11:5411:54, 26 March 2018diffhist+872
Dietrich von Bern
→Dietrich von Bern versus Theoderic the Great: Assertions on self-published books by Rolf Badenhausen are definitely unproven. Academic & institutional publishing of his books, formerly by "https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsenstein_und_Vannerdat" (insolvent), now via BSAW.de, is based on research funding; clearly substantiated e.g. at https://www.badenhausen.net/rolf-badenhausen/NibelungenhortXanten.htm . Badenhausen's book "Die Nibelungen..." has been catalogued in academia, cf. e.g. "Nibelungenlied und Nibelungensage, Kommentierte Bibliographie 1945-2010", https://www.degruyter.com/view/product/214533Tag: extraneous markup
2 March 2018
16:1116:11, 2 March 2018diffhist+280
Wolfdietrich
Deleting user brought no evidence of Badenhausen's unreliability, and of other scholars who consider a non-Ostrogothic literary environment of Theoderic, see restored link to B's article which, in this case, is not identical with a self-published book!
11:5411:54, 26 March 2018diffhist+872
Dietrich von Bern
→Dietrich von Bern versus Theoderic the Great: Assertions on self-published books by Rolf Badenhausen are definitely unproven. Academic & institutional publishing of his books, formerly by "https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsenstein_und_Vannerdat" (insolvent), now via BSAW.de, is based on research funding; clearly substantiated e.g. at https://www.badenhausen.net/rolf-badenhausen/NibelungenhortXanten.htm . Badenhausen's book "Die Nibelungen..." has been catalogued in academia, cf. e.g. "Nibelungenlied und Nibelungensage, Kommentierte Bibliographie 1945-2010", https://www.degruyter.com/view/product/214533Tag: extraneous markup
2 March 2018
16:1116:11, 2 March 2018diffhist+280
Wolfdietrich
Deleting user brought no evidence of Badenhausen's unreliability, and of other scholars who consider a non-Ostrogothic literary environment of Theoderic, see restored link to B's article which, in this case, is not identical with a self-published book!