In 1937, the Iranian government donated to the USSR Academy of Sciences a photocopy of the Mashhad (complete) manuscript of Ibn Fadlan, discovered in 23 A. Z. V. Tagan (A. Z. Validov), an orientalist who had emigrated from Russia. This was the last find introduced into scientific circulation and still completing the list of texts usually referred to as oriental sources, to which all information in Arabic, Persian, Hebrew, Syriac, Armenian and other non-European languages is usually included.
Ibn Fadlan's "Note" is the travel notes of the secretary of the embassy of the ruler of the faithful to the ruler of Volga Bulgaria. The embassy itself, as Ibn Fadlan writes, was undertaken in response to a letter from al-Hasan, son of Baltavar, king of Bulgaria to the Caliph of Baghdad al-Muktadir (908-932), in which he asks him to send them (people) to him. whoever taught him the faith would teach him the laws of Islam (1.461). The embassy took place in 922.
In 1939, Ibn Fadlan's "Note" was translated into Russian and published by A. P. Kovalevsky. (In the same year, the German edition of A. Z. V. Togan was published. 2). Having become one of the most popular texts, not only in the USSR-Russia, but all over the world, (as evidenced by the emergence of the Hollywood historical block-buster "The 13th Warrior"), nevertheless, due to a very late entry into the scientific turnover, Ibn Fadlan's "Note" does not seem to have received proper coverage yet.
One of the most impressive facts contained in this work is that from the first to the last line Ibn Fadlan is named the ruler of the Volga Bulgaria - malik as-Sakaliba - the king of the Slavs. This fact apparently so amazed the translator A. P. Kovalevsky and the publisher, academician I. Yu. Krachkovsky that they replaced the original title: The Book of Ahmad Ibn Fadlan ibn al-'Abbas ibn Rashid ibn Hammad, a client of Muhammad ibn Sulaiman, the ambassador of al-Muktadir to the king of the Slavs, brought something neutral into the title: Ibn Fadlan's Journey to the Volga BN Zakhoder in his Caspian Code (3,4) in a rather lengthy consideration of the work of Ibn Fadlan preferred to leave this fact without mentioning, only dully admitting that “in the complex of information (Eastern authors. referring not to the Rus-Slavs, but to the Volga Bulgars.(4.78). A. P. Novosiltsev hastened to dissociate himself from this problem, attracting political arguments to a greater extent than it would have been necessary to do this: “At the same time, it reflected Togan's pan-Turkic views, who, for example, proves that“al-Sakaliba” Arab sources are Burtases, Bulgars and other Turkic tribes of Eastern Europe. The question of the meaning of the term "al-Sakaliba" is not easy and, in fact, has not been resolved even today. The form of Togan's position in his solution does not differ from the conclusions of Kovalevsky (5) (and a number of other researchers (6)). But where the latter can only see the desire to find scientific truth, the Pan-Turkist Togan clearly has purely political motives. " Actually, the conclusions of A. P. Kovalevsky, T. Levitsky and Togan do not go further than the statement that yes, Ibn Fadlan calls the king of the Bulgars the king of the Slavs. B. A. Rybakov generally excluded Ibn Fadlan from the list of sources on the history of Kievan Rus (8).
Such an attitude towards the source does not at all depend on the well-defined worldview positions of the authors, or their affiliation with scientific schools. For example, I. N. Danilevsky, who fundamentally disagrees with B. A. Rybakov on the question of the genesis of the state of the Eastern Slavs, the very al-Sakaliba, nevertheless, just like his opponent, does not use the data of Ibn Fadlan, although the name of his course of lectures, it would seem, obliges this. (9) Another opponent of B. A. Rybakov - V. Ya. Petrukhin - acts like B. N. Zakhoder - the source knows, in his constructions he actively uses (even more actively, than all the others - Ibn Haukal, Ibn Khordadbeh, Ibn Yakub, Gardizi, etc.) but this problem does not fall into his field of vision. (10).
And yet, one cannot say that the problem of using the term al-Sakaliba by Ibn Fadlan completely dropped out of scientific discussion. IG Konovalova, admonishing students in a collective manual, honestly warns: “The Arab ethnonym as-Saklab (plural as-Sakaliba) goes back to the Greek - Sklaboi, Sklabhnoi. despite the fact that the ethnic content of the term as-Sakaliba in some Arab-Persian news about the peoples of Eastern and Central Europe does not always lend itself to an unambiguous interpretation, etymologically as-Sakaliba are Slavs.”(11.172) Since there is no exhaustive list of these“some” Arab-Persian news, then the only possible way for a responsible researcher to act is to treat any news as belonging to "some",and to seek ways to determine the specific meaning of the term al-Sakaliba used in this news.
Further, I. G. Konvalova offers her own version of the solution to the problem of the use of the term al-Sakiliba by Ibn Fadlan: Arab sources. (11.215)
The explanation offered by I. G. Konvalova is not based on the analysis of Ibn Fadlan's own text. Of the fifteen times the term al-Sakaliba was used by Ibn Fadlan, one time is the personal name of one of the heads of the embassy: Baris al-Saklabi. This mention is not subject to statistical accounting, since the vicissitudes of fate of one particular person cannot be correlated with the fate of an ethnic group. 12 references - this is the mention of the king of the Slavs, i.e. king of Bulgaria. One mention is the designation of the country or city of Bulgar, as the country or city of the king as-Sakalib: And when a ship arrives from the country (city) of the Khazars to the country (city) of the Slavs, the king rides on horseback and recounts what is in it (is), and takes a tenth of all this. (1.488) Once at the very beginning of al-Scaliba, they are listed in a number of countries seen by Ibn Fadlan: what he himself saw in the country of the Turks, the Khazars,Rus, Slavs, Bashkirs and others (peoples). (1. 461) The absence of Bulgars in this list allows quite reliably associate here as-Sakaliba with Bulgars. And finally, the last mention in the passage known from the Yakut (Yakut): the Khazars and their king are all Jews, and the Slavs and all who are neighboring with them, (are) in submission to him (the king), and he turns to them (verbally), as to those in a slavery state, and they obey him with humility. This is the only place that can obscure the general meaning of the use of the term al-Sakaliba by Ibn Fadlan, since only the Khazars and al-Sakaliba are mentioned here. However, since this is the final passage of the secretary of the embassy to the king of al-Sakaliba, it is quite natural that al-Sakaliba is singled out from the mass of other countries and peoples.461) The absence of Bulgars in this list allows quite reliably associate here as-Sakaliba with the Bulgars. And finally, the last mention in the passage known from the Yakut (Yakut): the Khazars and their king are all Jews, and the Slavs and all who are neighboring with them, (are) in submission to him (the king), and he turns to them (verbally), as to those in a slavery state, and they obey him with humility. This is the only place that can obscure the general meaning of the use of the term al-Sakaliba by Ibn Fadlan, since only the Khazars and al-Sakaliba are mentioned here. However, since this is the concluding passage of the secretary of the embassy to the king of al-Sakaliba, it is quite natural that al-Sakaliba is singled out from the mass of other countries and peoples.461) The absence of Bulgars in this list allows quite reliably associate here as-Sakaliba with the Bulgars. And finally, the last mention in the passage known from the Yakut (Yakut): the Khazars and their king are all Jews, and the Slavs and all who are neighboring with them, (are) in submission to him (the king), and he turns to them (verbally), as to those in a slavery state, and they obey him with humility. This is the only place that can obscure the general meaning of the use of the term al-Sakaliba by Ibn Fadlan, since only the Khazars and al-Sakaliba are mentioned here. However, since this is the concluding passage of the secretary of the embassy to the king of al-Sakaliba, it is quite natural that al-Sakaliba is singled out from the mass of other countries and peoples. The Khazars and their king are all Jews, and the Slavs and everyone who neighbors them, (are) in obedience to him (the king), and he addresses them (verbally) as to those in a slavery state, and they obey him with humility. This is the only place that can obscure the general meaning of the use of the term al-Sakaliba by Ibn Fadlan, since only the Khazars and al-Sakaliba are mentioned here. However, since this is the concluding passage of the secretary of the embassy to the king of al-Sakaliba, it is quite natural that al-Sakaliba is singled out from the mass of other countries and peoples. The Khazars and their king are all Jews, and the Slavs and everyone who neighbors them, (are) in obedience to him (the king), and he addresses them (verbally) as to those in a slavery state, and they obey him with humility. This is the only place that can obscure the general meaning of the use of the term al-Sakaliba by Ibn Fadlan, since only the Khazars and al-Sakaliba are mentioned here. However, since this is the concluding passage of the secretary of the embassy to the king of al-Sakaliba, it is quite natural that al-Sakaliba is singled out from the mass of other countries and peoples.only the Khazars and al-Sakaliba are mentioned here. However, since this is the concluding passage of the secretary of the embassy to the king of al-Sakaliba, it is quite natural that al-Sakaliba is singled out from the mass of other countries and peoples.only the Khazars and al-Sakaliba are mentioned here. However, since this is the concluding passage of the secretary of the embassy to the king of al-Sakaliba, it is quite natural that al-Sakaliba is singled out from the mass of other countries and peoples.
Promotional video:
Thus, all references to as-Sakalib by Ibn Fadlan refer specifically to the Volga Bulgaria and do not have an expansive meaning. At the same time, it should be pointed out that Ibn-Fadlan describes or mentions the following ethnic groups in the southeast of the European Plain: As-Sakaliba; rus; Khazars; askal; visu, living three months from the Bulgar; Pechenegs; Turks called al-Bashgird (Bashkirs), Turks-Guzes. That is, Ibn-Fadlan distinguishes a much larger number of ethnic categories than it would be if many authors traditionally neglect strangers and name them all by some single term, usually meaning “barbarians”.
The known mechanisms of transferring self-designation from conquerors to conquered ones and vice versa are also inapplicable in this case. There is no doubt that the Slavs never constituted either the main ethnic mass in the Volga Bulgaria, or its ruling element. One could try to see the Slavs, who gave their name to nomadic newcomers from the south, in the settled forest subjects of the king as-Sakalibs. But this version so far meets an almost insurmountable obstacle in the form of a complete absence in this region for the time of interest of Slavic archeology (12), and at the same time there are many other settled and non-Slavic peoples inhabiting the Volga forests and forest-steppe, which would be without any other reliable sources accept this version. In addition, if as-Sakaliba-Slavs is a self-name already adopted by the Bulgarians at the beginning of the 9th century. then another theory is needed to explainwhy, over the next 200 years, they again changed their self-identification and not only returned to the ancient name of the Bulgarians themselves, but also passed it on to the subjects of the as-Sakaliba-Slavs.
But the fact is that the as-Sakalibs are called Bulgars by the Arab Ibn Fadlan, while the Bulgars themselves called Bulgars:
-… on his minbar they already proclaimed the khutba for him: “O Allah! save (in prosperity) the king Baltavar, the king of Bulgar”(1. 477).
-… he (khatib) began to proclaim for him (the king) khutba: “O Allah! save your slave Ja'far ibn-'Abdallah, the ruler (emir) of the Bulgar, the client of the ruler of the faithful”. (1. 478)
Hence, it is quite obvious that the Bulgars are a self-name, and as-Sakaliba is the name of the Bulgars by the official Baghdad delegation. And this difference in self and external naming does not cause the slightest difficulty for Ibn Fadlan. As an analogue, one can cite various external naming conventions of the Deutsch people: Germans, Germans, Alemans, etc., which also does not bother anyone.
In the description of Ibn Fadlan al-Sakaliba, both elements of nomadic life (yurts) and elements of settled life (houses, cellars) are clearly present. Therefore, the version of I. G. Konvalova is not without grounds, but only on a much more local territory than the whole of Eastern Europe. As-Sakaliba, taking into account the indicated differences in the way of life, is not an ethnic self-name, and not even an external name of an ethnos, but a name introduced from the outside, by the Arabs, the name of citizens-subjects of the state of the Volga Bulgars.
Now it remains to find out when and how the Arabs in Baghdad developed a stable name for the Volga Bulgaria as the country of al-Sakaliba. In order to clarify this, let us turn to the earliest mentions by the eastern authors of the ethicon as-Sakaliba. True, under the earliest, due to the specifics of the Arab-Persian historical and geographical literature, one should understand not the earliest dated texts, but texts describing the earliest events.
Ibn Isfendiyar (1216-1217) and Amuli (XIV century). During the reign of Khosrov I Anushirvan (531-579), his brother fled through Derbent to the Khazars and Slavs (13.362) (i.e., as-Sakalibs).
al-Balazuri (d. 892) and al-Kufi (d. 926). In 737, the Arabs under the leadership of Marwan made a great trip to the north beyond the Caucasus Mountains. They passed the Derbent gate, defeated the Khazars, took their capital, the city of Baidu, and, moving further north, reached a river called the Sakalib River (Nahr al-Sakaliba), where they captured twenty thousand families of these same al-Sakalibs.
al-Ya'kubi (IX century). In 853-854, some Sanari people, residents of modern North Kakheti, sent ambassadors to the north, including the Sahib (ruler) al-Sakaliba.
These same as-Sakaliba Y. Markvat, V. V. Bartold, A. P. Novoseltsev are identified with the Slavs, as well as with the as-Sakaliba from the other end of Europe - in Spain, among the Cordoba emirs in the IX-XI centuries. was the guard of the as-Sakaliba, which, however, included the Germans and Hungarians, and Western Europe itself was characterized as the land of the Germans and as-Sakaliba. (13.367-371)
There are some good reasons for such an identification (outside the context of Ibn Fadlan). First, the term al-Sakaliba itself arose from Eastern authors precisely as a definition for the Slavs. It was first recorded by the court poet al-Akhtal (ca 640-710) in a poem written at the end of the 7th century, which mentions the "golden-haired Sakalibs" in connection with the wars with Byzantium. It was at this time that the military contingents of the Slavs were actively used by the Byzantines in the wars with the Arabs. (11. 172)
Secondly, the data of an Arab author of the 10th century are put in parallel to the message of al-Ya'kubi. Ibn an-Nadim (10th century), mentioning that one of the kings of the mountain al-Kabek sent ambassadors to the "king of the Rus". (11.202)
The first thing to do is to separate East and West. No matter how militant the Arabs were, they could not advance further north than the triangle formed by the lower reaches of the Volga and Don, under any circumstances. And on this territory, there are no Slavic antiquities that preceded the appearance of the Cossacks here in the 15th-16th centuries, and Nestor, describing the settlement of the Slavs, southeast of the right tributaries of the Dnieper and Oka, no one settles. Based on this, the eastern as-Sakaliba could not be Slavs in any way.
Under the Slavic River (nahr As-Sakaliba), all researchers see either the Don or the Volga, in both cases their lower reaches from the overhaul. (11.214) Following A. P. Novoseltsev, we believe that this is Don.
Ibn al-Fakih (~ 903, translated by A. P. Novoseltsev). The Slavs go to the sea Rum [from Kiev], and the ruler of Rum [Constantinople *] takes tithes from them; then they follow to the Jewish Samkush [Kerch, the possession of the Khazars *]; then they go to the country of the Slavs or move from the Slavic Sea [Azov *] to the river called the Slavic River [Don] in order to go to the Khazar Gulf [Volga Delta, the Khazars did not have ports on the Caspian *], and there from the Khazar ruler takes tithes; then they follow to the Khorasan Sea [Caspian Sea *], they get to Djurdjan [the southern coast of the Caspian Sea] and sell everything that they bring with them, and all this goes to Ray. (13.385, * - K. E.)
In this fragment, the entire group of Slavic toponyms: the country of the Slavs, the Slavyanskoe Sea and the Slavyanskaya River (nahr al-Sakaliba) are undoubtedly formed from a single source. It is completely pointless to explain one of them on the basis of the other, and vice versa, having ascertained the origin of one name, it would be logical to explain the others in the same way. It is obvious here that all the names come from the name of the people - as-Sakaliba. At the same time, the river is quite reliably interpreted with the Don, and the sea with the Azov.
The version of the explanation of the term al-Sakaliba, which, for example, LN Gumilev adheres to, looks quite attractive. As-Sakaliba is a term denoting both infidels in general and, in particular, a guard made up of infidel slaves (fighting slaves), while in fact there is a word "slavia" to denote the Slavs in Arabic. Those. Marwan took prisoners not representatives of a certain people, then the prisoners would be considered not families, but pieces, but transferred some prisoners to the status of military slaves. (14.86) But to whom then did the Sanarians send their ambassadors? In addition, place names of rivers and seas are not produced on behalf of the estate.
Agreeing that the term al-Sakaliba in the West could mean a guard of the infidels and probably goes back to the Greek "sklavina", in the East we find another meaning of al-Sakaliba.
About Bulgarians (4.29):
Ibn Rust. (903-913) They [Bulgarians] are of three categories. One category of them is called b.r.sula, the other category is as-k.l. and the third is the Bulgars.
Gardizi. (1050-1059) And there are these three categories, the first is called b.r.sula, the other category is as.c.l. and the third is the Bulgars.
Khudad al-'alam. (~ 982) Inscriptions of the categories: br.zula, ash.k.l., Bulgars. (B. Z.) Translated by V. V. Bartold: bihdula, ishkil, bulgars.
About the Magyars (4.48):
Bakri (XI century) (Translated by V. V. Rosen). About the countries of Majgaria. Madjgaria between the Pechenegs and the Ashkal countries from the Bulgarians.
Ibn Rust (translated by D. A. Khvolson). Magyars. Between the land of the Pechenegs and the land of the Bulgarian Esgel lies the first of the Magyar lands.
Gardizi (Translated by V. V. Bartold). Between the possessions of the Bulgarians and the possessions of the Iskilians, also belonging to the Bulgarians, lies the Magyar region.
These Bulgars of the second category - as-s.k., mentioned by several authors both as part of the Bulgars and as the closest neighbors of the Magyars, were those North Caucasian as-Sakalibs, whom Marvan took prisoner and to whom the Sanarians sent ambassadors.
The same as-s.k can be seen in Ibn Fadlan:
Another group was with the king of a certain tribe, who was called King Askal. He [Askal] was in obedience to him [the king of Bulgar] (1.487)
The second mention is connected with the marriage of the daughter of the Bulgarian king to the king Askal. In the edition I have, either a typo or the original translation is as follows: he (the Bulgarian king) hurried and married (so! E. K.) for the sake of Tsar Askal. (105.488) Therefore, I will give a more intelligible translation by V. V. Bartold …
As soon as this [news] reached the king of the "Slavs", he [the king of the Bulgars. EK] preempted [this] and gave her [his daughter] in marriage to the king [prince] [of the tribe] Eskel, who was under his rule. (4.29)
Actually, it does not follow from the text that Askal is an ethnic, not a personal name, but since for the most part Ibn-Fadlan operates with ethnic names for residents of unknown and not yet Muslim countries, we will accept the traditional version that Askal is an ethicon. Likewise, there is no data on the ethnic difference of those whom Ibn-Fadlan calls as-Sakaliba, i.e. There are no Bulgars, and there are no Askals, in any case there are no other nomads different from the Bulgarians, he calls them - these are the Pechenegs and various Turks.
Thus, we can assume the mechanism of the appearance of the designation as-Sakaliba in Ibn Fadlan in relation to the Bulgars. Almost simultaneously in the late VII - early VIII centuries. the Arabs met in the west (in Asia Minor) and east (that is, in the north, in the Ciscaucasia) with two completely different ethnic groups with similar names. As a result of the cabinet-mindedness of most of the Arab-Persian authors, which is emphasized by the majority of orientalists (15), a situation has developed that the term al-Sakaliba was fixed at the same time for the Slavs and the Bulgars. As long as they were in different parts of the world, this could not cause difficulties. However, rather quickly, the Slavs and Bulgars turned out to be close neighbors, which resulted in the confusion among the Eastern authors.
So, for example, it has long been noticed that the description of the life of the as-Sakaliba - the Eastern Slavs, when this does not cause doubts in the context, is accompanied by a mention that the Slavic king feeds exclusively on milk. Since such an extravagant trait as the milk lovingness of the Russian princes has not shown itself in any other sources, then B. N. Zakhoder also attributed this passage to the Bulgars (4.79)
It seems that some more of the mentions of as-Sakaliba can be considered in the context of the as-Sakaliba-Bulgara. First of all, we are talking about the well-known message of Ibn Khordadbeh about Rus merchants, whose translators are Slavic eunuchs. Without going into a detailed analysis of this message, we simply point out that since the time of I. Markquart there has been an assumption supported by B. N. Zakhoder (4.90) and resolutely, but without arguments rejected by A. P. Novosiltsev (7.386), that the Rus merchants of this message is a corrupted designation of the Jews - ar_Radaniya. Then the availability of translators from the Slavs among merchants traveling throughout the Muslim-Byzantine world seems absolutely incredible. However, the advantage of the Volga Bulgars over the Slavs for the role of a system-forming component of such a corporation is also completely unclear. Rather, here you can see a modified meaning of professional slaves of the al-Sakaliba type - guards, fighting slaves.
Secondly, the message of Masudi (Early 10th century - 956) about Itil, where there were seven judges: two for Muslims, two for the Khazars in accordance with the law of the Torah, two for Christians in accordance with the Gospel and one for the Slavs, Rus and other pagans: he judged them according to natural law, that is, according to reason. (16.230) An attempt to interpret al-Sakaliba of this message of Masudi outside the entire context of his work probably cannot lead to positive results, however, Masudi's books: "Chronicle" - "Akhbar al-Zaman", "Middle Book" - "al-Kitab al- ausat "," Washers of gold and mines of gems "-" Muruj az-zakhab wa ma'adin al-javahir "," Book of warning and revision "-" Kitab at-tanbih wa-l-ishraf "; are still inaccessible to the Russian-speaking reader. All bibliographies refer to practically inaccessible French editions of the last century. And only in 1989 a new translation into English was published in Beirut. However, double translations inevitably hit mistakes, so let's hope that Russian orientalists will find the money and the willingness to carry out a series of Russian translations of many texts of oriental authors that have not been fully translated until now.
In conclusion, we will say that this article deliberately avoids the problem of using the term Rus by Eastern authors, as well as all the related classical issues: the correspondence of the Rus and Slavs, three centers, the Rus island, Russian trade, the campaigns of the Rus, etc. All these are topics, requiring separate consideration.
Konstantin Egorov
Notes
1. Travel of Ibn Fadlan to the Volga. in the book. Russian chronicles. T.2. Voskresenskaya Chronicle, Ryazan, 1998. Reprinted from The Journey of Ibn Fadlan to the Volga. Edited by Academician I. Yu. Krachkovsky. M.-L., 1939
2. Validi Togan AZ lbn Fadlan's Reisehericht. Leipzig, 1939.
3. Zakhoder B. N. Caspian collection of information to Eastern Europe., T. 1. M. 1962.
4. Zakhoder B. N. Caspian collection of information to Eastern Europe., Vol. 2. M. 1967.
5. Kovalevsky A. P. The embassy of the caliph to the king of the Volga Bulgars in 921-922 // Ist. app. 1951, vol. 37, p. 163.
6. For example, T. Levitsky
7. Novosiltsev AP … The Khazar state and its role in the history of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus.
8. Rybakov B. A. Kievan Rus and Russian principalities of the XII-XIII centuries M., 1993.
9. Danilevsky I. N. Ancient Russia Through the eyes of contemporaries and descendants (IX-XII centuries). M., 1999
10. Petrukhin V. Ya. The beginning of the ethnocultural history of Russia in the IX-XI centuries. Smlensk, M., 1995
11. Ancient Russia in light-foreign sources. Edited by E. A. Melnikova. M. 1999. Part I. Ancient sources - A. V. Podosinov. Part II. Byzantine sources - M. V. Bibikov. Part III. Eastern sources - I. G. Konovalova. Part IV. Western European sources - A. V. Nazarenko. Part V. Scandinavian sources - G. V. Glazyrina, T. N. Dzhakson, E. A. Melnikova.
12. VV Sedov Eastern Slavs in the VI-XIII centuries. M., 1982
13. Novoseltsev A. P. Eastern sources about the Eastern Slavs and Russia VI-IX centuries. in the book. Old Russian state and its international significance. M., 1965.
14. Gumilyov L. N. Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe. M. 1992.
15. Let us give here a general description of the eastern authors, which was given by BN Zakhoder in solidarity with his predecessor VV Bartold. (3.5)
“… our remarkable orientalist VV Bartold (1869-1930) noted:“The situation with the Arab geographical literature is somewhat complicated by its bookish character and the associated chronological uncertainty. For example, if we know that one author wrote in the 10th century, and another in the 9th century, then it does not follow that the stories of the second refer to a later time than the stories of the first; almost all authors write from books, without naming their sources and not specifying their time, and it often happens that in the composition of the 11th century. an earlier source is used than in the composition of the 10th century. A careful examination of the early medieval geographical literature in Arabic and Persian leads us to even more decisive conclusions: authors whose biographical data allow us to make an assumption about their real and original participation in the work attributed to them,- extremely rare. The overwhelming majority of authors of geographical works are compilers; neither an examination of their own works, nor any other data outside of these works, allow in the slightest degree to reasonably assert their independence and originality. If we add to this the fact that most of these works have come down to us in poor textual preservation, and that a significant part of the works survived in a very late and, naturally, distorted correspondence, then the mention of the author and the title of the work can often be replaced by a reference to the variant or editions represented by this or that author”.nor any other data outside of these works do not allow in the slightest degree to substantiate their independence and originality. If we add to this the fact that most of these works have come down to us in poor textual preservation, and that a significant part of the works survived in a very late and, naturally, distorted correspondence, then the mention of the author and the title of the work can often be replaced by a reference to the variant or editions represented by this or that author”.nor any other data outside of these works do not allow in the slightest degree to substantiate their independence and originality. If we add to this the fact that most of these works have come down to us in poor textual preservation, and that a significant part of the works survived in a very late and, naturally, distorted correspondence, then the mention of the author and the title of the work can often be replaced by a reference to the variant or editions represented by this or that author”.then the mention of the author and the title of the work can often be replaced by a reference to the version or edition, the representative of which is one or another author”.then the mention of the author and the title of the work can often be replaced by a reference to the version or edition, the representative of which is one or another author”.
16. Vernadsky G. V. Ancient Russia. Tver, M., 1996