GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2004-04 > 1081957445


From: (Jared Linn Olar)
Subject: Re: POSSIBLE GATEWAY: FROM AFRICA TO EUROPE
Date: 14 Apr 2004 08:44:05 -0700
References: <c57e4f24.0403141731.5b931209@posting.google.com> <010401c40af0$dd3b5b20$9b0d0043@hppav> <7004aa4b.0403161328.2409e930@posting.google.com> <40582A2C.1070409@interfold.com> <7004aa4b.0403171315.e1450fe@posting.google.com> <40591FC1.6080000@interfold.com> <ac1a3786.0404051920.56e6a1f6@posting.google.com> <0Lzcc.47119$Hg2.43344@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com> <ac1a3786.0404130833.536f5b8c@posting.google.com> <seVec.51076$171.5160@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com>


"Chris Bennett" <> wrote in message news:<seVec.51076$>...
> > So, this kinglist of Rey's is different from earlier versions of the
> > Ethiopian kinglist, with the Nubian kings having been shown to be
> > interpolations?
>
> I don't know, I'm not an Ethiopian specialist. But you're putting the
> burden of proof in the wrong place. In order to claim that this list is an
> independent tradition, it really would be necessary to show the presence of
> such names in Ethiopian kinglists which antedate the discovery of these
> Nubian kings. Its quite possible that the Ethiopians were aware of these
> discoveries very early.

Of course I'm the furthest thing from an Ethiopian specialist -- I
didn't know Rey's version of the kinglist was so late and suspect,
though I'm not entirely surprised. But I really wasn't putting a
burden of proof anywhere, just wondering if Rey's list is actually
known to differ from earlier lists. Judging from the "royalark"
kinglist, it seems it does indeed differ markedly.

Oh well, I already knew Rey's list was largely legendary and
unhistorical -- I had no idea just how unhistorical it was. Thanks
for your help.

Jared Linn Olar

This thread: