2011 m. vasaris 24 d., ketvirtadienis 00:04:06 UTC+2, wjhonson rašė: > In a message dated 2/23/2011 1:49:32 PM Pacific Standard Time, > [email protected] writes: > > > > consider, without regard to a word "Princess" or "kinswoman", that > > this woman, which is not referred to in any "contemporary" Russian > > chronicle > > at all, was a daughter of the Emperor. > > > > Just to point this nail a little more. The Primary Chronicle was first put > together, in some fashion, about 70 years after this arranged marriage is > supposed to have taken place. We do not have that version, we have a few > version many *centuries* later, which have been edited. We cannot tell how > much or how they've been edited. > > To my mind, that's not a contemporary document at all. Not even the first > version. https://books.google.lt/books?id=1BXlXAkBKs0C&pg=PA108&lpg=PA108&dq=Anastasia+is+believed+to+be+related+to+the+family+of+the+Byzantine+Emperor+Constantine+IX&source=bl&ots=r45YHieivT&sig=kLTuYdng0ezGU2CSsDBATLO1D60&hl=lt&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiH0Y73-brUAhXnYpoKHQa1D9oQ6AEITjAH#v=onepage&q=Anastasia%20is%20believed%20to%20be%20related%20to%20the%20family%20of%20the%20Byzantine%20Emperor%20Constantine%20IX&f=false