On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, Felix Eisen wrote: > > Jon_Lincicum at stream.com wrote: > This raises (yet again) the question: who's more unreliable, Vlad or > Paarfi? > > [...] Paarfi, for all his 'claims', should be read as entertainment, not > as 'history'; we all know how many differences there are between what > Paarfi 'states' and what Vlad relates to the little silver box as being > told to him by various personages. Begging the question. Also, P and V are actually remarkably consistent, given that one is an oral work and both are translated. > Remember, Paarfi is writing so that he can make money May or may not be true. May or may not affect the veracity of the story. > > Vlad, on the other hand, is just telling a story which is no guarantee of veracity, plus memory is like a something-or-other. Note that the Paarfiad is being read by people who experienced the events in question and might not take kindly to false portrayals, whether fawning or otherwise. Vlad can tell us what he likes, improving or ameliorating the truth.