries with the collar rank
> insignia during discussion of 1944-45, etc.
> Those about the pre-Revolutionary Russia usually are a peculiar mixture of
> the supreficial (and often plain wrong) comments by some "experts" and
> even peculiarer mixture of the related and unrelated artifacts.
That sounds awful boring - when you think about the great medieval
material there is in Russia - then they should be able to do something
interesting documentaries.
>
> > ( maybe there has been one about
> > St. Petersburg already).
>
> I don't recall anything worth remembering. Actually, there was one about
> the architects of XVIII but, unfortunately, I saw only the last 10 minutes
of
> it.
>
> > In fact I don't understand that we've heard
> > so little about it on TV. Unfortunately I can't see History Channel,
> > but I wonder if some of their documentaries might be sent on
> > Discovery Channel later on?
> >
> > I found a good link to Saint Petersburg with beautiful pictures
> > of the whole city and of the Hermitage with the Winter Palace.
> > And with English text too - Russian is so bloody difficult!
>
> You can't even imagine how difficult it REALLY is: most of the Soviet
> leaders, from Stalin to Gorby and Yeltsin, could not learn it. :-)
>
That's a comfort, Alex!!
> > I once tried to follow a course in Russian. Oh dear!
> >
>
> You make me feel REALLY good about my own intellectual capacities:
> even as a child, I was able to learn it reasonably well. :-)
That's not a comfort at all, Alex!!
I have an excuse though - my job then, in 1988, took all my time
and overtime too, and when I started this course in Russian, it showed
I had to spend my spare time on much homework too. So I had to
give up rather quickly.I still have a pair of the books by Elena Filatova
and Sven Wahlström. And one more book (English/Russian) called:
"How to learn Russian without Toil." (by A. Chérel) My cousin handed
it over to me from her book-collection, but it is so old-fashioned -
and at the same time it's funny without having the intention of being funny.
I'll just write the start as an example:
"Russian is - rightly - said to be a difficult language. The alphabet looks
unsympathetic (!), the declensions and conjugations complex; and yet
nearly two hundred million people, most of whom are far from being
intellectuals (!), speak it as naturally as we speak English. One has no
need to be learned, or especially gifted (!) to succeed in doing what a
young 5 - or 6 year old moujik does quite naturally. (Like you, Alex!)
All you shall need is patience, steadiness in study, and confidence. We
shall take upon us to lead you along the easiest paths, and bring you to
the purposed end without too much fatigue. We even hope that
the journey will not be devoid of interest and pleasure."
And it goes on...................... `:)
Cheers
Grethe
BernardZZ
@hotmail.com said...
> > > >but for Polish
> > > > people it is important that we do consider them Europeans.
> > > >
> > > > > in particular, since this country took
> > > > > its cues from Rome rather than Byzantium.
> > > >
> > > > So what!
> > >
> > > A lot of things. For example, "stop writing nonsense". :-)
> >
> > Since when is a criteria for being European is that you that your cues
> > from Rome or Byzantium?
>
> Actually, it's important because, IIRC, whatever was equivalent of the
> cultural "european" notion during the MA, it was based on being a part
> of the "Catholic World".
Disagree. Much of the European region in medieval times was actually
pagan not Christian. Furthermore much of the central and Eastern parts
of Europe was a battle ground between the Catholic and Greek church.
Sometimes also with Islam.
> There could be questions about the non-Catholics belonging to this entity
> (Greeks, Russians, Bulgarians) but the Catholics were "in". Which means
> that the Czechs and Poles had been "in" by any criteria of the time (of
> course, at this time nobody knew that they lived in MA).
For the Czechs and Poles you would not see them "in" till about the 10th
to 14th centuries.
> Actually, the Czechs were more "in" than, say, England. The "center" of the
> medieval world was HRE and they had been in the center of HRE, with the
> King of Bohemia being the only king within HRE and Prague being more than
> once the imperial "capital".
I agree although I am not sure that I would agree with Bohemia. The
present situation in the English speaking world is quite crazy. England
was a rather small player in the period and does not merit so much
interest. It is as if someone studied the modern era and concentrated on
Canada. But as Professor Gans said "that is the way it is".
Alex
> In article <f8e58188.0306...@posting.google.com>, am05
> @hotmail.com said...
> > > > >but for Polish
> > > > > people it is important that we do consider them Europeans.
> > > > >
> > > > > > in particular, since this country took
> > > > > > its cues from Rome rather than Byzantium.
> > > > >
> > > > > So what!
> > > >
> > > > A lot of things. For example, "stop writing nonsense". :-)
> > >
> > > Since when is a criteria for being European is that you that your cues
> > > from Rome or Byzantium?
> >
> > Actually, it's important because, IIRC, whatever was equivalent of the
> > cultural "european" notion during the MA, it was based on being a part
> > of the "Catholic World".
>
> Disagree. Much of the European region in medieval times was actually
> pagan not Christian.
To start with, these areas usually did not fell into the cultural "europan"
notion (as opposite to the geographic reality). Then, short of the early
MA, MOST of the "pagans" had been located either in the area of a Polar Circle
or in the areas from Volga to Ural and were not considered "europeans".
There was one more enclave in Lithuania (mostly Zmud), which was rather
limited, and in the earlier times there were more pagans in what is now
Prussia. The bigger pagan areas belong to the times of Charlemagne & Co.
>
>Furthermore much of the central and Eastern parts
> of Europe was a battle ground between the Catholic and Greek church.
> Sometimes also with Islam.
>
The only noticeable "battlegrounds" between Catholic and Orthodox were
Bizantia (for a short time) and the Great Princedom of Lithuania, where
these processes had been carried into the modern times.
Fight between Islam and Christianity was localized to Spain and the Balkans.
However, this all is rather irrelevant to what I'm saying: the only
meaningful medieval "denominator" was a notion of a Catholic World. Most
of this world had been geographically stable, starting from the early
MA. There were some changes on its borders but the main part was intact.
>
>
> > There could be questions about the non-Catholics belonging to this entity
> > (Greeks, Russians, Bulgarians) but the Catholics were "in". Which means
> > that the Czechs and Poles had been "in" by any criteria of the time (of
> > course, at this time nobody knew that they lived in MA).
>
> For the Czechs and Poles you would not see them "in" till about the 10th
> to 14th centuries.
And X century is what, in your opinion? The modern times?
England was only marginally "in" until XI century.
>
>
> > Actually, the Czechs were more "in" than, say, England. The "center" of the
> > medieval world was HRE and they had been in the center of HRE, with the
> > King of Bohemia being the only king within HRE and Prague being more than
> > once the imperial "capital".
>
>
> I agree although I am not sure that I would agree with Bohemia.
Nobody asks you to agree or disagree. It's a fact that exists regardless
of your opinion.
> The
> present situation in the English speaking world is quite crazy.
The answer is: who cares.
>England
> was a rather small player in the period and does not merit so much
> interest. It is as if someone studied the modern era and concentrated on
> Canada. But as Professor Gans said "that is the way it is".
He usually implies "that is the way it is in the English speaking world".
Which is not the same as "world-wide".
Alex
On the Russian news (my TV pack includes the Russian channel) I saw the
small pieces of the stylized ballet performance with the Peterhoff
fountains on a background: the dancers in the costumes of XVIII. The costumes
are of a golden color and the faces are also covered with the golden paint
so that they are looking as the dancing statues.
I was expecting that (in a spirit of a true cooperation) Putin would show
Bush the "surprise fountains" so that he would be able to drench Shirac
in the water but nothing of the kind happened (which brings up the question
about the Putin's true loyalties). :-)
> >
> >
> > > Sometimes you have mentioned History Channel in shm,
> > > (is it a British or US-channel?)
> >
> > US
> >
> > >where they seem to have some
> > > good documentaries,
> >
> > Some about the US history were good. About some subjects I simply don't
> > know enough to comment competenltly. The documentaries I saw on the
> Russian
> > old history were terrible. There were some interesting ones on the Soviet
> > history but a habit of the indiscriminate showing the old documentaries
> > is sometimes annoying: Stalin in epaulets (introduced in the beginning of
> > '43) in pre-WWII period or the Soviet militaries with the collar rank
> > insignia during discussion of 1944-45, etc.
> > Those about the pre-Revolutionary Russia usually are a peculiar mixture of
> > the supreficial (and often plain wrong) comments by some "experts" and
> > even peculiarer mixture of the related and unrelated artifacts.
>
> That sounds awful boring - when you think about the great medieval
> material there is in Russia - then they should be able to do something
> interesting documentaries.
Instead, they are mostly using some old paintings (usually of the beginning
of the XX), which are hardly relevant to the subject. For example, they
would show a portrait of the singer Fedor Schaliapin (you could see his
son in "The name of the Rose" -- the blind monk) playing Tzar Boris Godunov
(without explaining that this is not an original portret).
The problem is that he himself wrote that his makeup was not "authentic".
And so on.
> >
> > > ( maybe there has been one about
> > > St. Petersburg already).
> >
> > I don't recall anything worth remembering. Actually, there was one about
> > the architects of XVIII but, unfortunately, I saw only the last 10 minutes
> of
> > it.
> >
> > > In fact I don't understand that we've heard
> > > so little about it on TV. Unfortunately I can't see History Channel,
> > > but I wonder if some of their documentaries might be sent on
> > > Discovery Channel later on?
> > >
> > > I found a good link to Saint Petersburg with beautiful pictures
> > > of the whole city and of the Hermitage with the Winter Palace.
> > > And with English text too - Russian is so bloody difficult!
> >
> > You can't even imagine how difficult it REALLY is: most of the Soviet
> > leaders, from Stalin to Gorby and Yeltsin, could not learn it. :-)
> >
> That's a comfort, Alex!!
I was doing my best. :-)
>
> > > I once tried to follow a course in Russian. Oh dear!
> > >
> >
> > You make me feel REALLY good about my own intellectual capacities:
> > even as a child, I was able to learn it reasonably well. :-)
>
> That's not a comfort at all, Alex!!
>
> I have an excuse though - my job then, in 1988, took all my time
> and overtime too, and when I started this course in Russian, it showed
> I had to spend my spare time on much homework too. So I had to
> give up rather quickly.I still have a pair of the books by Elena Filatova
> and Sven Wahlström. And one more book (English/Russian) called:
> "How to learn Russian without Toil." (by A. Chérel) My cousin handed
> it over to me from her book-collection, but it is so old-fashioned -
> and at the same time it's funny without having the intention of being funny.
> I'll just write the start as an example:
>
> "Russian is - rightly - said to be a difficult language. The alphabet looks
> unsympathetic (!), the declensions and conjugations complex; and yet
> nearly two hundred million people, most of whom are far from being
> intellectuals (!), speak it as naturally as we speak English.
As far as these millions are involved, the secret is simple. You learn
two or three obscenities and use them after every second word. This
frees you from a need to learn most of the grammar and the rules of
making the sentences. :-)
>One has no
> need to be learned, or especially gifted (!) to succeed in doing what a
> young 5 - or 6 year old moujik does quite naturally. (Like you, Alex!)
Thanks for making a "moujik" out of me. :-(
> All you shall need is patience, steadiness in study, and confidence.
Nonsense, I already gave you a simple recepie. :-)
ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk
grethe....@mail.tele.dk (Grethe Bachmann) wrote:
> "Russian is - rightly - said to be a difficult language. The
> alphabet looks unsympathetic (!), the declensions and conjugations
> complex;
I have done a years worth of Russian lessons a long time ago. And
forgotten most of it. It is not as complicated as English, far less
irregular verbs for a start. The alphabet is difficult but by the end
of the year I had no difficulty in reading a sentence aloud even if I
did not understand it. It did help that modern Russian has a large
number of loan words in it.
Medieval Russian or even 17th century is a different kettle of fish.
For a start the alphabet has more letters, there has been at least one
reformation of it since then and you get the same changes in
vocabulary and meanings of words as you do in other languages.
Mind you I am hopeless at languages and only took them when they were
a required part of a course.
Ken Young
ken...@cix.co.uk
Maternity is a matter of fact
Paternity is a matter of opinion
Grethe Bachmann
How rude to ban the inhabitants from their own city's celebration.
They should have first priority. And many of those distinguished
foreign visitors might not know much about St. Petersburg's history
- unless they were briefed beforehand.
> > >
> > The TV-news I saw about St.Petersburg showed nothing about
> > the restoration of the Winter Palace - only Putin and Bush talking.
> > It's a shame if they don't use this jubilee-occasion to do a fine
> > documentary about their great city.
>
> On the Russian news (my TV pack includes the Russian channel) I saw the
> small pieces of the stylized ballet performance with the Peterhoff
> fountains on a background: the dancers in the costumes of XVIII. The
costumes
> are of a golden color and the faces are also covered with the golden paint
> so that they are looking as the dancing statues.
I can imagine that. Maybe we saw something alike once in a New Year's
concert from Vienna? I've heard that this gold-makeup is poisinous
and that the skin cannot breathe, but maybe they've found out something
better now. Anyway, it must have been a beautiful show.
> I was expecting that (in a spirit of a true cooperation) Putin would show
> Bush the "surprise fountains" so that he would be able to drench Shirac
> in the water but nothing of the kind happened (which brings up the
question
> about the Putin's true loyalties). :-)
>
Putin seems to have an extremely strong personality - and it was even
more obvious together with Bush, who looked (I'm sorry to say that, I
really don't want to offend anyone) like a little frightened boy. He's the
leader of the biggest super-power in the world, and he looks confused.
This doesn't really sound good. They need to have some marketing
people over there to tell them what to do about their great material.
Or maybe the Russians who really know how to do it, are prevented
from it by some of the power people or by the lack of money.
I remember the blind monk in The Name of the Rose He was frightening,
wasn't he? I didn't know he was a son of Schaliapin.
I like the great Russian composers and their operas. Fortunately we've
got a fine Opera House in my little town, and the city-counsil spends
a lot of money for this _good_purpose.
There was a Russian Opera film once, I don't remember the name, but
there were scenes from Prince Igor, Boris Godunov and Eugen Onegin
and others I don't recall. They had of course chosen all the best and most
wellknown scenes and arias. I wish I could remember the name of this
movie. It's ma.....ny years ago, but it was long after Schaliapin. Right
after
the world war - not the first, Alex !! I'm not that old - after the second,
of
course! `:) And I was just a little girl. Is that a moujikka? It was the
first
time I heard the Polovetser-dances.
> > > > ( maybe there has been one about St. Petersburg already).
> > >
> > > I don't recall anything worth remembering. Actually, there was one
about
> > > the architects of XVIII but, unfortunately, I saw only the last 10
minutes
> > of it.
> > >
> > > > In fact I don't understand that we've heard
> > > > so little about it on TV. Unfortunately I can't see History Channel,
> > > > but I wonder if some of their documentaries might be sent on
> > > > Discovery Channel later on?
> > > >
> > > > I found a good link to Saint Petersburg with beautiful pictures
> > > > of the whole city and of the Hermitage with the Winter Palace.
> > > > And with English text too - Russian is so bloody difficult!
> > >
> > > You can't even imagine how difficult it REALLY is: most of the Soviet
> > > leaders, from Stalin to Gorby and Yeltsin, could not learn it. :-)
> > >
> > That's a comfort, Alex!!
>
> I was doing my best. :-)
>
BTW, something about Yeltsin, that big bear! I've always
wondered what Yeltsin and Clinton laughed so much about, when
we saw them almost collapsing with laughter on TV. I guess it was
something very naughty. I couldn't help laughing, although I had no
idea what it was all about.
> > > I once tried to follow a course in Russian. Oh dear!
> > > > > >
> > > You make me feel REALLY good about my own intellectual capacities:
> > > even as a child, I was able to learn it reasonably well. :-)
> >
> > That's not a comfort at all, Alex!!
> >
> > I have an excuse though - my job then, in 1988, took all my time
> > and overtime too, and when I started this course in Russian, it showed
> > I had to spend my spare time on much homework too. So I had to
> > give up rather quickly.I still have a pair of the books by Elena
Filatova
> > and Sven Wahlström. And one more book (English/Russian) called:
> > "How to learn Russian without Toil." (by A. Chérel) My cousin handed
> > it over to me from her book-collection, but it is so old-fashioned -
> > and at the same time it's funny without having the intention of being
funny.
> >
> > I'll just write the start as an example:
> > " Russian is - rightly - said to be a difficult language. The alphabet
looks
> > unsympathetic (!), the declensions and conjugations complex; and yet
> > nearly two hundred million people, most of whom are far from being
> > intellectuals (!), speak it as naturally as we speak English."
> >> As far as these millions are involved, the secret is simple. You learn
> two or three obscenities and use them after every second word. This
> frees you from a need to learn most of the grammar and the rules of
> making the sentences. :-)
Yes, and I've been told that Russian is the language with the biggest
number of swear-words! You say it's enough with two or three
obscenities. Have they also learned to say F..ck now?
>
>
> "One has noneed to be learned, or especially gifted (!) to succeed in
doing what a
> young 5 - or 6 year old moujik does quite naturally." (Like you, Alex!)
>
> Thanks for making a "moujik" out of me. :-(
>
I'm so sorry if that was an insult! I don't know what a moujik is, but I
thought it was a sweet little boy! And now it seems that a moujik might
be a little bad boy instead. I didn't mean to call you a bad boy, Alex!
> All you shall need is patience, steadiness in study, and confidence.
>
> Nonsense, I already gave you a simple recepie. :-)
It wasn't me who said that. It was that chap A. Chérel -
as you very well know. . ....... you little moujik! *:) `:)
Grethe
Grethe Bachmann
<ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk> skrev i en meddelelse
news:bbg441$692$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk...
Thank you, Ken! In fact I'm glad that you say English can be
complicated too. The more I learn about the English language,
the more difficult I find it to express myself grammatically correct.
I try to do it right - but I have acknowledged that I will never know
the half of it. I'm aware of my limitations now - I wasn't before,
believe you me ! I had good marks in school and later on, but that
really doesn't matter among some born Englishmen and Americans.
I just jumped into an interesting medieval group of experienced
historians. Uhu!! I was afraid of them all in the beginning!!
I wanted to learn Russian to impress one of my Slavic friends,
who had an M.A. in Russian!! Pride is one of the deadly sins,
isn't it?
Cheers
Grethe
OldWilmington
>
> AFAIK, they did a lot of the restorations recently so this may be a good
> time to visit it.
> Moscow is, of course, another obvious target. Probably they still have an
> express overnight train between these two cities.
>
I suppose the cuisine would be very similar to Polish, too.
Another idea of heaven on earth...
>
> >I'd
> > rather spend my tourist dollars with folks who appreciate the business,
and
> > who are warm and friendly!
>
> You mean "not French"? :-)
>
Speaking of taking a shot at the French, the other night I watched _Matric
Reloaded_ and the Wachowski brothers created an arch-villian called the
Merovingian who was over-the-top French. Delicious!
> [I suspect that the $$ still can buy a lot of friendliness and good will
in
> both of these countries.]
'Specially nowadays! I'm sure French manners have noticably improved.
Really, I don't have that much against the French, except their own tendency
to self-aggrandizement. ;-)
OldWilmington
I have gone back to trying to teach myself Russian years after a one year
college course using both my textbook and the paperback _Russian in 10
Minutes a Day_. The latter is plenty of fun, but it lacks accent marks on
the words, as my Warsaw-born best friend noticed immediately. However, I'm
glad I purchased it.
Also, there are some websites up with sound effects that are enjoyable.
I've also started a collection of Russian folk songs and opera on CD. My
Warsaw cousin said one of the only things he misses about the Russian
soldiers was their musicality and all their songs!
Best,
Donata
"Grethe Bachmann" <grethe....@mail.tele.dk> wrote in message
news:3eda7522$0$97160$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
Alex
> In article <3eda7522$0$97160$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk>,
> grethe....@mail.tele.dk (Grethe Bachmann) wrote:
>
> > "Russian is - rightly - said to be a difficult language. The
> > alphabet looks unsympathetic (!), the declensions and conjugations
> > complex;
>
> I have done a years worth of Russian lessons a long time ago. And
> forgotten most of it. It is not as complicated as English, far less
> irregular verbs for a start. The alphabet is difficult
Now, what is difficult about the alphabet?
>but by the end
> of the year I had no difficulty in reading a sentence aloud even if I
> did not understand it.
Wow, it took Breznev a whole lifetime to achieve the same result and he
still misspeled most of what he was reading. :-)
>It did help that modern Russian has a large
> number of loan words in it.
>
> Medieval Russian or even 17th century is a different kettle of fish.
Indeed. I had serious difficulties reading the medieval Russian even
when it was printed using the modern alphabet.
> For a start the alphabet has more letters,
The letters had been substantially different from the modern ones and
the language (vocabulary) was different as well.
> there has been at least one
> reformation of it since then
Two:
(a) A major one by Peter I when the modern-looking letters had been
introduced.
(b) Commies abolished some rarely used letters (like "i").
BernardZZ
@hotmail.com said...
> BernardZZ <Bern...@REMOVEmail.com to reply delete REMOVE> wrote in message news:<52a765e18b3223b8...@free.teranews.com>...
> > In article <f8e58188.0306...@posting.google.com>, am05
> > @hotmail.com said...
> > > > > >but for Polish
> > > > > > people it is important that we do consider them Europeans.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > in particular, since this country took
> > > > > > > its cues from Rome rather than Byzantium.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So what!
> > > > >
> > > > > A lot of things. For example, "stop writing nonsense". :-)
> > > >
> > > > Since when is a criteria for being European is that you that your cues
> > > > from Rome or Byzantium?
> > >
> > > Actually, it's important because, IIRC, whatever was equivalent of the
> > > cultural "european" notion during the MA, it was based on being a part
> > > of the "Catholic World".
> >
> > Disagree. Much of the European region in medieval times was actually
> > pagan not Christian.
>
> To start with, these areas usually did not fell into the cultural "europan"
> notion (as opposite to the geographic reality). Then, short of the early
> MA, MOST of the "pagans" had been located either in the area of a Polar Circle
> or in the areas from Volga to Ural and were not considered "europeans".
> There was one more enclave in Lithuania (mostly Zmud), which was rather
> limited, and in the earlier times there were more pagans in what is now
> Prussia. The bigger pagan areas belong to the times of Charlemagne & Co.
(a)
So we have a division between a cultural and a geographic Europe! Hold
this thought.
>
>
> >
> >Furthermore much of the central and Eastern parts
> > of Europe was a battle ground between the Catholic and Greek church.
> > Sometimes also with Islam.
> >
>
> The only noticeable "battlegrounds" between Catholic and Orthodox were
> Bizantia (for a short time) and the Great Princedom of Lithuania, where
> these processes had been carried into the modern times.
Disagree. Russia for example, could have gone either way.
> Fight between Islam and Christianity was localized to Spain and the Balkans.
> However, this all is rather irrelevant to what I'm saying: the only
> meaningful medieval "denominator" was a notion of a Catholic World. Most
> of this world had been geographically stable, starting from the early
> MA. There were some changes on its borders but the main part was intact.
If so then Russia and Greece would be not be in this Catholic world! So
they outside this cultural "European" in (a).
> > > There could be questions about the non-Catholics belonging to this entity
> > > (Greeks, Russians, Bulgarians) but the Catholics were "in". Which means
> > > that the Czechs and Poles had been "in" by any criteria of the time (of
> > > course, at this time nobody knew that they lived in MA).
> >
> > For the Czechs and Poles you would not see them "in" till about the 10th
> > to 14th centuries.
>
> And X century is what, in your opinion? The modern times?
In this medieval forum which sees it covering dates from 500 to 1500CE,
it is about halfway.
>
> England was only marginally "in" until XI century.
Agreed.
>
> >
> >
> > > Actually, the Czechs were more "in" than, say, England. The "center" of the
> > > medieval world was HRE and they had been in the center of HRE, with the
> > > King of Bohemia being the only king within HRE and Prague being more than
> > > once the imperial "capital".
> >
> >
> > I agree although I am not sure that I would agree with Bohemia.
>
> Nobody asks you to agree or disagree. It's a fact that exists regardless
> of your opinion.
>
> > The
> > present situation in the English speaking world is quite crazy.
>
> The answer is: who cares.
An English speaking poster.
>
> >England
> > was a rather small player in the period and does not merit so much
> > interest. It is as if someone studied the modern era and concentrated on
> > Canada. But as Professor Gans said "that is the way it is".
>
> He usually implies "that is the way it is in the English speaking world".
> Which is not the same as "world-wide".
Agreed. When I read medieval history from other countries, they will
discuss different countries.
Grethe Bachmann
"OldWilmington" <Oldwil...@nc.rr.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:mJPCa.44093$jp.7...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> Hi, Grethe,
>
> I have gone back to trying to teach myself Russian years after a one year
> college course using both my textbook and the paperback _Russian in 10
> Minutes a Day_. The latter is plenty of fun, but it lacks accent marks on
> the words, as my Warsaw-born best friend noticed immediately. However,
I'm
> glad I purchased it.
>
> Also, there are some websites up with sound effects that are enjoyable.
> I've also started a collection of Russian folk songs and opera on CD. My
> Warsaw cousin said one of the only things he misses about the Russian
> soldiers was their musicality and all their songs!
>
Hello Donata!
Some years ago there were much on TV here about Russian Operas
and folkmusic and dances, but I sometimes think it depends on,_ who_
is in the management of the TV-companies/channels. We've got a lot
of American TV-series here in DK, and it's not that I've got something
against any country at all, but I'd wish our choices were more widespread.
Fortunately one of our channels have a more varied TV- programme
with documentaries, music and so from other countries, but I really miss
more history-documentaries, medieval history in special. I guess it's
impossible and too expensive to satisfie everybody. You'll just have
to pluck out the little bits and pieces you are mostly interested in.
I'll look out for "Russian in 10 Minutes a Day". Maybe it's a language
series of paper backs? I'd like to learn Italian too in that way!
Cheers
Grethe
Alex
> "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
> > > AFAIK, they did a lot of the restorations recently so this may be a
> > > good time to visit it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you know if there was made some TV-documentary
> > > > > in connection with the 300-years jubilee of St. Petersburg?
> > > > > We have only had a short review in our Today's News here
> > > > > in DK.
> > > >
> > > > I saw only some rather incomprehensible Russian and US news. Russian
> were
> > > > showing some views of Peterhoff and St-P. and telling in some length
> > > > how President Putin communicated with various foreign leaders (as I
> > > > understand, when all done and said, they s----d him on the issue of a
> > > > non-visa travel between Russia and Eu). Maybe they'll produce some
> > > >documentary afterwards. AFAIK, the "natives" are mostly banned from
> the city > > >center so most of the celebration is a show for the foreign
> visitors.
>
> How rude to ban the inhabitants from their own city's celebration.
AFAIK, the explanations given are:
(a) Security
(b) Priority of an access: the dignitaries MUST see the show.
[this does not mean that I disagree with you]
> They should have first priority.
To be fair, I don't think that it would be technically possible to transport
few hundred thousand people in Peterhoff.
BTW, an interesting fact. According to the Russian news, the Hungarian
President sent to Peterhoff a considerable ammount of the Hungarian wines.
The obvious question is: who will drink it?
>And many of those distinguished
> foreign visitors might not know much about St. Petersburg's history
> - unless they were briefed beforehand.
>
> > > >
> > > The TV-news I saw about St.Petersburg showed nothing about
> > > the restoration of the Winter Palace - only Putin and Bush talking.
> > > It's a shame if they don't use this jubilee-occasion to do a fine
> > > documentary about their great city.
> >
> > On the Russian news (my TV pack includes the Russian channel) I saw the
> > small pieces of the stylized ballet performance with the Peterhoff
> > fountains on a background: the dancers in the costumes of XVIII. The
> costumes
> > are of a golden color and the faces are also covered with the golden paint
> > so that they are looking as the dancing statues.
>
> I can imagine that. Maybe we saw something alike once in a New Year's
> concert from Vienna?
The concerts from abroad is not something routinely shown on US TV.
>I've heard that this gold-makeup is poisinous
> and that the skin cannot breathe, but maybe they've found out something
> better now.
I thought that this was a problem in the times of Leonardo. Recently I saw
some British movie (on BBC America) where an actress was walking completely
covered with a gold dust without any visible damage to her health.
> Anyway, it must have been a beautiful show.
All the 30 seconds of it shown in the news. :-)
>
> > I was expecting that (in a spirit of a true cooperation) Putin would show
> > Bush the "surprise fountains" so that he would be able to drench Shirac
> > in the water but nothing of the kind happened (which brings up the
> question
> > about the Putin's true loyalties). :-)
> >
> Putin seems to have an extremely strong personality
With the local news praising him 24x7, it's not such a difficult task.
> and it was even
> more obvious together with Bush, who looked (I'm sorry to say that, I
> really don't want to offend anyone) like a little frightened boy. He's the
> leader of the biggest super-power in the world, and he looks confused.
Don't know. In the Russian news he looked pretty much at ease. Not that
he was doing anything besides shaking the hands and sitting in the chair.
I doubt that most of the presidents present had a clear idea what exactly
they are doing in this time and place. Personally, I was not impressed
with Schroeder's technique of drinking vodka. BTW, why would somebody
drink vodka with all this tokaj being available?
It does not. Actually, it's pretty annoying.
>They need to have some marketing
> people over there to tell them what to do about their great material.
> Or maybe the Russians who really know how to do it, are prevented
> from it by some of the power people or by the lack of money.
The shows are done by the Americans and for the Americans. I don't think
that the Russians have too much to do with it. There is usually one or
two of them in the show but most of the talking is done by the Americans.
>
> I remember the blind monk in The Name of the Rose He was frightening,
> wasn't he? I didn't know he was a son of Schaliapin.
Yep. Fedor Shaliapin Jr.
[]
> And I was just a little girl. Is that a moujikka?
No, "mujik" is strictly for the grown up males. A young girl is "devotchka".
[]
> > >> As far as these millions are involved, the secret is simple. You learn
> > two or three obscenities and use them after every second word. This
> > frees you from a need to learn most of the grammar and the rules of
> > making the sentences. :-)
>
> Yes, and I've been told that Russian is the language with the biggest
> number of swear-words!
I consulted on this account some europeans and they assured me that
Hungarian, Polish and German practically don't have anything "serious".
However, the Spaniards could produce something comparable and, the
English is practically the same as Russian with the differences in few
"specifics".
>You say it's enough with two or three
> obscenities. Have they also learned to say F..ck now?
How can I tell? I was not in Russia since 1989. However, the Russian
equivalent would be "F..ck your mother": language does not "allow" to
say simply "F..ck you". Otherwise, as I said, both languages are pretty
much "equal".
> >
> >
> > "One has noneed to be learned, or especially gifted (!) to succeed in
> doing what a
> > young 5 - or 6 year old moujik does quite naturally." (Like you, Alex!)
> >
> > Thanks for making a "moujik" out of me. :-(
> >
> I'm so sorry if that was an insult!
I know. See explanation below.
>I don't know what a moujik is, but I
> thought it was a sweet little boy! And now it seems that a moujik might
> be a little bad boy instead. I didn't mean to call you a bad boy, Alex!
"Mujik" means one of two things:
(a) conversational for "male" (if you are talking in "buddy-buddy" style)
(b) a male peasant. I was joking about this meaning.
>
> > All you shall need is patience, steadiness in study, and confidence.
> >
> > Nonsense, I already gave you a simple recepie. :-)
>
> It wasn't me who said that. It was that chap A. Chérel -
> as you very well know. . ....... you little moujik! *:) `:)
>
Don't be a nasty devotchka. :-)
Grethe Bachmann
> "Grethe Bachmann" <grethe....@mail.tele.dk> wrote in message
news:<3edbb3a3$0$32538$edfa...@dread16.news.tele.dk>...
> > "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
> > > I saw only some rather incomprehensible Russian and US news.
> > > Russian were showing some views of Peterhoff and St-P. and
> > > telling in some length how President Putin communicated with
> > > various foreign leaders (as I understand, when all done and said,
> > > they s----d him on the issue of a non-visa travel between Russia
> > > and Eu). Maybe they'll produce somedocumentary afterwards.
> > > AFAIK, the "natives" are mostly banned from the city center
> > > so most of the celebration is a show for the foreign visitors.
> >
> > How rude to ban the inhabitants from their own city's celebration.
>
> AFAIK, the explanations given are:
> (a) Security
> (b) Priority of an access: the dignitaries MUST see the show.
>
> [this does not mean that I disagree with you]
>
> > They should have first priority.
>
> To be fair, I don't think that it would be technically possible to
transport
> few hundred thousand people in Peterhoff.
But the whole city should be celebrating the 300 years, I mean.
>
> BTW, an interesting fact. According to the Russian news, the Hungarian
> President sent to Peterhoff a considerable ammount of the Hungarian wines.
> The obvious question is: who will drink it?
Tokayer - a good wine. Why wouldn't they like to drink that?
Do they only drink vodka?
>
> >And many of those distinguished foreign visitors might not know
> > much about St. Petersburg's history - unless they were briefed
> > beforehand.
> >
> > > > The TV-news I saw about St.Petersburg showed nothing about
> > > > the restoration of the Winter Palace - only Putin and Bush talking.
> > > > It's a shame if they don't use this jubilee-occasion to do a fine
> > > > documentary about their great city.
> > >
> > > On the Russian news (my TV pack includes the Russian channel)
> > > I saw the small pieces of the stylized ballet performance with
> > > the Peterhoff fountains on a background: the dancers in the
> > > costumes of XVIII. The costumes are of a golden color and
> > > the faces are also covered with the golden paint so that they are
> > > looking as the dancing statues.
> >
> > I can imagine that. Maybe we saw something alike once in a New Year's
> > concert from Vienna?
>
> The concerts from abroad is not something routinely shown on US TV.
They are sent every year on New Year's Day at twelve noon here.
>
> >I've heard that this gold-makeup is poisinous and that the skin
> >cannot breathe, but maybe they've found out something better now.
>
> I thought that this was a problem in the times of Leonardo.
> Recently I saw some British movie (on BBC America) where an actress
> was walking completely covered with a gold dust without any visible
> damage to her health.
>
Maybe she fainted afterwards! *:)
>
> > Anyway, it must have been a beautiful show.
>
> All the 30 seconds of it shown in the news. :-)
>
> > > I was expecting that (in a spirit of a true cooperation) Putin
> > > would show Bush the "surprise fountains" so that he would
> > > be able to drench Shirac in the water but nothing of the kind
> > > happened (which brings up the question about the Putin's true
> > > loyalties). :-)
It would be fun to see that elegant Shirac as wet as a drowned rat!
> > >
> > Putin seems to have an extremely strong personality
>
> With the local news praising him 24x7, it's not such a difficult task.
I don't know about that. To me he just appears as a strong -
and maybe a brutal man, if he's provoked. It's only my private
guess. As my guess about Bush.
>
> > and it was even more obvious together with Bush, who looked
> > (I'm sorry to say that, I really don't want to offend anyone) like
> > a little frightened boy. He's the leader of the biggest super-power
> > in the world, and he looks confused.
>
> Don't know. In the Russian news he looked pretty much at ease.
> Not that he was doing anything besides shaking the hands and
> sitting in the chair. I doubt that most of the presidents present had
> a clear idea what exactly they are doing in this time and place.
Maybe they were all confused. I only saw him and Putin.
Personally, I was not impressed with Schroeder's technique of
drinking vodka. BTW, why would somebody drink vodka with
all this tokaj being available?
If he preferred the Tokayer instead of the vodka, he might be
unpolite to the Russians??
(snip, documentaries)
> > > .......................... in pre-WWII period or the Soviet militaries
> > > with the collar rank insignia during discussion of 1944-45, etc.
> > > Those about the pre-Revolutionary Russia usually are a peculiar
> > > mixture of the supreficial (and often plain wrong) comments
> > > by some "experts" and even peculiarer mixture of the related
> > > and unrelated artifacts.
> > > >
> > > > That sounds awful boring - when you think about the great
> > > > medieval material there is in Russia - then they should be
> > > > able to do something interesting documentaries.
> > >
> > > Instead, they are mostly using some old paintings (usually of the
> > >beginningof the XX), which are hardly relevant to the subject.
> > >For example, they would show a portrait of the singer Fedor
> > > Schaliapin (you could see his son in "The name of the Rose"
> > > -- the blind monk) playing Tzar Boris Godunov (without
> > > explaining that this is not an original portret).
> > > The problem is that he himself wrote that his makeup was not
> > > "authentic". And so on.
> > >
> > This doesn't really sound good.
>
> It does not. Actually, it's pretty annoying.
>
> >They need to have some marketing
> > people over there to tell them what to do about their great material.
> > Or maybe the Russians who really know how to do it, are prevented
> > from it by some of the power people or by the lack of money.
>
> The shows are done by the Americans and for the Americans. I don't think
> that the Russians have too much to do with it. There is usually one or
> two of them in the show but most of the talking is done by the Americans.
>
I didn't know.
I really wish I knew the cyrillic letters, then I should write
something teasing to you in Russian.
Cheers
Dosvidanya! (Wrong?)
Grethe `:)
erilar
Bachmann" <grethe....@mail.tele.dk> wrote:
> Putin seems to have an extremely strong personality - and it was even
> more obvious together with Bush, who looked (I'm sorry to say that, I
> really don't want to offend anyone) like a little frightened boy. He's the
> leader of the biggest super-power in the world, and he looks confused.
That's probably because he is confused. I didn't see that, but I have a
tendency to turn the TV off or to another station if Bush's face or
voice intrudes. He sets my teeth on edge rather like fingernails on a
chalkboard--for those who remember that sound.
--
Mary Loomer Oliver(aka erilar)
Erilar's Cave Annex:
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk
grethe....@mail.tele.dk (Grethe Bachmann) wrote:
> The more I learn about the English language,
> the more difficult I find it to express myself grammatically
> correct.
Do not let that worry you. Most native English speakers have not
mastered the grammar either. I write Fan Fiction and have to get
somebody else to correct my grammar.
Yours and Alex's posts are always understandable, which is more than
I can say for one presumably native English (well American) speaker.
I have a nasty feeling that the above might be read as patronising.
If so it is not intended except for the dig at DSH. I really admire
the way that non native English speakers manage what has been alleged
to be the most complicated language on earth.
ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk
am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:
> Now, what is difficult about the alphabet?
Pronouncing it, if I had been Scottish it would have been easier as
the accent there uses similar sounds.
D. Spencer Hines
PRONOUNCING Russian is quite logical ---- and indeed easy.
It's far more "reasonable" and consistent in that respect than is English.
You obviously don't know Russian ---- and have a poor understanding of the
comparisons and contrasts between Russian and English.
You yourself admit your English grammar is poor. So is your logic and your
comprehension ---- as we can readily see from the choice bit of puerile
gibberish you've written below.
That's two strikes.... [I'm being most generous....]
Would you like to try for three?
Deus Vult.
"I pass with relief from the tossing sea of Cause and Theory to the firm
ground of Result and Fact."
Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill [1874-1965] ---- The Malakand Field
Force [1898]
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor
Fortuna et Gloria
<ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bbiodd$hvu$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk...
Alex
> "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:f8e58188.03060...@posting.google.com...
> > "Grethe Bachmann" <grethe....@mail.tele.dk> wrote in message
> news:<3edbb3a3$0$32538$edfa...@dread16.news.tele.dk>...
> > > "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
> (snip)
>
> > > > I saw only some rather incomprehensible Russian and US news.
> > > > Russian were showing some views of Peterhoff and St-P. and
> > > > telling in some length how President Putin communicated with
> > > > various foreign leaders (as I understand, when all done and said,
> > > > they s----d him on the issue of a non-visa travel between Russia
> > > > and Eu). Maybe they'll produce somedocumentary afterwards.
> > > > AFAIK, the "natives" are mostly banned from the city center
> > > > so most of the celebration is a show for the foreign visitors.
> > >
> > > How rude to ban the inhabitants from their own city's celebration.
> >
> > AFAIK, the explanations given are:
> > (a) Security
> > (b) Priority of an access: the dignitaries MUST see the show.
> >
> > [this does not mean that I disagree with you]
> >
> > > They should have first priority.
> >
> > To be fair, I don't think that it would be technically possible to
> transport
> > few hundred thousand people in Peterhoff.
>
> But the whole city should be celebrating the 300 years, I mean.
Probably. OTOH, why? Most of the population are not really the "herediatory"
citizens of St-P: there were numerous post-Revolutionary "cleansings" and
hundreds of thousands died during Blockade of Leningrad (WWII).
Not to mention that the foundation of what became the beautiful city was
not beautiful at all: tens of thousands died on the early stages of its
construction.
> >
> > BTW, an interesting fact. According to the Russian news, the Hungarian
> > President sent to Peterhoff a considerable ammount of the Hungarian wines.
> > The obvious question is: who will drink it?
>
> Tokayer - a good wine. Why wouldn't they like to drink that?
The question is not "why wouldn't they" but "who exactly will drink it"?
If it is in the cellars of Peterhoff, who'll have an access to it?
> Do they only drink vodka?
Not only, AFAIK. But it looks like this was what they gave to the gathered
Presidents. Otherwise, why the moronic statementabout Russia and EU being
as unseparated as vodka and the black caviar? BTW, one prominent (not really)
Soviet writer remarked that only the idiots drink vodka with caviar: it
should be drunk with a hot food. :-)
[]
> >
> > >I've heard that this gold-makeup is poisinous and that the skin
> > >cannot breathe, but maybe they've found out something better now.
> >
> > I thought that this was a problem in the times of Leonardo.
> > Recently I saw some British movie (on BBC America) where an actress
> > was walking completely covered with a gold dust without any visible
> > damage to her health.
> >
> Maybe she fainted afterwards! *:)
Not on the screen. :-)
> >
> > > Anyway, it must have been a beautiful show.
> >
> > All the 30 seconds of it shown in the news. :-)
> >
> > > > I was expecting that (in a spirit of a true cooperation) Putin
> > > > would show Bush the "surprise fountains" so that he would
> > > > be able to drench Shirac in the water but nothing of the kind
> > > > happened (which brings up the question about the Putin's true
> > > > loyalties). :-)
>
> It would be fun to see that elegant Shirac as wet as a drowned rat!
And this could easily lead to the "reconcilliation": "OK, now we are even,
here is a towel!" :-)
> > > >
> > > Putin seems to have an extremely strong personality
> >
> > With the local news praising him 24x7, it's not such a difficult task.
>
> I don't know about that.
I keep waiting when they'll come to the logical point of equaling him
to a medieval monarch: "Today President Putin visited <whatever> and cured
<does not matter whom> from a leprosy <or AIDS>". :-)
> To me he just appears as a strong -
> and maybe a brutal man, if he's provoked.
He probably has some goal. Unfortunately, I have no clue what his goal is.
>It's only my private
> guess. As my guess about Bush.
I rather like(d) Bush but I'm far from a starry-eyed adoration and not
completely happy with EVERYTHING he is doing.
> >
> > > and it was even more obvious together with Bush, who looked
> > > (I'm sorry to say that, I really don't want to offend anyone) like
> > > a little frightened boy. He's the leader of the biggest super-power
> > > in the world, and he looks confused.
> >
> > Don't know. In the Russian news he looked pretty much at ease.
> > Not that he was doing anything besides shaking the hands and
> > sitting in the chair. I doubt that most of the presidents present had
> > a clear idea what exactly they are doing in this time and place.
>
> Maybe they were all confused. I only saw him and Putin.
>
> Personally, I was not impressed with Schroeder's technique of
> drinking vodka. BTW, why would somebody drink vodka with
> all this tokaj being available?
>
> If he preferred the Tokayer instead of the vodka, he might be
> unpolite to the Russians??
I don't think so. Besudes, this would be historically accurate because
Peter I liked tokaj (and vodka as well).
This partially explains the sloppiness: 90% of the viewers will not know
the difference and the expences are close to zero.
[]
> I really wish I knew the cyrillic letters, then I should write
> something teasing to you in Russian.
You can download the Cyrillic keyboard but a knowledge of the letters is,
of course, another story. So, I'm relatively safe for a while. :-)
>
> Cheers
> Dosvidanya! (Wrong?)
Correct (but it's two words: Do svidaya). :-)
> Grethe `:)
And I don't know Danish even on this level. :-(
Alex
> In article <f8e58188.03060...@posting.google.com>,
> am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:
>
> > Now, what is difficult about the alphabet?
>
> Pronouncing it, if I had been Scottish it would have been easier as
> the accent there uses similar sounds.
>
As you understand, this is rather a matter of a habit. On a positive side,
there is much stronger adherence to the rules and the letter is practically
always spells the same way, unlike English.
The grammars are considerably different and, as you may notice, I still
have problems with using the articles. :-)
OldWilmington
series of paper backs? I'd like to learn Italian too in that way!
Grethe, this is a paperback available in the U.S. through Amazon.com. It
also does come, I believe, in an Italian version.
Donata
Don't have one?
We'll set one up for you.
Russian in 10 Minutes a Day
by Kristine K. Kershul
Look inside this book
List Price: $19.95
Price: $15.96 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25.
See details.
You Save: $3.99 (20%)
Availability: Usually ships within 24 hours
24 used & new from $11.89
Edition: Paperback | All Editions
"Grethe Bachmann" <grethe....@mail.tele.dk> wrote in message
news:3edc9281$0$97272$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
Grethe Bachmann
"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:f8e58188.03060...@posting.google.com...
> "Grethe Bachmann" <grethe....@mail.tele.dk> wrote in message
> > "> > > > > > lay eyes on St. Petersburg (or any spot in Russia, for that
matter).
> > > > >
> > > > > AFAIK, they did a lot of the restorations recently so this may be
a
> > good
> > > > > time to visit it.
> > > >
> > > > Do you know if there was made some TV-documentary
> > > > in connection with the 300-years jubilee of St. Petersburg?
> > > > We have only had a short review in our Today's News here
> > > > in DK.
> > >
> > > I saw only some rather incomprehensible Russian and US news. Russian
were
> > > showing some views of Peterhoff and St-P. and telling in some length
> > > how President Putin communicated with various foreign leaders (as I
> > > understand, when all done and said, they s----d him on the issue of a
> > > non-visa travel between Russia and Eu). Maybe they'll produce some
> > documentary
> > > afterwards. AFAIK, the "natives" are mostly banned from the city
center so
> > > most of the celebration is a show for the foreign visitors.
> > >
> > The TV-news I saw about St.Petersburg showed nothing about
> > the restoration of the Winter Palace - only Putin and Bush talking.
> > It's a shame if they don't use this jubilee-occasion to do a fine
> > documentary about their great city.
Hej Alex!! and others! I have complained to Alex above,
therefore
Hej Alex!!
I quarrelled about that I had seen no documentaries about
Saint Petersburg and the 300-years celebrations, but now
to-night there really was one from TV Norway in
connection to the celebrations.( It was made before,so we
didn't see the show, you mentioned.)
It was a_ Norwegian_ documentary about the city . There is a
connection Norway-Saint Petersburg by the admiral Cornelis
Cruys ( real name Niels Olsen AFAIR),who was a Norwegian.
He was an admiral in the Russian navy, and said to be Peter
the Great's friend and right hand (he was also Peter the Great's
best man at his wedding to Katharina).
Some co-work between Cruys and an Italian architect Tresini
was mentioned. They had to "make" Petersburg a beautiful city.
We saw the Hermitage, the Winter Palace and several places
in the city itself, and there were talks with some Russian women,
who told shortly about their experiences in the city during WWII.
They were all members of a ladies-choir and drank coffee at Hotel
Astoria, where we then had the opportunity to see the great hotel,
both the restaurant and the kitchen and (the ballroom? I guess)
The supermarkets and shops looked good with plenty of food
and other articles.
It was a Norwegian, who showed us the city and talked to people.
The broadcast only lasted one half hour, but we got a good
impression of the city and it's people.
He visited a Russian family, not exactly typical Russian- the wife
was from Norway, and they had guests from both Congo and
England, but she made Bortsch, and the apartment looked Russian,
if you know what I mean? I have never been in a Russian home, my
"knowledge" is from films and a few documentaries and so!
But the pictures from Hermitage and the Winter Palace and the
channels and the bridges showed how beautiful a city Saint
Petersburg is. I should like to go there once.
Cheers
Grethe
>
(the rest snipped)
erilar
> On a positive side,
> there is much stronger adherence to the rules and the letter is
> practically
> always spells the same way, unlike English.
When it comes to spelling and pronunciation discrepencies, English makes
many languages look easy 8-)
Grethe Bachmann
> >I'll look out for "Russian in 10 Minutes a Day". Maybe it's a language
> series of paper backs? I'd like to learn Italian too in that way!
>
> Grethe, this is a paperback available in the U.S. through Amazon.com. It
> also does come, I believe, in an Italian version.
>
> Donata
>
Ciao
Grethe
Alex
> "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f8e58188.03060...@posting.google.com...
>
> >
> > AFAIK, they did a lot of the restorations recently so this may be a good
> > time to visit it.
> > Moscow is, of course, another obvious target. Probably they still have an
> > express overnight train between these two cities.
> >
>
> I suppose the cuisine would be very similar to Polish, too.
> Another idea of heaven on earth...
I'm not sure that it's similar to Polish and that there is something
you can count as a traditional Russian cuisine (OTOH, who knows? maybe
these guys managed to recreate something similar).
I read quite a few "old" Russian authors who went into the considerable
details of the traditional Russian cuisine and practically nothing of it
was available in any decent form or shape during the Soviet times.
If you go to visit Russia, I'd recmmend a Georgian cuisine. It was widely
popular and probably still popular in Russia.
>
> >
> > >I'd
> > > rather spend my tourist dollars with folks who appreciate the business,
> and
> > > who are warm and friendly!
> >
> > You mean "not French"? :-)
> >
>
> Speaking of taking a shot at the French, the other night I watched _Matric
> Reloaded_ and the Wachowski brothers created an arch-villian called the
> Merovingian who was over-the-top French. Delicious!
Well, it could be 'Chiracian' :-)
>
> > [I suspect that the $$ still can buy a lot of friendliness and good will
> in
> > both of these countries.]
>
> 'Specially nowadays! I'm sure French manners have noticably improved.
> Really, I don't have that much against the French, except their own tendency
> to self-aggrandizement. ;-)
Well, I did not like their international maneuvering (and I seriously
dislike de Gaulle and most of what he did, esp. after WWII) but this is
neither here nor there. IMO, Chirac went too far with his "let's confront
America" but, OTOH, it's absurd to BUY a wine just to pour it into the drain
(personally, I prefer the Spanish wines so why would I care about the French
ones?).
OldWilmington
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: soc.history.medieval
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 20:56
Subject: Re: History of Slavs
>
> Well, I did not like their international maneuvering (and I seriously
> dislike de Gaulle and most of what he did, esp. after WWII) but this is
> neither here nor there. IMO, Chirac went too far with his "let's confront
> America" but, OTOH, it's absurd to BUY a wine just to pour it into the
drain
> (personally, I prefer the Spanish wines so why would I care about the
French
> ones?).
My husband was born in Northern Italy, and he has always considered French
wines overrated when not downright lousy.
P.S. I noticed there was a Georgian restaurant in Warsaw.
Alex
He knows better than me.
> P.S. I noticed there was a Georgian restaurant in Warsaw.
This could be a REAL possibility. :-)
BTW, the Georgian wines are really good if you like them on a sweeter side.
They are available here as well but, IMO, overpriced.