The Early Hungarians
This volume shows to the En­
glish reader the origin of the Hun­garians and their first civilization,— according to recent historicalresearch.
In the new light, the Hungari­ans seem to have come from theAncient Near East — Mesopota­mia, Egypt and Syria —where thefirstHigherCivilization
flourished. Their westward mov­
ing tribes reached the Middle
Danube basin already in the Neo­lithic times and had laid the foun­dation of the future Hungary. In
the subsequent periods Scythians,
Huns and half-Turkised ArpadHungarians added their own eth­
nic and cultural contribution to
the existing heritage, whereby the
People acquired its final charac­
teristics by the end of the IXthcentury A.D.
The volume (soft-bound, in-8°,
248 p., 36 ill.) can be ordered by
mail, at the address of the Author:
P.O. Box 697, Station “B”, Mon­
treal, Canada, H3B 3K3.

AbouttheAuthor

The author ofthis volume, TiborEtienne BARATH,
was formerly pro­fessor at the Uni­
versity of Kolozsvar, Hungary (1940-1945), until
the communist take-over of his native country. He
studied history in Budapest (Ph.D.), Vienna, Parisand M ontreal (B. L.S.) and prior to his nomination
to the teaching post, he was Secretary of the H un­
garian Institute in Paris (1932-1939) and fulfilled
the role of Assistant-Secretary of the International
Committee of Historical Sciences at the same time.
He is now retired in M ontreal, Canada. Prof.
BARATH is author of over a hundred historicalessays and also of several books, the most significant
ones being: The Tax-System in Hungary, 1605-1648;
H istory o f the H ungarian Historiography, 18671935 (in French); A Short History of Hungary; andthe three-volume A Aici’enf History o f the Hungarian
Peoples with the present sequel The Early H ungar­
ians (in English).

ril)o r E. BARATH

THE EARLYHUNGARIANSIN THE LIGHT OF RECENTHISTORICAL RESEARCH

M O N T R E A L 1983

Published by the Author
P.O. Box 697, Station “B”
Montreal H3B 3K3
CanadaCONTENTS
C on ten ts.........................................................................................

V

I,ist of figures .....................................................................
I’mlogue: The rough road of Hungarian Ancient His­
tory .....................................................................

VII
1

P A R T ONE
WHO ARE THE HUNGARIANS?
The People ........................................................................
1. The anthropological build-up of the Nation,
p. 17. —2. The Hungarian language and its great
antiquity, p. 24. —3. Their two most frequently
used ethnic names: Magyar and Hungarian,p. 40. — 4. The whereabouts of the Old Father­land, p. 47.

17

Their earliest civ iliza tio n .............................................
1. The Old Hungarian script, p. 65. — 2. The
Old Hungarian faith, p. 76. — 3. The Oriental
background of the first Hungarian dynasty,
p. 95. —4. How the Nation remembered its origin,p. 105.

65

P A R T TWO
THE GENESIS OF THE DANUBIAN HUNGARIANSThe N eolithic and Bronze Age H ungarian s..........
1. Implantation of the Higher Civilization into
the Danubian basin, p. 115. — 2. The adventof the first sedentary population, p. 126. — 3.
The identity of the first settlers, p. 137. — 4.
The testimony of the T at^laki (Tartaria) tab­lets, p. 147.

115

The Scyth ian H u n garian s............................................
1. Their origin and civilization, p. 159. — 2.
Scythians in Hungary, p. 162. —3. The languageof the European Scythians, p. 167. — 4. Who
were the Kelti or Celts? p. 175.

159

The H un-H ungarians......................................................
1. The Roman and Germanic influence upon
the ethnographic conditions in the CarpathoDanubian basin, p. 181. — 2. The coming of theHuns, p. 187. — 3. The ethnic identity of theHuns, p. 191. — 4. Hun-symbols and written
records, p. 193. — 5. The bad image of the Huns
in Western Europe, p. 202.

181

The M agyar-H ungarians...............................................
1. Massive influx of Magyars into the Car­
pathian land and the birth of Hungary-I, p. 207.
— 2. Hungary’s ethnographic and political con­ditions in the IXth century, p. 210. — 3. The
formation of the Arpadian people in Eastern
Europe, p. 219. — 4. The re-unification of thecountry and the birth of Hungary-H as a modern
state, p. 225. - 5. Epilogue; The fate of the lost
Hungarian tribes, p. 232.

207

B ibliograph y*...................................................................

241

The numbers given in parentheses in the text r e f e r to the
publications (P 000, P 001, etc.) in which the r e a d e r may findfurther inform ation on the subject in que.stioii.

List of figures
I’iu. 1. Physical map of the Middle Danube basin.
I'ij;. 2. Old Hungary’s geographic location in relation to
the Ancient Orient.
3. The great river-valleys of the Ancient Near-East.
Fig. 4. Turullu, the lion-headed Sumerian bird which sym­
bolized the divine ancestors of Hungarians. Uruk,c. 3200 B.C.
Fig. 5. Pictorial representation of the two Hungarian an­
cestors. Carved by a shepherd in Somogy county,
X lX th century.
Fig. 6. Some of the most frequently used Egyptian hiero­glyphs.
Fig. 7. ‘Magyar country’ written in Egyptian hieroglyphs.
Fig. 8. ‘Ruler of the Magyars’ written in hieroglyphs.
Fig. 9. In Egypt, the flat-homed ram was the favourite
Kush-symbol.
Fig. 10. The Kush-symbol survives in Hungarian folklore.
Example: the ceremonial walking-stick, ‘Fokos’.
Fig. 11. The Kush-name written in Egyptian hieroglyphs.
Fig. 12. Anubis, the dog-like creature, was also considered
as a Kush ancestor.
Fig. 13. The Egyptian kings’ royal titles were Hungarian
titles.
Fig. 14. The Old Hungarian sound-signs in their final stageof development.
Fig. 15. Old Hungarian inscription of Dalnok, Hungary. It
reads from left to right.
Fig. 16. Old Hungarian inscription of Constantinople, Tur­
key. It reads from right to left.
Fig. 17. Old Hungarian inscription of Enlaka, Hungary,accompanied by a pictorial complement.
Fig. 18. Sun-door of Csik-Szent-Kiraly, with a geometricdecoration.
Fig. 19. Elaborate Sun-gate of Harasztosi, Hungary,flanked by two idols.

Fig. 20. Wooden columns on burial sites in present-day
Hungary.
Fig. 21. ‘The Lion of Esztergom’. Wall-painting in the royalpalace. Hungary, XHth century.
Fig. 22. Ramses H, King of Egypt (1304 — 1232 B.C.),
holding the God-symbol.
Fig. 23. Human-shaped divinity with the God-symbol.
Hungary, Neolithic Age.
Fig. 24. A typical Troy-H vessel, c. 2300 B.C.
Fig. 25. Gold badge of a high priest. Mojgrad, Hungary,Bronze Age.
Fig. 26. Hungarian hammer-axe with disc for a butt. It wasin great demand in the Bronze Age.
Fig. 27. Map showing the density of Hungary’s populationby the end of the Bronze Age.
Fig. 28. The world-famous Tatarlaki(Tartaria) clay tablets,
found near the river Maros. They were used forthe purpose of solar observations.
Fig. 29. The sound-signs of the Tatirki tablets, separated
into words.
Fig. 30. The most beautiful Scythian gold-stag ever foundin Hungary. Tapio-Szent-Mdrton, Vth century B.C.
Fig. 31. Scythian gold-stag from Zbld-Halom-Puszta, in an
unusual posture. Hungary, Vth century B.C.
Fig. 32. Several vessels belonging to the Hun treasure of
Nagy-Szent-Miklos bear this inscription: ‘The
adornment of this article was made by a skilled
Hun’.
Fig. 33. Hungarian language message engraved upon a
Hunnic gold tray.
Fig. 34. The great seal of King Oktar the Hun with legendin Hungarian.
Fig. 35. Dedication incised upon the pendent of a Hunnecklace in Hungarian. Wolfheim, Germany.
Fig. 36. Decorated silver satchel-cover of a Hungarian army
commander. Hungary, IXth century.

B
V
'u

O

4->
C

.2
'3
c
<
V
JS

a
o
£
c
o
eod
o
JS

&
&
§
be
u
S)
B
d
M

lib

PROLOGUE
I'he rough road of Hungarian Ancient
History
H ungarian Ancient History deals with th a tperiod of the national past which begins around3000 B.C. and ends in 895 A.D. when the last
M agyar ethnic wave arrived and settled in the
C arpathian basin. This delim itation is mainly
based upon a longstanding tradition, but is ju sti­fied by methodological considerations as well. In ­deed, in the elaboration of ancient history, theso-called subsidiary studies of History play a con­siderably greater role than in more recent periods,
on account of the scarcity of w ritten documents,
which are the usual sources of historicalknowledge. The most helpful of such subsidiarystudies are, first, linguistics and archaelogy, thenmythology and paleography, to which most re­cently, the science of place-names or toponymy
was added. This many-sided approach renders thetask of the historians more difficult. The impor­tance of their researches is however great, since
the results have a strong bearing upon the national
consciousness. Because of this. Ancient History isusually exposed to strong political interferences.
1.
When modern historiography was born, in the
middle of the X lX th century, H ungarian scholars
found themselves before a difficult alternative:
they had to adopt either the Finno-Ugrian con­

ception of their past or the Orientalist conception.
T h e foundation of the Finno-Ugrian or “U ralian”
conception was laid down by Swedish, German and
R ussian scholars, and in particular, by August
Ludwig Schloezer, professor at Goettingen Uni­
versity, Germany. Its basic thesis was the linguistic
a n d ethnic kinship of H ungarians with Finns andB sthonians living in the Baltic area, and with the
U ralian peoples in the Volga-Ural region. The
holder of this theory placed the original homelandof the Finno-Ugrians in the vast Siberian plain.
T h is theory was welcomed and strongly supported
for political reasons by the Habsburg dynasty,
which was anxious, after the tragic events of 1849,
to curb Hungarian influence in the Double M on­archy ju st then, by injecting the leaders of th a tnation with an inferiority complex. They first sent
Ivliklosits, the professor of slavistics a t Vienna
University, to Budapest, to supervise the programof the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Miklosits
had understood the point of his mission andprepared a long list of words which were all “bor­r o w e d ” from the Slavonic languages, according tohim. After Miklosits, a German scholar was sent
to Budapest, J. Budenz (1836-1892), who became,with his companion Pal Hunfalvy (Hunsdorfer,
lSlO-1891), the main architect of the Finno-Ugrian
conception of H ungary’s ancient history.
The two pioneers proclaimed th a t the H ungari­an people and the Hungarian language were of
Finno-Ugrian origin, consequently, their original( ommon homeland could not have been situated:mywhere else than in the Uralo-Siberian region.
They also found th a t the early Hungarians stood,
in respect to civilization, on the lowest step of
evolution: they were forest-dwelling nomads, Hving on the mere product of N ature, eating
mushrooms, berries, digging up roots, fishing andhunting. As such, they were ignorant of the funda­
m ental achievements of Higher Civilization:
stockbreeding and foodproduction by farming. In
short, the early Hungarians were depicted as a
backward populace, in a state of semi-savagery,whose later civilization developed entirely fromconstant borrowings, first from the Turkish peo­
ples, thereafter from Slavs, Germans and Latins,
who were their teachers and instructors.
The second conception of H ungarian ancienthistory linked the Hungarian language to theoldest one of mankind, viz. the Sumerian, andplaced the original home of the Nation in theAncient N ear East, between the E uphrates andTigris rivers (Sumer and Babylon). This concep­
tion was also first outlined by W estern scholars,
namely by A.H. Sayce, J. Oppert, F. Lenorm ant
and C. RawHnson.
From a Hungarian point of view, the mostim portant finding of the W est-European sumerologists was the discovery th a t the Sumerian lan­
guage was neither Semitic nor Indo-European instructure, but agglutinative, like the Hungarian.
The far-reaching significance of this statem ent wasobvious, because speakers of this early agglutina­
tive language were the authors of the first Higher
Civihzation of mankind. A. H. Sayce summed up
this thesis as follows: “The earliest civilized inhab­
itants of Babylonia did not speak a Semitic lan­
guage and therefore they were not Semites... Eas­
tw ard of Sumer, the type of language was thus
agglutinative, as it was in Sumer itself. And in
the days when civilization first grew up there, there
is no sign or trace of the language we call inflection­al... Babylonian culture owed its origin to a race
whose type of language was th a t of the Finns, ofthe Magyars or the Japanese” (P 112 pp. 70-72).
The same opinion was upheld by all later sumerologists, including Prof. Woolley, who writes in themost recent UNESCO manual: “Sumerian was
unique amongst the languages of the Ancient Near
East in being agglutinative; it belonged in thisrespect, to the same group as... Finnish and Hungarian"(P 064 p. 635). W estern scholars also stated
th a t there was a steady outflow of Sumerian
population towards Europe beginning the New
Stone Age, and th a t they had introduced theHigher Civilization to alm ost all regions of Europe,
including distant Britain. In short, this conception
places Early Hungarians into a considerably
higher historical status.
After the above mentioned discoveries, it be­came increasingly exciting for Hungarian scien­tists to find out the true ethnic and linguistic
identity of the ancient Near-Easterners: Mesopo-I iini.ins, Kgyptians, and Anatolians. It was indeedlm|)(‘(l (hat the solution of this enigma, with theli< l|) of the Hungarian clue, might lead us to ar,lul»;il re-evaluation of the origin and affiliation
III all European peoples and, in particular, to a
tccvaluation of the place of Hungarians amongst
ilicin. A formidable challenge was thus awaiting
Hungarian scholarship.
2.
It seems incredible, but the fact is th a t H un­
garians were not encouraged to take part in theseresearches; on the contrary, they had been re­
moved from the field of sumerology and egyptology, and redirected towards the Uralo-Siberian
wildernesses. The new Orientalist researches had
already produced decisive results which were goingto alter the traditional Semitic image of the region
in question. In fact, they discovered th a t the m ythof the Creation, the story of the Flood, and themany hymns and parables recorded in the Old
Testam ent, were not the literary invention of
Semitic Genius, as it was believed until then, but
th a t of the previous agglutinative-speaking peo­
ples, from whom they were simply taken over.
Therefore, to avoid further erosion of the Semitic
Miracle, it seemed appropriate to divert all thepotentially dangerous elements from the field of
researches. The chief instigator of this m ilitant
policy was Joseph Halevy (1827-1917), a Jewishborn Rum anian, who managed to become profes­
sor at the Sorbonne in Paris. Actually, he had
waged a lifelong battle to m aintain the antiquatedbelief, namely, emphasizing the exclusively Semi­
tic character of the Ancient Near East, where noother race was ever present, according to him. At
the Orientalist Congress in Paris (1901), Hal6vy
encountered H ungary’s delegate, Ignac Goldziher(1850-1921), who had a seat in the governing bodyof the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and was,at the same time, general-manager of the Jewish
Religious Community of Budapest for m any years.
So he was quick to understand Halevy’s concern
and, back in Budapest, emphatically declared th a t
H ungarian scholars were wasting their time
searching for their ancestors in the Ancient
N ear-East, it being a purely Semitic area. And
B ernat Munkacsy (Munk), another Hungarian
educated orientalist, also member of the Academyof Sciences and school-inspector a t the Jewish
Religious Community of Budapest, subm itted his“expert’s report” to the Academy, wherein de­clared “in good faith” th at: “It is out of question...
th a t we may envisage any closer relation between
the Sum erian and the H ungarian languages.
Therefore Hungarian scientists cannot rightly
claim any p art of the brilliant Sumerian heritage,
nor can they take any credit from the Sum erians’
merits, under the pretext th a t they were theirancestors. If anyone would, nevertheless, do so,
he would make himself ridiculous” (P 051 p. 55).
After th at, the Academy system atically sabogated Sum erian studies in Hungary. It had refused
to receive Zsofia Torma, the lady who wished toreport on her epoch-making finding, th a t in Neo­lithic times there were close contacts between
Hungary and ancient Mesopotamia. Professor
Zsigmond Varga, another outstanding orientahst,
who established several linguistic parallels be­
tween Hungarian and Sumerian in his imposing
volume “At a distance of 5,000 years” (Debrecen1942), was judged by his critics as an “impostor,charlatan, confused and unscientific.” A third
scholar, Vilmos Hevesy (alias F.A. Uxbond), who
discovered the ancient hnks between Hungarians
and Indians (P 130), was also rejected, because hisfindings disagreed with the official Uralo-Siberian
doctrine. M any other similar cases are known, but
let us recall only one, th a t of Florian Matyas. Thisscholar, in his inaugural address at the Academy(1859), talked, to no avail, about the decipheringof hieroglyphs; he was unable to capture theattention of Pal Hunfalvy, who simply laughed
it off. It was not until a great, independent, inter­national authority, Prof. G. Childe, stated in his
fundam ental work on the D anubian Neolithic andBronze Ages (P 031), th a t scholars all over theworld agreed th a t the Early H ungarians had arespectable share in the heritage of the Ancient
N ear East. Thus ended the stormy, first period of
the modern researches on the origin o f H ungari­ans, wherein the imposed Uralian conception
seemed to prevail, to the detrim ent o f the freeresearches.

3.
After 1945 this situation totally changed,
when swarms of intellectuals left Hungary, follow­
ing the communist take-over. These exiles, free ofany political pressure, once they were settled in
the free world, have undertaken the renewal of
the ancient Hungarian history in an Oriental light.
Ida Bobula (USA, 1900-1981) was the first toperceive their new mission. She took up researchwhere Prof. Varga left off in 1942 and was indefat­
igable in arousing interest for the arduous task.
In his time, Prof. Varga was mainly dealing withgram m atical parallels between Sumerian andHungarian. As regards the vocabulary, however,
he was unable to find more than about 80 common
words. Consequently, Ida Bobula, focussed herefforts upon the enlargem ent of the vocabulary
concordances and was instrum ental in completingthe existing list with over a thousand additionalcommon words, amongst them the im portant one
for ‘God’, Isten in both languages. W ith her work,
she firmly established the Sumero-Hungarian kin­ship as a scientifically proven fact and summed
up her results in an English language study, S u ­merian affiliations (P 014).
Other exiled Hungarian scholars followed thetrend as set forth by Ida Bobula, elucidating asurprisingly high num ber of common charac­
teristics of the Sumerian and Hungarian lan­
guages. Amongst them, we have first to mention
Ferenc Badiny Jos (Argentina), professor of sumerology a t the University of Buenos Aires, who

I ril'd to fill the considerable time-gap between the
n u l of Sum er in the Near East and the birth of
I lungary proper in Europe, by means of a Hungar­
ian language book, “From Chaldea to Ister-G am ”
(F 006). The late Victor Padanyi (Australia) con­centrated his attention upon the migrating H un­
garians in the Don region (P 101) and C. G. Gostony(France) produced an
etymologicaldictionary of Sumerian (P 056), while Sandor
Csoke (Austria) compiled a “Sumero-Hungariangram m ar” (P 015). Finally, the comprehensive
work of Sandor Nagy which was w ritten in E n­glish, deserves special mention, The forgotten
cradle o f the H ungarian culture (P 098). All theseworks concerned Sum er (Southern Mesopotamia)
only and m aintained th a t Hungarian is the directcontinuation of the ancient Mesopotamian lan­
guage, as it was spoken in the H lrd millenium
B.C., or, as Sandor Csoke expressed it: “W ith afew phonetical and grammatical differences, theSumerian folklanguage, i.e. the spoken language
was, on the whole, the same as present-day H un­
garian.”
The next most im portant step in the elaborationof the orientalist conception was the extension of
the field of investigation beyond Mesopotamia, tocover the whole N ear-East. It was indeed discov­ered th a t innumerable M agyar words were used,
not only in Mesopotamia, but elsewhere too, in
the B.C. times, especially in the Nile valley, as
well as in Syria and in Anatolia. In these areascertain texts w ritten with hieroglyphs or with
Phoenician-type characters, can be read in H un­
garian. These surprising results definitely provedth a t the original home of the H ungarian speaking
population was the entire N ear-East and also th at
Magyar was a primary language, from which m anyothers originated. The enlargement of the field ofinvestigations and the above mentioned decipher­ings are due to Prof. Tibor B arath, author of thisbook, whose three volumes — Ancient History of
the H ungarian speaking Peoples” (P 007) — arefundam ental in this regard.
T h at ancient Egypt had been the most brilliant
M agyar homeland, was first stated by F. Thomas
in his Latin study: Conjecturae de origine, prim asede et lingua Hungarorum (Buda 1806). It m ust
also be added th a t the eminent Finnish linguist,
Helmi Poukka (Helsinki), has made an im portant
contribution to the subject with her “HungarianFinn-Egyptian word-parallels” (P 105). In her
publication, she lists 1,045 identical Egypto-Hungarian words. This work was recently expanded
into an im portant m anuscrit of 307 pages, which
its author has generously forwarded to the writerof these lines.
A ll these studies made almost exclusively by
exiled H ungarian scholars resulted in the elabo­
ration o f a new H ungarian ancient history, whose
starting point is in A ncient N ear East, in the
Neolithic a n d Bronze Ages.

In the light of these researches, the basic
iIm '.i s oI the Finno-Ugrian historical conception
l>r. iiiin' more and more untenable; above all the
Im Ih I (hat Hungarian was a language of FinnoI
origin. This m ust be a misnomer, declared
I lie orientalists, in view of the fact th a t thellim^iarian vocabulary includes a mere 7.3% of«nmmon Finno-Ugrian words, against 92.7% nonI'lmio-Ugrian. Moreover, if Old Hungarian ante(l.iU's the Indo-European languages, how it could
liave borrowed words from them, when they were
not yet in existence? Considering th a t the Hun^;arian and Indo-European common words areembedded in the oldest layer of the latters’ vocab­
ulary, the presumption is strong th a t these com­
mon words were borrowed by the Indo-Europeansfrom the Old Hungarian. And again, since theemergence of the Hungarians took place in theAncient Near-East, it seems impossible th a t thepeople would have originated in Uralo-Siberia.
The tiny Vogul (Manysi) and Ostiak (Hanti) peo­
ples — 9,000 and 21,000 souls respectively — whoare now living in Siberia, cannot vouch for the
N orthern origin of Hungarians, because anthro­pologically they are the farthest removed fromthem. These fragments of an original Uralian
population were, in all probability, overrun by abreake-away branch of H ungarians (cf. P 059
pp. 173-179), who taught them a few hundred
words before being assimilated. This view is sup­ported by the Vogul name, which is probably anIold form of the present Hungarian Fogoly, m ean­ing ‘Captive’. In any case, the Finno-Ugrian theoryof history never succeeded in proving its point to
the general satisfaction. Large segments of theacademic world — linguists, historians archae­ologists in particular — remained skeptical anddiscussed it with great reservations. For all thesereasons, those of the opposite conception openly
rejected it as an obsolete theory.
The pressure against the Uralian conception
increased so heavily in the last ten to fifteen years,
th a t the holders of this antiquated belief felt
themselves cornered, and began a desperate fightfor survival. But, instead of discussing and refuting
the pretensions of the orientalists, they simply
declared th a t the theses of their adversaries areunacceptable, ‘because’ they are contrary to theofficial doctrine. They soon lost their tempers andstarted a vilipending campaign. They everywhereproclaimed th a t the exiled historians “have been
infected with a W estern virus”, and th a t they
suffer from “spiritual inebriety”, for whom the“Oriental mirage” (sumerology and egyptology) is
but a “therapeutic gym nastic”. They also labeled
the orientalists “fanatics, lunatics, chauvinists,and fascists” (P 008). The Finno-Ugrists also used
adm inistrative measures to silence their oppo­
nents, especially the so-called press-closure, whichmeans th a t the scientific promotion of the orien­
talist conception is banned from the media in
Hungary. Since then in th a t country, the periodi­

cals, newspapers, publishing houses, television andradii) stations were exclusively reserved for schol­ars with Finno-Ugrian m entality. Along with thepnss-c'losure, writers in line with the official
dofiina were encouraged to prepare fresh publica­
tions in the obsolete spirit, saying nothing aboutthi“ 1‘xistence of the other way of thinking.
It would nevertheless be a mistake to think th a t
the front of Finno-Ugrists is a solidly united one.
As a m atter of fact, there are, in Hungary itself,many scholars who already have assimilated sev­
eral im portant elements of the H ungarian re­searches abroad. A ntal B artha, for example, has
discarded the wrong belief th a t the early Hungari­ans had been forest dweller nomads. Instead, heteaches today th a t they were living in river valleys,
engaged in agriculture and anim al husbandry, andstood, in every respect, upon the level of contem ­porary Higher CiviHzation. He also m aintains th a t
the early Hungarians had come to the KamaVolga “meeting place” (no longer “cradle land”),
in successive waves, from a southerly direction,at the beginning of the first millenium B.C.,
starting from the area “where the food-production
first had taken place,” i.e. from the N ear-East(M agyar Hirlap, December 15, 1972). Further­more, anthropologist Tibor T oth has conceded
th a t the skeletons do not support the existenceof any early Hungarian settlem ent in the UralSiberian region. On the contrary, they clearlyprove th a t it actually was in the Aral Sea region(Kisalfald, June 16, 1972).
This will suffice to m ark out the place of theorientalist conception in the general H ungarian
historical researches during the last hundred andfifty years or so. A fter a difficult start, it seems
now to be closer to victory. In the following
chapters, the author lets the reader become ac­
quainted, in detail, with the orientalist conception
only, avoiding all controversies.

P A R T ONE

WHO ARE THE
HUNGARIANS?

THE PEOPLE
1. The anthropological build-up of the
NationReliable data concerning the anthropologicalstructure of European peoples, can be found in
the standard work of the Swiss anthropologist
Eugene P ittard (P 103) and in the historical racegeography of the Soviet scientist V. P. Aleksejev(P 002). Inform ation concerning specifically the
H ungarians is available in the brief accounts of
Mr. Kosonczi {Sorsunk, Australia, 1959-1960), andin the two more recent articles by Pal Liptak(P 090) and Tibor T oth (P 128), leading anthro­pologists in Hungary to-day.
According to the authorities mentioned, thevarious peoples of Europe intermingled so muchduring the last two or three millenia th a t today
they hardly differ from one another genetically.
By and large, they are made up alm ost everywherewith the same racial elements, viz. the whiteskinned Caucasoids or Aryans; ‘ the brownish
1. We have reverted to the Aryan term, following thepractice of many scientists, who prefer it because its
meaning is ‘Men’ (Wiro, Vir, Ar, Ur) in most of theEuropean languages (cf. P 130 p. 115).

complexioned M editerraneans or Touranians, also
called Kush; and a third element, especially detec­table in Scandinavia and in Spain. The latter areprobably the descendants of a pre-Neolithic popu­
lation called Cro-Magnon-men. W ithin the said
relatively uniform social structure, the individu­
ality of each people is only characterized by thediffering proportion of the common composing
elements. In the case of Hungarians, the specificratio is said to be c. 80 —85% Caucasoids or Aryans
and c. 15-20% Touranids or Kush. The repre­
sentation of the Nordic (Cro-Magnon) type in
Hungary is so m inute th a t it is practically negli­
gible.'The great m ajority of Hungarians (the Cauca­
soids) is characterized by a height of 167 cm, aclear complexion, variable eye colour (40% fair and
40% dark) and medium brown hair. T heir face andeyes are of a vivid tone, their nose is straight, butsometimes high and bridged. T heir general de­m eanour is a friendly one. According to cranialmeasurements, their average cephalic index (Cl)is 84.3, i.e. they belong to the short-headed racial
group.-^
2. The double racial origin of the Hungarians is firstmentioned in the Latin language work of the sharp-eyedhistorian Deseritzky who said; “Hunnos Magoresquegentem robustissimam et populosissimam partim ex
Japhet per Magog, partim ex Cham per Chus turn vero
Nemrothum fuisse propagatam et in unum coaluisse”(P 092 p. 79).

E. P ittard was surprised to find, in a strongly
mixed Europe, a relatively homogeneous popula­tion, especially in Central Europe, which wasoverrun so many times by foreign invaders since
Neolithic times. B ut he himself gives us the neces­sary explanation, emphasizing the fact th a t before
the arrival of the last huge H ungarian ethnic wave
in A.D. 895, the numerically most im portant eth ­nic body in the country —the Avars —was raciallyakin to the Magyars: they resembled each otherlike “two overflows of a single and same ethniclake”, to quote the words of E. Pittard.^ His evalu­
ation holds good even for the periods prior to theAvars, including Neolithic times. In fact, the near­ly 1,000 extant crania from this age prove th a teven the earliest settlers of the Land, almost
exclusively consisted of short-headed Caucasoids(P 103 p. 36). This means th a t the same hum anrace has perpetuated itself in H ungary from theearliest historical times in an uninterrupted conti­
nuity.
3. The head-shape is indicated by the cephalic index (Cl).
It is given in percentage ratio (100) with the skull-width(W) and its greatest length (L), from front to back, seenfrom above the head: C I= 1()0 X (W:L). When its Cl
is 80.00 or more, the cranium is round, short or brachycephalic. When Cl is 75.00 or less, the cranium is longor dolychocephalic. Between these two ranges are themeso-cephalic or medium-headed elements.
4. E. Pittard: «I1 me semble de plus en plus evident que
les invasions avares et magyares, qui apparaissent debeaucoup comme les plus importantes, ne sont que deux

According to anthropologists, the greatest con­centration of the shortheaded population is to befound in the Caucasus region."’ The farther one
moves away from the area, the thinner is thedensity of the brachycephalic element. On thisbasis it was assumed, th a t the oldest detectable
home of this race was in the Caucasus region,
whence they got their scientific denomination:
Caucasoid race. From their supposed original ho­meland, the Caucasoids or Aryans are said to haveslowly moved southwards, extending their control
over the whole northern p art of Ancient N ear-Eastalready in prehistoric times. They were harbringers of the so-called Higher Civilization, in
which most people were farmers living in small
villages.
The second racial element of the Hungarian
ethnic body is the Kushitic one. Their distinctive
anthropological characteristics were the darkishskin colour and the Caucasian (not African) face.**detachements sortis d’une meme masse unique; que deux
^missaires issus d’un meme lac ethnique* (P 103 p. 341).
5. E. Pittard noticed the strong concentration of short­headed Aryans in the Ancient Near-East. He said: “En
Asie, par exemple, parmi les peuples divers que Ton aappel^ les Aryens, et qui ont laiss^ le souvenir degrandes civilisations, il y a beaucoup de brachyc^phales,d’Aryen brachyc^phales” (P 103 p. 29).
6. It is important to keep in mind that, when our historicalsources mention the “dark” complexion of Kush, they
do not always use this word in a literal sense as ‘black’,
but rather as opposed to white. — Further, the Kush

In contrast to the Aryan agriculturists, the Kush
were mainly a stock-breeding population and assuch moved around extensively. For a long time,they lived in tribal communities, w ithout any
higher socio-political organisation. They desintegrated easily and m any of them became absorbed
into the ethnic bodies of other nations, most often
in subject status, so th a t they soon lost their own
ethnic identity through assimilation.
Amongst the written references to the existenceof white and dark men in Hungary, the most
explicit one is th a t of Adamar of Angouleme,author of Historia Francorum (X lth century). He
described a monk’s journey through Hungary andclaimed th a t two distinct races existed there: awhite one in Ungaria Alba and a dark one in
Ungaria Nigra, so called after the skin colour of
their inhabitants." Hungaro-Kush relations were.

must not be confused with Negroes, who are either adistinct race, or a product of the jungle. Schure insists
upon this and says: «I1 faut en chercher le type sup^rieur
non pas dans le Negre degenere, mais dans I’Abyssinienet le Nubien, en qui se conserve le moule de cette race
parvenue a son apog^e» (P 114 p. 42).
7. In the first millenium A.D., almost every Eastem-European nation had some brownish-darkish complexioned
ethnic elements in their physical make-up. There werewhite and dark Huns, white and dark Bulgars, whiteand dark Ugors, white and dark Chasars. It is surprisingthat this all-important historical fact escaped the atten­
tion of scientists, who persisted in believing that theadjectives White and Dark, when employed in historicalhowever, almost always somewhat strained be­cause of the lower cultural niveau of the darkmen.” And when the Kush refused to become
Christians, King Saint Stephen (1000-1038)
dispersed them all over the country, where theylost their individual identity. A uthor Adamar of
Angouleme writes in th a t connection the following
commentary: “King St. Stephen of Hungary a t­
tacked black Hungary with the army and convert­
ed the whole country to the true faith, partly bysheer force, partly by intim idation and affection.”*’sources, in connection with ethnic names, would signify
the basic points: East and West, i.e. the geographic
position of the respective peoples. This is, of course, amisin terpretation.
8. Chronicler Simon de Keza accurately reflects the general
feeling of Hungarians against the dark coloured popula­tion by saying: “Gentes siquidem in eadem (i.e. in
Scythia) procreate otia complectuntur, vanitatibus dedite, nature dedignantis actibus venereis intendentes,
rapinas amant, generaliter colore plus nigre quam albe”(P 120 I p. 252).
9. Former linguists and historians were inclined to consider
the Kush population as of Old Turkish extraction. It
was, however, impossible to find a fitting Turkish
branch, or to determine the specific geographic area
where contacts between Hungarians and Turks might
have taken place. Above all, the beginning of the KushHungarian relations antedates the existence of any
Turkish people. Therefore, the idea of early TurkishHungarian connections had to be abandoned (see Prof.
Mcnko in P 009 p. 50).

The anthropological build-up of Hungarians
links them to most of the European peoples, e.
g. to the French, so far as they are of GalUc descent,and to the English as well, so far as they are
Britons, Scots and Piets. On the other hand,H ungarians have genetic connections with the old
Oriental nations (Sumerians, ancient Egyptians,
Indians), and also with the youngest offsprings ofthe said great family: Scythians, Huns, Avars inparticular. The kinship of H ungarians is largeboth in Europe and in South W est A sia, and thiscircumstance explains why H ungarian ancienthistory is, in m any respects, one o f the mostim portant keys to the general history o f Eurasia.

2. The Hungarian language and its great
antiquity
A language is characterized by its gram m aticalstructure, vocabulary a n d phonetics. W hen thesecharacteristics are compared with those of otherlanguages, it can be established which languages
are cognate, i.e. have a common origin. The cog­nate languages form language-families and havesuch names as Indo-European, Finno-Ugrian,
U ralaltaic and so forth.
1.
The principal characteristic o f the H ungari­an gram m atical structure is th a t the root of theverb remains the same throughout the different
variations (conjugations) and to this unchanging
root the various particles are added, called suffixes,
to express tense relations, modes and personalcases. The pattern is always the same: stem -Icircum stantial suffixes + case ending. In the fol­lowing two words: To give and To write, the basicroots are AD and IR. The root, in itself, expresses
the indicative present, therefore the personal caseending comes next here, thus: AD-ok, IR-ok: I
give, I write. Secondly, the root, when enlarged
with the conditional suffix N becomes AD-N-6k,
IR-N-6k: I would give, I would write. Thirdly,
when inserting the subjunctive suffix J, the follow­
ing forms emerge: AD-J-ak, IR-J-ak: T h at I give,T h at I write. Fourthly, the sign of the past being
r. ili(‘ two verbs in question take the following

forms: AD-T-am, IR-T-am , I gave, I wrote. The
declension of the noun follows the pattern of the
conjugation. There too, the various endings areaffixed to the unvariable root, the nominative case
excepted, which is the root itself, w ithout a suffix.
So the noun HAZ ‘House’ becomes, with the plural
suffix K, HAZ-ak; with a second suffix BAN m ean­ing ‘In ’, we say HAZ-ak-ban, In houses. All theelements of the word thus formed are written
w ithout a hyphen, and merged into a single block:A dtam , Irtam , H dzakban, etc. Due to its compact
character, H ungarian is called a synthetic lan­
guage, or, owing to the numerous suffixes it uses,
a suffix-using (suffixed) or agglutinative language.
Two other features of the H ungarian grammar
are, first of all, th a t it has no gender. So IR may
mean ‘She or He writes’, depending on the context.
Secondly, it has a fully developed unvaried definite
article, used in two forms: ‘A’ or ‘AZ’. ‘A’ stands
before nouns beginning with a consonant, while‘AZ’ is employed before nouns beginning with avowels. So we say: A HAZ ‘The house’, but AZ
EG ‘The sky’.
2.
H ungarian has a comparatively large vocab­
ulary, thanks to its great antiquity, and also to
the ease with which new words can be made. Forty
words which will frequently appear in the forth­coming chapters are listed below. They belong tothe oldest layer of the vocabulary and, as such,they are mostly monosyllabic. Words denoting
parts o f the hum an body: 1. KEZ ‘H and’; 2. KAR

‘Arm’; 3. SZEM ‘Eye’. W ords for house and its
equipment: 4. HAZ ‘House’; 5. HON ‘Dwelling’ or‘Land’: 6. TANY ER ‘Plate, Disk’; 7. FAZEK‘(cooking) P o t’; 8. SZEK ‘Chair’; 9. AGY ‘Bed’.
The environment: 10. EG ‘Sky’; 11. FOLD ‘E arth,Ground’; 12. NAP ‘S un’ and ‘D ay’; 13. VIZ‘W ater’; 14. UT ‘R oad’; 15. MEZO ‘Field’; 16.
K E R T ‘G arden’; 17. Ft) ‘Grass’. Food: 18. MEZ‘Honey’; 19. ITAL ‘D rink’; 20. SOR ‘Beer-’. A n i­mals: 21. HAL ‘Fish’; 22. MADAR ‘Bird’; 23.
EG ER ‘Mouse’; 24. KOS ‘R am ’; 25. CSIRKE‘Chicken’; 26. BEKA ‘Frog’. Implements: 27. KES‘Knife’; 28. HAJO ‘B oat’; 29. SZEK ER ‘C art’; 30.
K E R E K ‘Wheel’. Religion: 31. UR ‘Lord’; 32.
IST E N ‘God’; 33. K E P ‘Image’; 34. MAS(A) ‘Copy
of, D eputy’; 35. PAP ‘Priest’; 36. TUDO ‘Magician,Scientist’. Numbers: 37. K ETTO ‘Two’; 38. OT‘Five’; 39. H E T ‘Seven’; 40. SZAZ ‘H undred’.
How are compound words formed? T he simplest
way consists of putting the respective stems to ­gether, the determining word being placed before
its dependent as a rule. Examples: F u t + Ar =F utar ‘Messenger’ (ht. Running m an); Hord +Ar = H ordar ‘P orter’ (lit. Carrying man); Nagy
+ Ur = N ador ‘Governor, D eputy King’ (lit.
G reat man). In compound words only the last parttakes up suffixes and case-endings, the compound
being considered as a single word. In addition to
the above mentioned process called nom inal com­position, Hungarian has another m ethod to build
new words with new shades of meaning. It consists

of adding derivative suffixes to the root in the caseof nouns, and placing prefixes before verbs. The
derivative suffixes are very numerous, e. g. — sag(seg) which imphes the idea o f ‘m ultitude’. Its firstform (-sag) fits to roots ending with a back vowel,
while the latter fits to those ending with a front
vowel, as in KATONA-sag and PEK-seg: ‘Army’(lit. Soldier -I- m ultitude) and ‘Bakery’ (lit. Baker+ m ultitude), respectively. In the case of verbs,
the most im portant prefixed particles are thedirectional ones, like In, Out, Up, Down, Forward,
Backward, Under, Away, Retour, etc., which are
in Hungarian: Be-, Ki-, Fel-, Le-, Elore-, H atra-,Ala-, E1-, Melle-, Vissza-.
3.
The phonetical structure o f H ungarian islargely influenced by stress, which always falls on
the first syllable of the word which is uttered withgreater emphasis th an the others. Now, when the
tongue has taken up the necessary position to forma certain accentuated syllable, it is easier to remainin the same position when uttering the subsequentones. The consequence of this laziness of the
tongue is a sound-preference, called vowel har­mony. It means th a t whenever the first syllable
includes a back vowel (A, 0 , U), the following
vowels m ust usually be of the same category. The
same applies to the front vowels (E, I), m utatis
mutandis.
T he sound-preference goes so far as to influenceeven the simplest suffixes, which have two forms:
the one fitting to roots with deep tonality (A, O,

U), the other to those with high tonality (E, I).
The two forms of the suffix ‘In ’ are BAN and BEN,
and we say FAL-ban ‘In wall’ and K ERT-ben ‘Ingarden’. The law of vowel harmony also governs
the form ation of compounds and mercilessly
brings all the vowels into the general tone of thefirst, stressed syllable. T he result is a completely
new word, in which the composing elements are
sometimes hardly detectable. For example, a greatcity on the Hungarian Plain got its name fromthe fusion of two words, Kecske (goat) and M at(pasture), and is today called Kecskemet. In thearchaic period, the m ajority of nouns ended witha vowel. However, with the consolidation of theword-stress on the first syllable, the sound of the
final vowel became weaker, and was eventuallysilenced. W ith the loss of the final vowel, thepreceding one was usually lengthened as in thefollowing examples: Old Hungarian Uru became
I >; Sassu became Szdz, and B harata > Bardt.
In Old H ungarian there was a marked prefer­ence for deeper vowels as opposed present usage.
Instead of the present ‘A’, ‘0 ’ was used; andinstead of ‘O’, ‘U’. So the present word for ‘D ust’,Por appears in older texts as Pur\ the word for‘Fatherland, C ountry’ Hon appears as Hun\ ‘R am ’which is today Kos, was then K us (pron. Kush);and Magyar, the native name for Hungarian,
formerly was Mogur\ while the word for ‘Beer’ Sor,
was Sura.
In the process of softening the system of conso­

nants, the ‘P ’, ‘T ’ and ‘K ’ sounds often changed
into voiced sounds: ‘B ’, ‘D ’ and ‘G’ respectively.
The phenomenon of m utation of sounds is known
in hnguistics as sound-shift. Under its impact,
alm ost all Old H ungarian words beginning witha ‘P ’ sound, changed to ‘F ’. Examples: Old H un­
garian P al meaning ‘W all’ became Fal; Palu ‘Vil­lage’ became Falu\ Patek > Fazek ‘(cooking) P o t’;
Pekete > Fekete ‘D ark’; Penu > Feny6 ‘Pine’;and Pono > Fond ‘Spinner’. In spite of the quasi
regularity of the frontal P > F change, certain
ossified words continue to be used in their archaic
forms, such as Paller ‘C ontactor’, a compound of
Fal + Ur, lit. ‘Wall M an’; and Puszta ‘Steppe’(in Eastern Europe) which is the compound Fiis
+ Ta, lit. ‘Herbaceous land’.
The softening of the Hungarian sound-system
had a second phase around C hrist’s birth, which
enriched the language with seven new voiced
sounds, w ritten today with double-lettered signs.
These are 1. CS, which sounds like ch in ‘Cherry’;2. GY as d in French ‘Dieu’; 3. LY as / in ‘Volume’;
4. NY as n in ‘New’; 5. SZ as s in ‘Science’; 6.
TY as t in ‘Tuesday’; and 7. ZS like s in ‘Pleasure’.
For all these new sounds (exactly as for B, D andG sounds) there never was any special graphic signin the Old Hungarian writing, because its origin
antedates the soundshift.
T h e a b o v e listed 40 w o rd s m ay a p p e a r in th e follo w in g p h o n e tic a l fo rm s
In o ld H u n g a ria n w ritte n d o c u m e n ts : 1. K e te ; 2. K a r ; 3. S em e, Z u m ; 4.
(H )a s a ; .'j. (H )o n , (H )u n ; 6. T a n e r; 7. P a te k : 8. S e k e ; 9. A t; 10. E ge: 11.
Po d . P o t: 12. N a b u : 13, Pis; 14. U tu ; 15. M ese; 16. K e r ta ; 17. P u ; 18. M edu;
19. Ita l; 20. .Sura: 21. K hiiln: 22. M a ta r; 23. E g u r: 24. K u sh ; 25. S u rk e ;26. B e k a; '27. K esh ; 28. (H )a iu ; 29. S e k c ri; 30. K erek ; :)l. U ru , A r; '.i2. Is te n ;.'U. K h e p e ; M . M a ssa ; .'J5. Hap; 38. T u tu . D u d u ; .37. K h t t t a ; :W. U l; 39.
H e tu , H e th ; 40. S assu .

Now, if we imagine the Hungarian language in
its archaic from, i.e. w ithout voiced consonants,
w ithout diacritical signs, and with deeper tonality,
and a vowel at the end of nouns, we will be
surprised to see how closely such a script resembles
the alphabetic transcript of certain N ear Eastern
languages of the Ilird and Ilnd milleniums B.C.
Actually, with the Old Hungarian phonetic key,
it would be possible to understand certain hiero­glyphic texts and inscriptions w ritten with the
Phoenician type of letters. The following specimen
shows w hat H ungarian looked like around 1200
A.D., two hundred years after the conversion to
Chzistianity and the adoption of the Latin alpha­bet. The following two sentences are taken fromthe Funeral Pryer, which starts thus: LATIATUC
FELEIM ZUM TUCHEL MIC VOGMUC. YSAPU R ES CHOMUV VOGMUC. Using the present
orthography, this text would be: Latjatok feleimszem etekkel mik vagyunk. Izzo por es hamu vagyunk. T ranslated into English in the original
sequence of the words and suffixes, it would be:‘See-you/brethren-m y/eyes-your-w ith/w hat/arewe/. G low ing/dust/and/ash/are-w e/. In this shortsample, all the essential elements of the language
are already in their final places and even thesuffixes are solidly “glued” to their respectiver o o t -words. It should also be mentioned th a t thisfill i. xi is <omprehensible to every H ungarian ofloday at first hearing, so little has the language
1 hanged in the lapse of eight hundred years, while(he changes, witnessed by other European lan^Hiages during the same period of time are, howev(>f. very considerable. So we have to keep in m indthat the tempo of the H ungarian linguistic change
is and has always been very slow.
We have a significant assessment of the generalbuild-up and inner structure of H ungarian by aneminent English scholar. Sir John Browning(1792-1872) who had a good command of th atlanguage and had translated num erous poems. He
expressed his adm iration for its unity, originality
and exceptionally strong cohesion. He likened it
to an Egyptian stone m onum ent hewn out froma single block of granite and upon which not thethinnest fissure is detectable. Its origin dates backto the times when none of the presently spoken
languages of Europe were yet in existence. “Thislanguage is the oldest and most glorious m onu­m ent of national sovereignty and m ental indepen­
dence.”
4.
Now, the im portant question is to know towhich fam ily o f languages H ungarian belongs andwhat position it occupies within its group, accord­
ing to the newest researches. If H ungarian cannot
be classified as a Finno-Ugrian language, nor asa Turkish one, we have to examine the third
alternative, its connections with the family of
Indo-European languages, th a t is, we have to lookwhether Hungarian has connections with theGreek, Latin, German, English and Slavonic lan­
guages in Europe (the “K entum ” group of the
Indo-European) on the one hand, and with the
Hindu, Sanscrit, Sumerian and ancient Egyptianin Asia and Africa (the “Satem ” group of Indo-Eu­
ropean) on the other.
Actually, H ungarian has been compared withall these languages. T he most detailed comparison
with Greek was carried out by Jozsef Aczel (1927).
According to him, Greek and H ungarian have over
two thousand words in common, in addition to
the great num ber of Greek place-names, having
a definite Hungarian meaning. A closer analysis
has disclosed, however, th a t the common Hungarian-Greek words are to be found mostly in Old
Greek, i.e. in the pre-Greek languages: Pelasgian,Cretan and Aegean. —The comparison with Latin
disclosed th a t its gram m atical structure is, inmany respects, similar to th a t of Hungarian. Latinis also an agglutinative tongue, using a greatnum ber of affixes, both in declensions and conju­
gations. Moreover, its vocabulary has m any words
th a t are in common with H ungarian (11.5%), —according to Gy. H ary’s word-statistics. The mostextensive research in this regard has been doneby Prof. Laszlo Szabedy (1974). T he fact th a t
several inscriptions, w ritten in the pre-Latin E tru ­scan language, were read in H ungarian by thisauthor, suggests th a t the H ungarian words in•Hicslion must have found their way into Latin
I lii ui^;li t lu* intermediary of Etruscan, an Oriental

language from Asia Minor, and th a t these words
are now embedded in the lowest and oldest stageof Latin, which is similar to the H ungarian words
in old Greek.
The num ber of common Germano-Hungarianwords accounts for 6.1% of the H ungarian vocabu­
lary. We know little about the common English
words, as no research has been made yet in thisparticular field. T heir number might be, however,quite significant, proof of which are several
hundred Old British place-names (cf. P 108) that,in essence, are Hungarian. The British scholar L.
A. W addell has found enough evidence (see P 132)
to prove th a t the early Brit-Honi population ori­
ginated from the Ancient N ear-East, together withthe very name of Brit, Prit which sounded origi­
nally like B arat, and had the meaning of ‘Com­
panion, Fellow-Traveller, Associate’, exactly as in
the H ungarian language of today. A particular
British fellow-traveller ethnic group of the Bronze
Age, was the Picti, whose name is unexplainable
in English, but clear in Hungarian. Picti would
be pronounced today, after the P > F change,
as Fekete, meaning ‘dark coloured’. We reallyknow from authentic historical sources th a t thePicti were a dark skinned people. — The greatest
number of French-Hungarian common words areto be found in Gallic place- and ethnic names,
preserved in Caesar’s famous report, De bello
Gallico (P 030). B ut amongst the present French
place-names there are also a great number ofH ungarian words, proof of which is the Directoryof the French communes (P 039 bis).
The Slavonic languages also have a considerable
num ber of common words resembling Hungarian.
Their proportion am ounts to 13.5% of the H ungar­
ian vocabulary, according to the above-mentioned
word-statistics. It is im portant to mention th a t
the great m ajority of these words occurs only inthose Slavonic countries which border on H un­
gary, so th a t they do not seem to be of Slavic
origin, but were most probably borrowed from the
Hungarian. If the percentages of all common Hungaro-Indo-European words are added together, we
get the impressive high figure of 31.1%. This fully
justifies the conclusion th a t H ungarians m ust
have had long-lasting contacts with the Indo-European-speaking population in the millenia be­fore Christ. But vocabulary concordances alone,
w ithout stronger gram m atical support, are notsufficiently strong to prove close genetic connec­
tions between them.
The relations o f the H ungarian language arecloser with the Satem -branch o f the Indo-Europe­
an and with Oriental languages in general. Theinternationally reputed specialist in Sanscrit,Alexander Csoma de Koros, summed up his find­ings on th a t score with the following sentence:“The Sanscrit language shows no stronger rela­tionship to any other language than it does to
H ungarian” (quoted in P 098 p. 217). And with
ref?ard to the highly developed Sum erian language

Mesopotamia, Prof. C.G. Gostony (Paris) dis­covered and mentioned in his book (P 056), th atout of its 53 linguistic features, 51 can be foundin present-day Hungarian. The same author hsts
over 2,000 Sum erian words which correspond to:is many H ungarian ones. Finally, he mentions thewell-known fact th a t the native term for theSumerian language was E-Megir; the same as
Magyar in the old phonetical form. All this isdecisive data so th a t we m ust conclude th a t Su­
merian (as we call it) was merely an early Hungar­
ian language. — As for the ancient Egypto-Hungarian linguistic relations, they too are very strong,
direct and genetic. Proof of this is the native nameof this language: M akari, which is another oldform of the word Magyari. Besides, E gypt’s n a­tional name remained M isir to the present day,a derivation of the same root, like M asar, Magar,
M akar. This author has also deciphered over ahundred short Egyptian texts in his three volumes:“Ancient History of Hungarian-speaking peoples”(P 007). Thus, ancient Egyptian m ust also be
considered an old H ungarian language, in the lightof the most recent findings.
From all the above-mentioned researches, whichhave been carried out with untiring patience andenergy, it is clear th a t almost every language ofEurasia is related to the H ungarian with at least
several hundred identical words, while the San­
scrit, Sumerian and ancient Egyptian languages
were cognate with the Hungarian. The first expla­
1)1

nation of this unexpected conclusion was given by
the talented linguist Istvan H orvath, who de­clared, already a hundred years ago, th a t Hungari­an, in B. C. times, was a widely spread languagein the Ancient Orient and also the most polishedone, so th a t many younger languages could draw
a great deal from its rich vocabulary. B ut no one
has taken this bold statem ent seriously in H orvat’s
lifetime. However, it seems now th a t he has been
vindicated. To-day it is indeed clear th a t H ungar­
ian is a very ancient language and it occupies
the central place in an extensive network o f old
languages.^^'5.
The final im portant question to be discussed
is this: what would be the most appropriate lin­
guistic term for the collective appellation of all
the languages having genetic connection with
Hungarian? The most fitting would be, of course,
the one which was historically used for such a
purpose: the term Uri ‘A ryan’, meaning ‘Illustri­ous, divine (language)’, i.e. a civilized one. This
term reappears alm ost regularly in the native
names of every inter-related Hungarian, beginningwith the “m other tongue” whose Sum erian name
10. The same opinion was expressed in a most recent Ger­man language publication by Ferenc Kemeny: “(Dass)(las llngarische einerseits alien eurasischen Sprachen als(imiullaKe gedient hat, andererseits eine echte Urpt .K he is(, (leren Ursprung aus dem heutigen Bestandil< I <llii n i indciilit; erklaert werden kann (P 078 p. 115;
< •ilm li'ii

|i |>

:i(l.

( i | ).

w:is E-Meg-Ir, the Egyptian one being Mak-Ari,

iiiid the H ungarian M ag-Ari.i' The best known
o t h e r Aryan languages were Uri, Sub-Ari, Na-Iri;md Hurri in N orthern Mesopotamia; Lig-Uri,
lletr-U ri in Europa; Mund-Ari, Kol-Ari and M a­ll ri in India; Ma-Ori in New Zealand, as well as
many others.'*
Our foregoing conclusions have been recently(onfirm ed point by point by a team of Russian
linguists, namely W. Illitch-Switytch, Prof. Diakanov, A.B. Dolgopolski and others. They weresuccessful in proving th a t there was a “Primordial
Tongue” (Ursprache) on the Eurasian continent,(o which all the other languages were affiliatedwith c. 650 root-words a t least. They also havedetermined the geographic area correctly, where
the first original language was spoken, namely the
11. That Hungarian is an Aryan tongue par excellence, wasstated time and again by a number of linguists; mostemphatically be Kristof Lukacsy, who said this: “When
I say that Hungarian belongs to the Aryan class oflanguages, I am summarizing the results of my investi­
gations of several years, conducted in the field of Hun­garian linguistics and antiquities” (P 092 p. 199).
12. “Aryan is the terminus technicus describing one of thegreat language-groups extending from India to Europe”(P038; see also P 133 and P 132). —Formerly, by mistake,the European languages were collectively classified as
Aryan. But their names do not include the distinctive
vocable Ari. Their kinship is based only upon theword-stock present in their substratum. —For the Aryan
term, see also P 091 pp. 27-30; and Encycl. Britannica,
ed. 1947, t. H p. 494.

tract o f land from India to A natolia and fromthe Caucasus to the Persian Gulf. Furtherm ore,
the estim ated age of the Primordial Language also
corresponds to the Hungarian: it began a t the endof the last glacial period, about 12,000 years ago.
In addition, the Russian team had purposely in­cluded H ungarian in the group of descendants ofthe primeval language, because its antiquity has
been “proven.”** Thus, Hungarian and Russian
linguists agree on this point with one another.
In our judgement, there is only one point theRussians have missed: they failed to discover thereal identity of the primordial language. Insteadof calling it by its own historical name “A ryan”,
they introduced the confusing “N ostratish” name

13. “Ihm (Illitch-Switytch) war es gelungen, das System
der Lautentsprechungen zwischen den indo-europaischen, den uralischen, den altaischen... der khartwelischen, den hamito-semitischen und den dravidischen
Sprachen zu erkennen. Diese Lautentsprechungen beziehen sich auf Hunderte von Wortwurzeln einer eurasischen Ursprache deren man die Bezeichnung ‘nostratisch’ oder ‘boreisch’ gab, — writes Dolgopolski in his
German language account (P 042). — See also the
Hungarian complement to this study by Gy. Hary in
Valosag (Budapest, October 1976, p. 177). - Dolgopolski
continues thus: “Als Urheimat der boreischen Sprache,kommt nach allem, was wir heute wissen, der Raumvon Indien, und von Kaukasien bis zum Persischen Golf,
III- “Die boreische Sprachgemeinschaft muss
ill iMii.K h ill der mittleren Steinzeit, vor Beginn derliMi|- ii iii/cii. Ix slanden haben...” (P 042).

first, then, discarding it, rebaptized the primeval
language “Boreish”. For us, the essential fact is,that H ungarian is recognized as a language in
its own right, being, as the mother o f m any others,
perhaps the oldest cultural language o f all E ura­sia. Consequently, when looking for the origin of
the H ungarian people, we have to focus our atten­
tion first o f all upon the A ncient Near-East.

3. Their tw o m ost frequently used ethnic
names: Magyar and Hungarian
Hungarians are identified with two ethnic
names: M agyar and H ungarian. The first one isused in the country’s native language, the secondin foreign languages. The different use of thenames was already noticed by chronicler Anonymus, the unnamed notary of King Bela, at theend of the X llth century. He said clearly th a t
the M agyars perydiom a alienigenarum Hungarii,
et in sua lingua propria Mogerii vocantur. Unfor­
tunately, he did not disclose the reason for this
twofold use; in his time, any difference between
the two names no longer existed.
Scientists were always eager to find out theoriginal meaning of the names in question. The
Etymological Dictionary (P 084 bis) informs us
th a t “M agyar’ is “an obscure compound”, with
Magy -I- Ar, variously spelt M agar, Mogeri,
Meger, M ogur and M iser and meaning, simply,‘M an’. Geza Nagy, a keen Hnguist, brings us nearer
to the answer by teaching th a t M agari is a com­pound with two vocables: M at ‘E a rth ’ and A r‘Man, People’ (P 117 p. 98). But he does not elabo­
rate upon w hat the exact meaning of the resulting
new word might be. Concerning the etymology ofthe second name, viz. Hungar, our linguists gener­
ally believe, th a t it is not a Hungarian, but anold Turkish word, the On-Ogur, meaning ‘Ten
Tribes’, as the tribal federation was called, towhich the Magari people belonged at one time int he first p art of the V th century A.D. Finally, withregard to the Ar element occurring in both names,
our linguists are reluctant to be more definite. On
this subject we read in a French publication th a t
the term Aryan is not yet sufficiently clarified.
Thus, we come to the conclusion th a t we are noton firm soil when looking for the etymology of
the Hungarians’ ethnic names on the basis of theavailable literature.
In our judgem ent, both Magari and Hungari are
truly compound words, as it was always supposed.
Both of them consist of two vocables: Magy + Ar(< M at-A r), and Hung + Ar (< H ont-A r) respec­tively, to which the adjectival suffix -i is appended.
To our surprise, the lexical structure of Mag-Ar-iand Hung-Ar-i is identical with th a t of several
ancient ethnic names, Hke Lig-Ur-i, Ill-Yr-i, BavAr-i, Can-Ar-i in Europe; Col-Ar-i, Mund-Ar-i,
Ma-Or-i in India and New Zealand: and Mak-Ar-iand Onk-Ar-i in ancient Egypt. Today Magari is
no longer spelt with the -i suffix, but simply is
Magyar, this new graphic form having come into
practice towards the end of the X V IIIth century.
The comparison of the lexical structure of Magari/H ungari with th a t of the other old ethnic
14. «Le nom du peuple Aryen reste jusqu’a present sans
explication certaine* (P 091 p. 75).

names suggests th a t their origin may reach far into
remote historical times.
W hat is the meaning of the composing elementsof the names in question? First, the suffix -i ap­
pearing a t the end of both names, gives them themeaning of ‘Coming from. Native of, Follower o f
and the like. The second common element Ar (<Ur) has manifold meanings, but it always implies
an im portant personage, who has power of com­mand, such as God, a king, a high official or any
free man. And the first element in Mag-Ari: Mag(< M a t) means ‘field. L and’. Thus the whole com­pound as a new word signifies 1. ‘Subject of theRuler of the Land’, 2. ‘Fellow citizen’ or 3. simply‘peasant’. The first element of Hung-Ari: Hunt,is nothing else but the ancient phonetic form of
the present Hon, H ont ‘C ountry’. So the fullcompound name Hungari means ‘Countrym an,
N ative’. According to its etymology, it is a perfect
Hungarian word, as is Magari itself, and seems
to have nothing to do with the Old Turkish ‘Onogur’. Finally, if we are looking for the difference
which may have, in olden times, justified theseparate use of the two ethnic names, we may
suggest th a t Magari actually stood for peasant,tiller of the soil, whereas Hungari for keepers ofanimals. B ut whatever may have been the dif­ference between the meaning of the two names
in question a t the beginning, it soon disappeared.
An allusion was already made to the antiquityof the M agyars’ two ethnic names, which reachback into pre-historic times. Now, we can confirm
it by recalling th a t the M a t vocable is in generaluse among Finno-Ugrian languages and always
means the same thing, namely, ‘Field, Land,
Dwelling Place’ (P 110 pp. 85, 88, 89). Considering
further th a t Finns and Estonians have separated
from the Hungarian speaking body a t around 2000
B.C., the common Finn-M agyar word in question
m ust have been in existence before the said date,there having been no later contact between thetwo groups. Consequently, the Magari name may
be as old as 4000 years. Let us add to the foregoingth a t M atu was also known in the SumeroBabylonian language as a word for ‘C ountry’(P 056 p. 64) and th a t “M at Misir” was the current
term for Egypt in the Old Persian, and “M at Asyr”
th a t for Assyria (P 041 pp. 129,146,148). The samecan be said about the word Hon or Hont\ it isalso a basic word in the whole Finno-Ugrian lan­
guage group, meaning in Finnish and Estonian
Huona ‘Dwelling place, House’. Furtherm ore, thesame word is also included in the Sum erian vocab­
ulary, in the form of (H)an, (H)anu, signifying‘Realm of God’, as well as in Ancient Egyptian,where (H)an or (H)on was the name of the citywhere the Sungod lived, ‘Sun-City’, the Greek
Heliopolis in the Delta. Finally, with regard to
the second part of the word, Ar ( < Ur): it isgenerally used both in Sumerian and Egyptian andseveral other ancient languages, meaning ‘God,
King, Ruler or M an’, so th a t it does not requirea detailed explanation. Thus, our inquiry has
shown th a t the M agyar and H ungar names, to­gether with their compound elements, can be his­
torically traced back alm ost five thousand years.
There is hardly another nation in Europe, or
perhaps in the whole world, whose name could
be tracked down for such a long time.
It is also interesting to have a look a t the various
phonetical forms the the Magari and Hungari
compounds have taken during their existence assuch. The names were first affected by the generalsoftening tendency of the language. It brought
about a soundshift after which the T sound, bothin M at and Hont, successively changed into D,
G and H sounds, with the resulting phoneticalforms of M aDar, M aG ar or MagOr, as well as
M aH ar. Now, these phonetical forms happened
to sound similar to the words for ‘Bird’ (Madar),‘Grain God’ (Mag-ur), ‘Big Nose’ (Mag-orr) and‘Bee-king’ (Meh-ar, M6h-ur), although the original
name had absolutely nothing to do with them.
Still, this evolution is of the greatest interest tous, because the homophony between the nationalname M agyar and the quoted objects gave birth
to the idea th a t shaping or drawing a bird, a bee,a face with a big nose, or grains (beads) arranged
in a circle (necklace) showed so many appropriate
ways to “write” Magyar, i.e. to display one’s ethnic
identity.
Archaeological discoveries, representing a
hum an figure with a big nose, occur frequently.

especially in ancient Mesopotamia and on the
Aegean islands. In Egypt the picture of a bee
constituted a regular p art of the royal titulary,identifying the king as M ehar or Magyar. The
figure of a bird, applied on a brooch, or a bird
statu ette in clay, or even real birds kept in thehouse, were, as many, identification badges of theowners.*"’ There is no mistake in Unking thesegraphic or artistic figures with the presence of a
Hungarian-speaking population, because the ho­
mophony between the ethnic name and the m en­tioned objects exists only in th a t language, as far
as we know. Besides, all this symbolism would havebeen senseless without the ethno-linguistic impli­
cations. Of course, it is not easy to discover such
similarities w ithout having a good command of
Hungarian and a profound knowledge of its pastand present phonetical system. At any rate, we
can say th a t our ancestors had found a method
to establish their first written documents about
themselves, right a t the beginning of the literate
period of history. It was certainly a primitive wayof writing, but an ingenious one, the so-called
pictorial method, the first form of writing. Should
we then conclude th a t the early Hungarians also
were, perhaps, amongst the active forerunners in
the invention of writing?
15. Bird-headed statuettes have been found in ancient
Mesopotamia already from the time of the Flood (P006 I p. 56). In Hungary too, bird-headed bone-sticks
have been found on several sites (P 050 p. 258).

In summing up the results of our inquiry regard­
ing the two most frequently used Hungarian eth ­nic names, we may safely say th a t both of themwere products o f the H ungarian language; thatthey originated in the earliest historical times,
probably in the A ncient Near-East, and that they
identify the M agyars in their religious and politi­
co-social context.

4. The whereabouts of the Old Fatherland
The previous three chapters have already pro­
duced enough indication th a t the Old Magyar
Fatherland was probably situated in the ancient
Orient, dom inated by three mighty rivers — Nile,
Euphrates and Indus — and which we call NearEast. It appeared, indeed, th a t this particular area
was the one where the representative of the tworaces, out of whose fusion the H ungarian nation
has come into being, were sum ultaneously present;
where easily workable soil was available for farm­ing, as well as large grazing grounds for stockbreeding; and where the agriculturist Magyars andstock-breeding Kush population intermingled(Fig. 3). The following pages should prove th a t theAncient N ear-East was actually the Old Magyar
Fatherland, the land where the Hungarian typeof nations have come into being.
1. The presence of an agriculturist Magyar
speaking population in the A ncient N ear-East canbe traced back in all the three river basins by theplace-, ethnic and personal names, the former
inhabitants of the area had used, and which in­clude basic M agyar words, like Ur and
16. Most of the Oriental place - and ethnic names with a
Hungarian meaning have been collected from the fol­lowing five publications: P 013; P 021; P 024; P 044;
and P 085. Some others were found in the works of
Herodotus, Dauzat, Uxbond, Saks, etc.

In summing up the results of our inquiry regard­
ing the two most frequently used Hungarian eth ­nic names, we may safely say th a t both of themwere products o f the H ungarian language; thatthey originated in the earliest historical times,
probably in the A ncient Near-East, and that they
identify the M agyars in their religious and politi­
co-social context.

4. The whereabouts of the Old Fatherland
The previous three chapters have already pro­
duced enough indication th a t the Old Magyar
Fatherland was probably situated in the ancient
Orient, dom inated by three mighty rivers — Nile,
Euphrates and Indus — and which we call NearEast. It appeared, indeed, th a t this particular area
was the one where the representative of the tworaces, out of whose fusion the H ungarian nation
has come into being, were sum ultaneously present;
where easily workable soil was available for farm­ing, as well as large grazing grounds for stockbreeding; and where the agriculturist Magyars andstock-breeding Kush population intermingled(Fig. 3). The following pages should prove th a t theAncient N ear-East was actually the Old Magyar
Fatherland, the land where the Hungarian typeof nations have come into being.
1.
The presence of an agriculturist Magyar
speaking population in the A ncient N ear-East canbe traced back in all the three river basins by theplace-, ethnic and personal names, the former
inhabitants of the area had used, and which in­clude basic M agyar words, like Ur and
16. Most of the Oriental place - and ethnic names with a
Hungarian meaning have been collected from the fol­lowing five publications: P 013; P 021; P 024; P 044;
and P 085. Some others were found in the works of
Herodotus, Dauzat, Uxbond, Saks, etc.

In the Euphrates valley, to begin with it, the mosttypical such place-name was th a t of the City ofUr, whose ruins are called even today M ugheir(= Magyar), and which had a M aguerre (= M a­gyar) ruler. Not far from th a t city was locatedEridu, the oldest settlem ent of the whole Land.
Its Hungarian etymology ( < H .: Ur-i To) discloses,
th a t it was built on the shore of a lake, the Present
Persian Gulf. Today, the city is far from the Gulf,
but in the Ilird millenium B.C. it still stood on
the shore, the filling-up of the E uphrates delta

E astwith alluvial deposits having not yet been in an
Mclvanced stage. A third im portant M esopotamian( ity with clear H ungarian name was Nippur ( = H.:
Nap-Ur), the ‘City of the Sungod’. We know fromother sources, th a t N ippur was the most impor­tant religious centre for the Sun-cult in Mesopotamia
lor over a thousand years; a fact which w arrants
the accuracy of our etymology. O ther M esopota­
mian place-names, with a striking Hungarian
meaning were Sam -A r-R a ( < H.: Szem-Ur) ‘Resi­dence of the Eye-God’, a variant of Sungod; MatA r-R a ‘The City placed under the protection of
the Farm ers’ God’, and A ssour (< H .: A So Ura)
‘City of the Ruler of the Sand’. A part of the above
place-names, the geographic term Burattu de­serves special mention. Its rootword is Bor, which
is ancient Hungarian for ‘W ater, River’, by which
the E uphrates was meant. And the form B urattu
is the rootword Bor enlarged with two suffixes,
thus: Bor-at-i, to mean ‘Land (or People) Beyond
the River’. This name has taken up manifold
phonetical forms later on, like Berut, Beyrout,
Barat, Brit, etc., and it surfaced a t numerous
places which the Mesopotamians colonized in sub­sequent times (see map showing the diffusion of
the B urattu-nam e in P 132 after p. 420). In Syria,
Canaan and Anatolia, which were under Mesopo­
tam ian cultural and political influence for a longtime, the most im portant Magyar city-names
were: Arpad, on the great bend of the River, about
which more will be said later, and K arkem ish andDamask. The correct transliteration of the Egyp­tian hieroglyphs giving the names of Karkemish
and Dam ask is : K arika-M asa and Dama-Szeke,
meaning -according to the H ungarian key- ‘Depu­
ty of the Circular D ivinity’ (Sungod), and ‘Resi­dence of the Divine Lady’ respectively.
In the second great Oriental river valley, thato f the Nile, the two M agyar testwords Ur andMagyar again occur frequently. Ur is included in
the name of about a hundred divinities, as anybody
may notice it when opening the book of WaUice
Budge, The gods o f the Egyptians (P 026II Index).
The same word reappears in other combinations
as well, like in Horus (< H .: Ur-Os) ‘Divine Ances­
to r’, which was the regular title of the reigning
Egyptian king. Another of his titles was M akar,
the Egyptian form of Magyar. Contem porary rec­ords speak of a M akari Queen, of the X X th
D ynasty (c. 1080-940 B. C.), who tragically diedin childbirth at an early age. It is also recorded
th a t during the reign of K ing Zoser (< H .: As OsUr) ‘The Divine Ancestor’, a certain M adir
( = Magyar) was the governor of the E lephantCity. The very name of Egypt was at th a t time,
as it continues to be even today, ‘The Land of
M isir' (= Magyar). Finally, near the Red Sea, in
Eritrea, at the site called M atara, a M agyar lan­
guage inscription has been found, and decipheredby the author.
In the third great Oriental river valley, that ofthe Indus, the two M agyar testwords come up also

Irequently. The whole tract of land from the
Caspian Sea to the River Indus, for example, wascalled A ria ‘The Land of the Aryans’, as indicatedin the Dictionary of Mechitar. In th a t same zone
lies Iran, whose etymological meaning is not Per­sian, but Hungarian: Ur-Hon ‘Abode of the
Aryans’. Plinius, writing in the first century A.D.,
when listing the various peoples of India says this:Indum accolunt Megari... Uri and other peoples(P 092 p. 98). Toppeltinus writes in the same sense,
stating th a t the inhabitants of India are called
Magori even in his time, and th a t they are a
powerful people, possessing a famous land, thanks
to their victorius army.*^ The seven great ances­
tors of the Hindus were the M ahar-Ishi (< H .:Magyar Os) ‘M agyar Ancestors’, and the mostcelebrated Hindu dynasty was also called ‘M a­gyar’; Maury. It was founded around 315 B.C.,
and a t its hight, ruled over an immense kingdom,
extending from Afghanistan to Ceylon. Finally,
the first comprehensive name for India was B arat
Varsha (< H .: B arat Varosa) ‘Land of theB arats’.i”

17. Toppeltinus; “...etiamnum vocantur Magori. Ingens
populus et ipsi armorum gloria inclytum regnum possident” (P 092 pp. 98, 203).
18. L.A. Waddell comments Barat-Varsha thus: “The Landof the Barats (Barat Varsha) a name synonymous with
‘Barat Ana’ or ‘Land of the Barats’, which I have proved
to be the original form of the name ‘Brit-Ain’ as given
to Albion about 1100 B.C. by... the same Aryan race

A part from the numerous place- and and ethnic
names built with the word Ur and Magyar, thepresence of the M agyar population in all three
focal points of the Ancient N ear-East can beevidenced by pictorially written documents aswell. This writing, as already explained, com­municates abstract ideas with the pictures of con­crete objects, whose names sound identically. In
this way, the Magyars of a given place, could be
identified with the picture of a bird, for which the
Hungarian word is M adar, sounding like Magyar.
A second animal, which was used to identify aMagyar ruler, was the lion Oroszldn ( < H .: Ur-OsLeny) ‘Primeval Divine Ancestor’. We have twogood examples to illustrate the above. First, ahon-headed bird, M adar, found in the ruins of theCity of Ur. It is represented with outstretchedwings, hovering over two deer, Szarvas (< H .: Az
Ur-Os) ‘The Divine Ancestor (Fig. 4). The m ean­ing of this combined symbol (bird and two deer)
is M agyar Ur-0s6k ‘Hungarian Divine Ancestors’.
On the other hand, an early example of the useof the lion-symbol for identification purposes is
the well-known image of Gilgamesh, the legendary
ruler of the city of Uruk, who is depicted as holding
a lion cub in his arm. The meaning is ‘Primeval
Divine Ancestor’, a title similar to the pompous“king-of-kings”. In Egypt, we have found the Maof Barats... who civilized India and the Ganges valley”( P 132 bis p. 10); see also the entry under ‘Barata Varsha’in P 044).

Fig. 4. Turullu, the lion-headed Sum erian bird sym ­bolized the divin e an cestors o f H ungarians. Uruk,M esopotam ia, c. 3200 B.C.

Fig. 5. Pictorial representation o f th e tw o H ungarianancestors, carved by a shepherd in Som ogy coxmty.
X lX th century.

1Js^ fl ^

•^
J

c«

"

P
CQ

1

E-

”

|.
A
_▼“
■^
^
1

ww~~ <WU M

ffyar name spelt with hieroglyphs very clearly as
M -A-K h-aR (land) (Fig. 7) and in another in­
stance as A M a-Ti-aR -K u-R a ‘The R uler of theMagyars’ (Fig. 8). Thus, it seems clear that the
IJri (= A ri) M agyar ethnic element was strikingly
present in the whole A ncient Orient, in the B.C.
times. This is a m ajor historical discovery whose
far-reaching significance hardly escapes the a t­tention o f the reader.
2.
The next question is whether the same canbe said about the darkish complexioned ethnic
element, which made up 15-20% of the Hungarian
ethnic body. The comprehensive name of thispeople was Kush, and in the jargon of the anthro­pologists: M editerraneans or Touranians. It ap­
pears in various graphic forms, such as Kush, Cush,Kushan, Cassi, whereas its Hungarian form is Kus(pron. Kush), and meaning ‘Ram (people)’. Their
Ram-name indicates, th a t they were, first of all,a stock-breeding population, keepers of sheep andswine. In the Nile valley, i.e. in Egypt, they were
pictorially identified with a flat horned ram, whose
most elaborate exemplar was found in the Nubiancolony of Sulb (Fig. 9). At one time, a row of
ram -statues flanked the far side of the road leading
to the temple of God Amen, while the near sideof the road was lined with lion-statues, the symbolof Magyars. They were also raising pigs, so theircountry was called Sertes-Hon ‘The Pig C ountry’,and its ruler was the ‘R uler of the Pig C ountry’(See in P 007 II ill. 20), also in plain Hungarian.

Fig. 9. In Egypt, theflat-horned ram w as thefavourite K ush-sym bo].

Fig. 10. The
Kush*
sym bolsu rvivesin
H ungarian folklore.

DO

Fig. 11. Ku-S Tfirs =A K ush com panion

Fig. 12.
A Ne-P U-Se
Ma-T-AR U-N-Ti
F5-UR
People’s A ncestor
G reat Lord in the
M agyar country

Fig. 13.

RA-Mas-Sa Szudan U-RA
Deputy Sungod, Ruler of Sudan
RA-Mene, Feke-T6k URAHigh Priest of Sungod,
Ruler of the Blacks

In addition to the ram and pig, the Egyptian Kush
were ethnically identified with the picture of theirerect-eared, gracile hunting dog of a dark colour.
This anim al played the same role for the Kush
as the lion did for the Magyars. It was consideredas the ancestor of the dark people, and its namehas been transliterated as Anubis, with an unk­
nown meaning. If we consider, however, the hiero­glyphs of the name (Fig. 12), it discloses th a t theright transliterataion is A nep ose (A Ne-P U-Se),
which is again in Hungarian and means ‘The
Ancestor of the Folk’. In later times, the spottedleopard and the wolf were also in certain places,
substitutes for “Anubis”.
The Egyptian Kush of the First C ataract had
held a dark skinned lady in great esteem whomthey considered their local forebear. Her namewas written with four signs: with an arrow carrying
the sound-group SAT or SET, then with two
half-loaf shaped T and with a sitting woman figure
NU. We also notice th a t the arrow transfixes ananimal skin PAR (= H.: Bor). T hus this w ritten
source identifies the lady in question in full H un­
garian as SAT-T-eT boru NU Setet borii no,literally ‘Dark skinned W oman’, exactly as tradi­tion had preserved her memory. From this example
we altogether learn th a t the Kush were also calledby the name o f ‘D ark’ SetH. King Ramses I (moreaccurately: Ra-M asa, ‘Deputy Sungod’) had been
governor of the Nubian colony prior to his ascen­sion to the throne of Egypt, and continued to keep

liis earlier title when king. T h at is w hat his double( artouche (Fig. 13) discloses, when read with the
Hungarian key: R a mdsa, Szuddn ura; Ra mene,
Feketek ura ‘Deputy Sungod, R uler of Sudan;
Stallion of the Sungod, Ruler of the Blacks’. So,
incidentally we also learn th a t the Kush were evencalled simply Blacks, Feketek.
In the Euphrates valley, i.e. in Mesopotamia,
the regular Kush identifying symbol was also aram, but one of local species with horns twisted
in the form of a V. Its most beautiful exemplar
has been found in the City of Ur, and dated fromthe Ilird millenium B.C. The animal is represented
peering from the branches of a Tree of Life, indi­
cating th a t it is the ancestor. In M esopotamian
cuneiform writing, the Kush are referred to as“The dark headed ones” and as NAM LULU.
Considering th a t the sounds L and R have thesame writing sign, and th a t duplication of a signmeans plural case, the correct transliteration of
the quoted expression should be N em ur.ak, ‘Non
Aryans’, which is w hat the Kush really were. —In the third great river valley of the Orient, theIndus valley, the num ber of Kush was exceedingly
high, and the so-called “Indus valley seals” offer
abundant information about them. Nevertheless,they have less significance in H ungarian ancienthistory, because the D anubian H ungarian ethnic
body derived very little from them. Therefore, weare restricted to only one Hungarian written mes­sage they had left to us. It expresses, so to speak.

the philosophy of every Kush ruler worth of thisname. The seven worded sentence in question runs
thus: Uralkodo kedves, ha fuvesiti a rdndkat
orszagaban ‘A ruler is liked if he does grow grasson the open lands of his realm ’ (see details in P 007
II ill. 36). — As the reader may judge for himself,
there is plenty o f evidence to show that the darkish
coloured Kush population had actually occupied
large areas in and around the agriculturist M a ­gyar dom ains in the entire A ncient Near-East,
during pre-Christian times.
3.
M ention m ust yet be made as to how the
relations between Magyars and Kush developed,
and how they finally led to the formation of“Hungarian nations” in the Old Fatherland. The
connections between the two races in the NearEast lasted for over two thousand years. At the
beginning of this long period, their contacts werecharacterized rather by m utual distrust and open
hostilities. As a result, the Kush were defeatedalmost everywhere and subjected to political andculturel assimilation. They lost a great deal of
their people but, in exchange, received the badly
needed higher education, which contributed totheir later development. The second phase of theircontacts was characterized by large scale inter­marriages and the coming into existence of com­bined ‘Ario-Kush’ or ‘Cush-Ari’ nations, as thisprocess is well known in Mesopotamia, India,
Egypt and Touran alike.

In the second millenium B.C., the Kush in
M esopotamia were already so strongly civilized
th a t they were capable of taking over the govern­
ment of the land for a while, and freely interm in­
gled with the Aryans. In India the situation was
similar, the Kush were on equal footing with theMagyars there, and the Indus-valley civihzation,around 2500 B.C., was their common creation. In
c. 1650/1500 B.C., however, a great catastrophe
had befallen India when newly formed Aryansocieties (Aryans II) violently penetrated into theLand, coming from the West, and while they werebusy occupying the Ganges valley, they disrupted
the previous population and split it into several
blocks in bloody battles, which are echoed in the
famous poem of M aha Bharata or ‘The GreatB arat’. During th a t general upheaval, the com­
mixing of the two races advanced farther. Thosegroups which left India and went westwards peo­pled M akran, Iran, Afghanistan and Touran.
Others fled through the passes and gorges of the
Hindu-Kush and descended into the Oxus valley.
Following these large ethnic displacements, sever­al places were given a second name, or changed
the existing one to reflect the new realities. The
former Hyrcanian (= Aryan) Sea, for example, wasbeing called Caspian Sea, i.e. Kush W ater, andthe former Northern Sea changed into Sea of theBlacks or Black Sea. Double-named rivers andnations were born, like Araxes (Ario-Kush) river,and Casari (Kush-Arian) nation. Amongst thelatter, people were found with so dark a complex­
ion th a t “one would readily believe th a t they weredescendants of the H indus”, —as observed by Ibn
H aukal (P 092 p. 57). W ith the passing of time,
the fusion of the two races advanced so far th a t
alm ost everyone had both Aryan and Kush bloodin his veins, and everyone considered himself, withfull right, of Kushitic and Aryan descent at thesame time. In other words, the term s Kush andAryan became interchangeable. At th a t stage,
M echitar was right in saying in his Dictionary,
th a t Aria is also called the ‘Land of the K ush’.
In the Nile valley, the Kush first appeared in
the region of K hartum around 6000 B.C. In thesubsequent millenia, they inundated the whole
length of the valley so th a t when the Magyars
arrived under their leader Menes, in c. 3200 B.C.,
they had to fight against dark men to secure ahom eland for themselves there. At the end of thefirst round of struggling, it seemed th a t a kindof political condominium would be establishedbetween the two peoples, as the sim ultaneous
appearance of the Aryan bird-symbol and theKush dog-symbol on the national armories of
Egypt suggests. B ut shortly thereafter, a formal
sharing of the Nile valley took place whereby thedark men agreed to evacuate th a t section of theriver valley which lies above the First C ataract.
This division had, however, not calmed the aggres­siveness of the Blacks, who launched frequent in­cursions into the domain of the Magyars. As a

result, their country was gradually conquered andtransformed into a colony around 1500 B.C. The
Kush were then pacified for a long period and did
not regain their independence until 945 B.C. But,
by th a t time, they were already a completely
civilized, modem nation.
While these events unfolded south of Egypt, theDelta itself had been under Kush rule for about
two hundred years, the so-called “period of Hyksosrule”. The Hyksos were, however, driven out from
Egypt in 1576 B.C. together with their native
Egyptian helpers. The bulk of the exiles settled
in Syria and Canaan, mostly in the city-states ofCarchemish, Arpad and Damask. The Egyptiankings of the X lX th Dynasty relentlessly kept on
pursuing them, always pushing them farther andfarther, until they left Africa for good and settled
in Europe, including Hungary. The fusion in Egyptof the remaining dark elements with the white ones
was as thourough as it was in Mesopotamia andin Touran, and the Egyptians themselves finallybelieved th a t they too originated from two ances­
tors, M agyar and Kush.''*19. “They called it /E gypt/ the land o\ M ezor ( = Magyar)
and the land of Cham / =K ush/ from their two ances­
tors, which the Greek rendered Mesora and Chamia"(P 023 p. 298). — The same idea i.s expressed in thefollowing quotation “Throughout the early dynastic
period and the Old Kingdom /o f Egypt/ Set ( = the darkruler ) and Horus (the Aryan ruler) are represented as
the two patron-deities of the Monarchy” (John Van
Saters, The Hyksos, London 1966 p. 98).

To sum up, our inquiry has shown th a t 1. thebirth o f the M agyar speaking ‘H ungarian type’of nations has taken place in the A ncient NearE ast through the fusion o f two rival races: theA ryan with the Kush; therefore that area m ust
be considered as the original M agyar Fatherland.
It is also clear that 2. the population o f Danuhian
Hungary originated from the Old Fatherland: inthe first round directly from M esopotamia andEgypt, and in the second from the Caspi-OxusA ra l area (Touran); in wave after wave arriving
according to the pulse o f historical events (theSemitic a n d Turkish expansions in the same re­gion) which forced them to leave their native
lands.

THEIR EARLIEST CIVILIZATION
1. The Old Hungarian script
1.
Prior to the adoption of the Rom an alphabet
in the early X lth century, Hungarians used a setof sound-signs of Phoenician origin for writing. The
historical term for this old system of writing is
Rovds, meaning ‘incised, engraved’ or ‘carved’
script, the name describing the technique of w rit­
ing. Foreign language scientists called it “linear”
or “geometric shaped” script, thereby alluding to
the form of writing.
On this subject, there is an abundant literature
beginning with the very precious Latin language
work of J. Telegdi from 1598 (reproduced in P 115
p. 91 and f.). More recently, two eminent compre­
hensive works were written, one by Gyula Sebestyen (P 115 and P 116), and the other by Dezso
Csallany (P 035). Thanks to these and to similar
other publications, we have a perfectly clear idea
how this system worked: we know which were thesound-signs, the rules of writing and the writingm aterial as well. In addition, some forty extant
original inscriptions allow us to see the system inoperation. The incised or linear script was, in allprobability, invented in the ancient Orient, al­though the specific area remains unknown. It is,however, clear th a t the earliest form of this writingwas simplified by Phoenician scribes who thenspread it all over the M editerranean from the X lth
century B.C. onward. It is also known th a t asimilar type of writing existed in the Indus valley
already in the second millenium B.C. In subse­
quent times, this was also simplified and spreadto Lower and Upper Asia, mainly amongst Turkish
peoples. Finally, following the opinion of
Sir Flinders, then Petrie, several scientists m ain­tained th a t the earliest incised signs were used at
Abydos, in the Upper Nile valley for the purposeof pot-marking, in Neolithic times around 3200
B.C. Thus, a higher chronology seems to be prefer­able for this invention, the more the ancient H un­
garian word for scribe is Tudo, which is the samein ancient Egyptian (T utu and Thot), in Sumerian(Tudu) and also in Finnish (Tataa).
After H ungary’s conversion to Christianism, thecarved script, like everything associated with pa­
ganism, became a Habihty. Therefore, its use wasbanned by King St. Stephen (1000-1038) who alsoordered the destruction of all the existing records
written with the “diabolical letters.” W ith thepassing of time, the existence of the Old Magyar
writing was almost totally forgotten. Its last ves­
tiges were swept away with the appearence ofmodern writing m aterial and the invention of
printing.
W hat we know about the sound-signs o f theH ungarian carved script, may be summed up in
the following. First, th a t in the X lllth century.

under the impact of the Roman alphabet, the listof the Hungarian sound-signs was gradually en­larged, to become a regular alphabet, i.e. having
a special sign for each sound. But up to th a t period,and earlier in history, this writing used a consider­ably sm aller num ber of graphic signs. The paucityof the signs required is explained by the fact th a t
in this writing there is no difference between shortand long vowels, consequently it needs only fivesigns to write them instead of fourteen. Further­more, the scribes often used unvoiced consonants(T and P) to write their voiced counterparts (Dand B), whereby new cuts could be made. The
num ber of required writing symbols were evenfurther reduced by eliminating the vowel signs.
This was possible by the particular character of
Hungarian, wherein vowels have no grammaticalrole, the root remaining always unchanged. The“vowel dropping” or “vowel jum ping” as this prac­
tice was called, was further justified by invoking
the phonetical particularity th a t every consonant
already includes a vowel sound with which it isuttered. Thus, adding a special sign for this vowel,
would be superfluous. At this stage, the names
Barabas and Aladar could have been written as
B-R-B-S and L-D-R respectively and the reader
had to supply the necessary vowels in speech. W ith
the alm ost to tal elimination of vowels, the conso­
nants have taken over the leading role in thewriting. Therefore, the carved script was also
called a “consonantal script.”According to the principal rule of writing, allwords were to be written phonetically, as they wereuttered, irrespective of etymology, exactly as inpresent-day shorthand. A second rule required
th a t the words of a given message be written
immediately one after another, w ithout separatingthem by a white space or in any other way.
Thirdly, the direction of writing depended largelyon the nature of the writing m aterial. In theearliest times, and as long as the writing was donewith a knife on small sticks or wooden tablets,
the direction was usually from right to left. In
more recent times, when paper, ink and pen cameinto use, the natural direction of writing with theright hand went from left to right, starting at theupper left end of the paper.
W riting by incision on wood, stone slabs or metal
plates was a time-consuming operation, especiallywhen the place of the individual signs had firstto be marked out for some valid reason, such as
symmetry or exiguity of space. Thus, the need foraccelerating the writing appeared very soon. The
easiest way to do this consisted of creating abbre­
viations for the most frequently used words, such
as God and Sun. B ut the most effective method
consisted of combining two or more signs into asingle figure, saving strokes here and there. Suchgraphic contraction or “ligatures” most frequently
resulted in the case of N and T, S and T, A and
R, K and R, etc. (see the sign-lists. Fig. 14). The
frequent use of combined signs was a special fea-SoundvaluesSoundvalues

Signs

A
M

t

T

0

U

-t-

E

S
i

9

G

/K

1

Gy

t
X

^

I, J

1

i

K

^ N > v ^

L

y A

/

^

1
1

K.R

^

G.R
Z.R.

M

1 r 4!> bdnVz
Abbreviations;

?
1

God
Sun
Ligatures:
N.T

r

A.R

0

?
0

P

^

n

R

/

H

N

1

S

X

D

H

A /<

Sh

Cs

F

Signs

S.T

Fig. 14.

<k
A'
3
The O.H. alphabetture of the Hungarian incised writing at its zenith.
The principal rules of the carved script must
always be kept in mind, not only when we aredeciphering inscriptions in Hungary, bu t in exa­
mining Ancient Near-Eastern inscriptions as well,
the principles of old writings having been the same
everywhere and in all systems. T he Old Hungarian
writing was often called a “Scythian script”,“Hunnic way of writing” or “Siculi alphabet”.
These three denominations are as many indica­
tions warning us th a t several socio-cultural groups(Scythians, Huns, Siculs) were using the Magyar
writing system in the Danube basin prior to theadvent of the Arpad H ungarians in 895 A.D. In
other words, they m ust all have been interrelated
Hungarian type of nations.
A similar conclusion results from the fact th a t
the knife, which was the principal writing instru­
ment all over South-W estern Asia, was known
everywhere by the H ungarian word Kes (pron.
Kash). For example, the deadly knife every Scyth­ian kept in his boot-leg, was A Cina Kesh. This
word Kes is mentioned several times by Ptolemy
in his Geography when describing the Oxus region.
Knife, even in the ancient Egyptian language was
Kesh. These data will help researchers figure out
the vast area where the Hungarian version of thecarved script was in use.
2.
Let's now consider three specimens o f the Old
H ungarian script. The first one (Fig. 15) was
found on the old wall of the Presbyterian church

of Dalnok in the H^romszek county during repairs.
It uses frequent ligatures and reads from left toright. We transliterate it thus: eSZ.T aR-eG.I
Fa(l)-R-A . R6-Ja 0-K o.R i Ma-G.aR R.O-N-A/K -aL /. W ith present Hungarian speUing: E zt aregi falra roja okori magyar r u n d /k k a l/. In E n ­glish: ‘This is being incised on the old wall /w ith /archaic M agyar rune/s/.-"
The second inscription shown (Fig. 16) was in­cised on the wall of the Ambassadors’ Hostel inConstantinople (Turkey). It records, in three lines,
the rough handling of the members of the embassy,
sent to Sultan Selim I by King Ladislas of H un­gary in 1515. The inscription was first deciphered
by William Thomsen (Copenhagen), then com­pleted by Gyula Sebestyen, and corrected by
Dezso Csallany (P 035 p. 77). It reads from rightto left, the first line (only reproduced here) saying:‘This was written in the year 1515 when King
Ladislas’ five envoys were kept there waiting.’
The third inscription shown (Fig. 17) was paint­
ed on the ceiling of the Unitarian church of
Enlaka in Udvarhely county, in 1688. It reads also
from right to left and proclaims the fundam ental
20. The transliteration of carved signs into Roman charac­ters is usually done 1. with capital letters for thegraphically expressed sounds; and 2. with small charac­ters for the sounds supplied by the decipherer. And 3.
in our transliterations a dot is inserted between theelements of every combined sound-sign. 4. The omitted
consonants or words are given in parentheses (), while
5. the broken-oflf and missing signs are in brackets /.../.

Fig. 16. Old H ungarian inscription o f D&lnok, Hun­gary. It reads from left to right.

■

J A M A4f1-;a.^0.(94 N1 0■i

- M

Fig. 16. Old H ungarian inscription o f C onstantinople,
Turkey. It reads from right to left.

doctrine of the U nitarian confession, th a t God isonly one person (contrary to the Catholic doctrineof Trinity). The same principle is repeated twice
nearby in Latin thus: “Deus unicus” and “Inhonorem unius veri Dei”. The message in H ungari­an runs thus: Egy az Isten. Deut.VI. Georgyius
M usnai deakon, ‘God is (only) one. Deut. VI.,
George Musnai deacon.’3.
A pleasant feature of the Old Hungarian
script was th a t its inscriptions were quite fre­quently accompanied by some pictorial drawing,
as is the case in the Enlaki (Fig. 17) inscription.
These pictures are not only added for the sakeof illustration; they are fulfilling a more im portantrole: they usually emphasize the main point of
the message. As such, they constitute a specialC

W M aa AMttHOSA

Fig. 17. Old H ungarian inscription o f Enlaka, Hun­gary, w ith a p ictorial com plem ent.

kind of writing with pictures. As was alreadyillustrated when dealing with the M agyar andKush symbols, this m ethod of idea-comm unication was based upon the homophony exist­
ing between two different words, mostly between
a noun and a verb, i.e. between a concrete andan abstract idea. Exam ples: Fog as a noun signifies
T o o th ’ and as verb it m eans ‘To grasp’; and H alis ‘Fish’ as a noun and ‘T o die’ when it is a verb.
Now, to write the ab stract idea ‘To grasp’ or ‘Todie’, the scribe had to revert to the concrete object
to write the pictorially inexplicable idea. In suchcases, either the context or some additional sign
warns the reader th a t the sound-signs signify
something abstract. Given the very special charac­
ter of the pictorial writing, if we can successfully
decipher such writing in H ungarian, we thus havethe decisive proof th a t th e text is in Hungarian.
In the case of the Enlaki inscription (Fig. 17),
the pictorial complement includes a paragraph­like sign on the four sides of the frame; this is
the regular sign for the double-lettered GY-sound.
W ith its built-in vowel, it means eGY, egy ‘one’.
Then, in the centre-stage, there is a milk-jar withflowers. T he H ungarian word for milk-jar is K6csog, whose Old H ungarian form Ketseg is homophonous with Ketseg ‘D oubt’. The flowers in theja r are tulips, in H ungarian Tulipdn, a homophonof Tele-van, ‘Is full’. Now, when all these homophonous elements are pu t together, the following
sentence emerges: EGY-KETSEG-TELE-VAN.

In present day Hungarian: Egy ketsegtelen van,indicating once again the U nitarian dogma: ‘One
(divine person) doubtless exists.’ Of course, for areader not versed in Hungarian, it is not easy tofollow the acrobatic stu n ts displayed by the scribesof pictorial messages.
In conclusion, we may say th a t the Hungarian
carved script dates back considerably farther than
was supposed until now and that its importancegoes fa r beyond w hat was acknowledged by cer­tain foreign authors. The Old H ungarian script
is a strong link which binds the H ungarians to
the N ear-E ast where the first literate nations of
the world had emerged. A ll that has a consider­able bearing upon the historical role o f the early
Hungarians.

2. The Old Hungarian faith1.
It is a foregone scholarly conclusion th a tzealous M agyar kings of Christian Hungary put
all their energy into eradicating the last roots of
the old pagan creed from the M agyars’ soul.-’
These kings, indeed, ordered the destruction of theheathen altars and temples, and severely punishedthe venerators of rivers, fountains, groves, trees
and stars. The kings also persecuted the diehard
servants of the ancient divinities, treated them aspariahs and committed them to the care of SaintLazar. W hatever element of the old belief andcustom escaped the purge was baptized and incor­
porated into the new religion, or relegated into
the realm of folklore.-^21. The word Pogany ‘Pagan’ originates from the Latin
Pagus ‘Village’ and Paganus ‘Villager’, signifying ‘Peo­
ple living in the countryside.’ In the Middle Ages, thesame word was, however, used in a pejorative sense tosay ‘uneducated, backward, despicable’, especially when
speaking of non-Christian people. The alternative word
for Pagan is Heathen. It is probably derived from the
Old Hungarian word HHh ‘Seven’, a shortened from of
the expression ‘Follower of the Seven Great Gods.’
22. Hungarian chronicles preserved the memory of the crueltreatment King St. Stephen inflicted upon Thonuzoba
who “stubbornly adhering to his beliefs, was unwilling
to become a Christian, and was buried alive with hiswife” (P 120 I p. 117). A simileu* cruel punishment was
imposed upon a woman, Raski by name, who was

It would be, nevertheless, a hasty conclusion to
say th a t the M agyar kings totally succeeded inbrainwashing all segments of the population.
There remained, indeed, much evidence proving
the survival of the old faith, not only in folklore
and place-names, but even in the royal adm inistra­tion. Moreover, the elements constituting the oldfaith were to a great extent brought into theChristian reHgion, including the very name of theheathen god, so th a t Christianization cannot beinterpreted as total break with the past. As a m ajor
proof of this, Arnold Ipolyi, author of a m onumen­tal “H ungarian m ythology”, was able to collecta more th an ample docum entation about the oldfaith as late as the second half of the X lX th
century. Moreover, the work of Ipolyi has been
completed since then, with plenty of new, detailed
data. W hat the otherwise successful scientists wereunable to prove, however, was the positive identifi­
cation of the chief M agyar divinity: the Sungod.
Therefore, they also failed to established the rela­tionship of the M agyar faith to the great Oriental
solar religion, especially with th a t of Egypt.

prominent in a heathen uprising: “(She) was capturedby the very Christian King Bela and confined in prison
until she ate her own feet, and also died in the sameplace” (P 120 I p. 398). Persecutions of adherents tothe old faith continued until about the middle of the
X lllth century, the last dreaded inquisitor having been
Johannes Theuthon (+1252), commissioner of the Holy
See to several Central European states (P 047).

2.
An Arab historian, Ibn R usta, in reporting
about Hungarians of the IX th century, observed
th a t "'they are worshippers o f the S u n a n d the
M o o n ” This summary statem ent emphasizes theroot of the m atter, which can be advantageously
completed with M agyar sources. In a pagan M a­gyar hym n to the Sun, we read for exam ple this:“Thou a rt the primeval Tree of Life... from which
everything springs; by which the night of evil
spirits is chased; to which everything in th is world
returns” (P 130 p. 7). The rising Sun was greetedby the farmers of the Csik county with th eir hatsoff, and with the following words: “Be welcome,oh Sun, thou bringest us daylight and givethwarm th to our soil. Be blessed, thou, who disperses
the dark clouds, and ripens our ears. Be glorified
thou, who waters our crops and adorns our fields
with flowers” (P 125 p. 339 and f.; P 020). Thesequotations prove th a t their idea of God included
the belief in a divine creation, and th a t God
governs the created world. It is also clear th a t theSungod was mostly venerated in his capacity astutelary deity of the agricultural population. His
most im portant task was to illum inate the E arth,which he did by means of a shining globe th a t
travelled daily across the firmament from east to
west.
God’s principal residence was supposed to havebeen in Heaven, inside the fiery disk, called N ap
‘Sun’. He also had dwellings on E arth, especiallyin stone idols, called Balvany ( < O.H.: Baluan

= Bal-Hon), ‘Idol’, literally ‘God’s home’, in Latin
Simulacrum ‘Hiding place’. T h e num erous stone
idols served as appropriate places for God to keepa close watch over the behaviour of his creatures.
Other earthly houses reserved for God were thetemples, built in a round shape and therefore
called Rotundae in Latin. The inside diam eter ofsuch temples hardly measured over four to six
m eters and they were erected during the XIX lllth centuries; about a hundred of them havealready been identified. In spite of the fact th a tthey were erected in the Christian era, they could
not have been intended for Christian rites, because
all the believers could not attend the ceremonies
in such a small space. Several place-names referto the former existence of Rotundae, being com­pounded with the word Kerek ‘R ound’, such as
Kerek-Egyhaza, ‘Sacred House of the RoundShaped God’; Kerekes-Kapolna ‘Circular Chapel.’M any other villages in Hungary are called Egerszeg (Eg-Ur-Szeke) ‘Throne of the Heavenly Lord’,suggesting th a t in such places too, regular divine
services used to be held. Still other places werereserved for religious feasts. These were often

23. King Saint Stephen mentions in his gift-charter granted
to the nuns of Veszpr6m-Valley: “Ibi stat meta lapidea,que volgo Baluan vocatur,” “There stands a boundarystone, called Idol by the local population.” — Similarly,
King Andr^ I ordered in his edict of 1047: “Falsos deosabrogare et Simulacra demoliri”, “to suppress the false
gods and to destroy the idols” (P 082 p. 367).

hilltops, as their names indicate, like Bdlvdny-Ko‘Place of Idol’; A ldo Ko ‘Place of Blessings’; OltdrKo ‘A ltar Stone’; Isten Szeke ‘God’s T hrone’;Aldom ds-Teto ‘Celebration Peak’, etc. (P 082
p. 365 f.).
The general nam e for God was Isten, with nocertain etymology. For this word there was aspecial sign in the carved script, resembling a
combination of three consonantal signs: S-T-N.
While the special sign for Sun resembled an in­verted S crossed with four oblique strokes (see thesign-list, Fig. 14), God’s name was often precededby the word Ur ‘Lord’ to say Ur-Isten ‘Lord God’.
Because of God’s round-shaped appearance, he
was called K6r-Isten, ‘Circular Shaped God’, a
name, which may be the origin of our word
Kereszteny (< 0.H .: Koroszten), ‘Christian’. Livingin the Sky (H.: Eg), God was also called Eg-Ura‘Sky God’. B ut he was also referred to by thewell-known Oriental name of R a ‘Sungod’, espe­
cially to indicate places, m ountains, and rivers
enjoying divine protection. Such names were likethese: Ra-Monya, Ra-Mocsa, Ra-T6t, Ra-Kos,
Ra-D6c, Ra-H6; and in reverse word-order: NyitRa, Mu-Ra, T at-R a, Fat-R a, M at-Ra.
The name of the Sungod was evoked several
times each day, whenever people met. In themorning, they greeted one another — as they doeven today — with the saying J o reggelt ‘Goodm orning’, literally Jo R a K elt ‘The good Ra hasrisen’. And in the evening the greeting formulawas — and is —J o estet ‘I wish a good Sundown’.
Of course, the original meaning of these expres­sions has long been forgotten and nobody thinksof the daily movements of the Sun any more. The
ancients, however, autom atically linked every
phenomenon of the daily life to God’s intervention.
The Sungod in Hungary had over a thousand
Sun-symbols. One group of such symbols wasusually geometric in design, consisting of spirals,
circles, globes, rosettes, inverted S-forms linked to
one another, and sun-beams radiating from acentral spot. These symbols are seen everywhere,
cut in stone, painted, or artistically represented.
A typical object upon which several of these ele­m ents appear sim ultaneously is the Sun-gate, as
the decorated entrance to many M agyar houses
in E astern Hungary is called. Upon such a doorof Csik-Szent-Kiraly (Fig. 18), the rising Sun isrepresented with its beams, and the door ofHarasztosi, in Torda Aranyos county (Fig. 19) has
spirals carved upon the door-posts on both sides
which are flanked by two attending stone idols,with globe-like heads. And on the top of the door,a series of pigeon-holes allow these birds to nestle
there. Birds and deer appear m ost frequently
amongst the anim al symbols. Birds w ithout out­
stretched wings usually indicate sorrow and grief;
with outstretched wings (as the eagle and falcon),they symbolize the glorious Sun. The deer as solar
symbol was used in the winter solstice ceremony.
Its role was to bring back the shining disk of theFig. 18. Sun-door o f CsikSzent-Kir&ly, w ith a geo­
m etric decoration.

Fig. 20. W ooden colum ns
on burial sites in presentday H ungary.

Sun between its horns, after it was reborn on
December 25th.
Anthropomorphic representations of God wereless frequent. Hungarian archaeologists have nev­
ertheless unearthed a beautiful terracotta divine
statu ette, representing a man, sitting on a throne
and holding the Isten-symbol in his hand (Fig. 23).
On the other hand, the hum an eye was often used
to represent God on numerous occasions, probablytFig. 19. Elaborate Sungate o f H arasztosi, H ungary,flanked by tw o idols.

because the Sun was considered as an all-seeing
One-Eyed Giant. In this connection he was called
Szem -U r and Szem es ‘Eye God’ and ‘He who has
an Eye’. The eye-motive is one of the most fre­quent decorative elements in H ungarian folklore
and is called Isten szem e ‘God’s Eye’ (P 014 p. 78).
Several villages and rivers were placed under theprotection of the Eye-God, e.g. Szem es-on-Lake
Balaton, Szomoroc and the river Szam os( = Szemes).
In spite of the m any traces of this Suncult in
Ancient Hungary, it is alm ost unbelievable th a t
no m ajor research has been devoted to this prob­
lem of param ount historical importance. Shorter
investigations have only been made during the last
few years and shed some light upon certain aspectsof the role of the Sungod in Hungary (P 004;
P 003; P 121; P 020 and P 122).
3.
Under whatever name the solar divinity
might have been venerated in Hungary, it always
had a m ultitude of servants a t its disposal called
Papok in the plural, and Pap in the singular,
meaning ‘Priests’. They had a lot of things to do.
Their duties included star-gazing, and the obser­
vation of the yearly path of the Sun, especiallyfor the purpose of calendar-making. Certain otherpriests were assigned to special tasks, as was thecase of the ‘Eye priests’ or ‘Sem priests’, whose
distinctive garm ent was the spotted leopard skin
thrown across over the shoulders when officiating.
A further group of special priests consisted of ‘Male

priests’ {Kan papok), whose exact duties have,
however, not yet been elucidated with sufficientclEirity. At any rate, this saying was associatedwith them: K dr a kanpapnak a rak, which reads
identically from both ends and means th a t “it isfutile serving crab to a male priest.” This is because
he dares not eat it, crabs being sacred to the solar
divinity. Every priest used holy w ater extensively
when officiating, exercised many charms and often
wore a mask. When he was not wearing one, afeather was his usual head ornam ent.
Amongst the intermediaries between God andhis followers, the Taltos or Tatos, ‘Scientists’ hada somewhat spectacular role, similar to th a t of
the medicine-men. T heir name originates from theword Tudo ( < O.H.; T utu), meaning literally ‘He
who has knowledge.’ They also were known as
Bolcsek ‘Wise m en’. They were capable of curing
diseases, averting elemental catastrophes, knew
how to purify wells, and could reveal the where-

Fig. 21. 'The Lion o f Esztergom ’. W all-painting in
the royal palace, H ungary,
X llth century.

Fig. 22. R am ses II, Kingo f E gypt (1304-1232 B.C.),
holding the G od-sym bol.

Fig. 23. H um an-shapedd ivin ity w ith the G od-sym bol. H ungary, N eolithic
Age.

abouts of stolen objects, and so on. T heir ceremo­
nial garm ent was made of feathers, and a longone was fixed upon the head. Their footwear was
also decorated with bird-claws. They spoke thebird-language (bird = m ad ir = Magyar), andtheir equipment included a ladder (P 040; P 047;
P 086). The T atos had the power of ascending to
Heaven and entering into direct contact with theSungod. To this end he used his high ladder. The
presence of a ladder, Letra in Hungarian, was toemphasize, pictorially, the sense of the ceremony,this word being homophonous with the abstract
idea of Ldt-Ra: “Ra (the Sungod) sees me.” ’^The most im portant religious feast was thewinter solstice on December 25th when the Sun,
after having reached the lowest point of its yearly
wanderings, began to rise again. The ‘ReturningSun’ or ‘Reborn Sun’ was celebrated in all cornersof the country with the performance of a dram awhose central them e was a miraculous deer coming
through the clouds from Heaven, bearing andbringing back between its horns, the shining diskof the Sun (P 015 p. 71). The sum m er solstice onJune 21 was another great religious holiday inAncient Hungary. Its purpose was to celebrate theglorious rising of the Sun to the peak of its yearly
24. A witness who attended a meeting of wise-men, testified
before the Christian inquisitor by saying: “Wiseman
Bansa climbed to the top of a high ladder, stayed there
for a while, chatting with God and, back on earth, heforetold the future to his audience” (P 047 p. 56).

path. It was marked with colossal m ountain-top
fireworks.
In Old H ungarian rehgious thinking, death was
not considered the end o f m a n ’s existence-, it wasrath er regarded as the most im portant turning
point of a life which continued thereafter in eternal
happiness in the company of the Big Bird, as an‘Associated bird’, i.e. a semi-divine being. The
transition from earthly to eternal life was marked
with great solemnities. The coffin of the well-to-do
farm er was carried to the grave on a cart drawn
by six oxen and various objects were pu t into thecoffin, a custom proving beUef in an afterlife.
Amongst such objects, a needle and thread werealso included to enable the deceased to mend his
garm ent when necessary. Money was also pu t into
the hand of the deceased so th a t he could pay
for the toll when marching over the plank leading
to the other world. And the grave-digger had tobe rem inded to make a ‘window’ on the new homeof the defunct, so th a t he might come up on certain
days to see his divine m aster the Sun (P 077
p. 59-62).
The memory of the defunct was kept alive by
a stone m onum ent erected upon the grave andprovided with a short inscription and geometricsymbols. A special H ungarian feature was theequilateral cross sign MAS C£irved within a circle(AR or RA), stating th a t the defunct had become
M as-A r or Ra-M ds ‘D eputy for God’ or a ‘Hero’.
A nother widely spread custom was — and is even

today —to m ark the burial place with a beautiful­ly-carved wooden column made by the deceased
himself before his death. This column reveals to
I he initiated the sex, age, rank and wealth of the(lead person. In the case of a male, the top of thecolumn is usually conic while th a t of a female ishollow or tulip-shaped. The column commemo­
rating a child is usually smaller in size and lightin colour (Fig. 20; P 135 and P 069).
4.
How long m ay the suncult have been p ra c­
tised by the Hungarians? In connection with thisquestion we have to remember th a t Estonians andFinns originally lived together with a group of
Hungarian-speaking peoples until their ways p a rt­
ed around 2000 B.C. and, notw ithstanding thegreat time-span separating them , they too have
kept ahve a substantial num ber of identical Sunsymbols in their folklore. The giant tree reaching
into Heaven is called in Finnish Sam-Po, pro­nounced Szem-Fa in Hungarian (after P > F),‘Eye-God’s T ree’; while Sam -M as in Finnish re­sembles the H ungarian Szem-M^is ‘D eputy for
Eye-God’. Such and similar concorandces suggest
th a t the Suncult belonged to the spiritual heritageof all Hungarians of any denomination before 2000
B.C. Another tim e-elem ent is to be found in the
Old H ungarian ballad “Julia, the beautiful girl.”
Reference is made therein to the spring equinox
which was then celebrated during the zodiacal
constellation of the Bull (Taurus) group of stars.
It is now known from astronomical calculations

th a t said constellation occurred just around 2000
B.C. (P 122). As mentioned above, this chrono­
logical evidence confirms th a t the Suncult waspractised by early H ungarians in the New Stone
Age, or perhaps even earlier.
The age of the Suncult in the D anubian basin
itself can be guessed upon the basis of archae­ological finds adorned with solar symbols. N u­
merous such relics have been unearthed since 4000
B.C. D anubian farmers, in particular, carried thespiral, the m eander and the other geometricaldesigns everywhere across Europe (P 064 p. 332).
Hungarian archaeologists have brought to lightm iniature cart-models — Sungod chariots — atseventeen different places, all fitted with discwheels and dated c. 2700 B.C. and 2300 B.C. Sunsymbols continued to appear in Hungary, without
interruption, during the Copper Age (3500 B.C.
— 1900 B.C.) and during the Bronze Age (1900
B.C. — 900 B.C.). And later, when the Rom an
Empire ruled in large parts of Hungary, in thefirst three centuries of the Christian era, a magnif­
icent Sun-temple was erected in the City of Savaria, the present Szombathely. It was the greatest
such tem ple ever built in Europe (16.5 m X 9.5 m),
displaying a giant Sun-disc above its altar.
All the quoted d ata prove th a t Sun-worship wasa regular feature in the spiritual life of Hungary
from the beginning o f Neolithic times until the
adoption o f Christianity. It survived even afterthat turning-point, as witnessed by the greatd m ount o f evidence found in folklore, place-names,
mythology and history.
Concerning the geographical origin o f the Danuhian Sun-cult, all our evidence points toward
Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Hungarian sci­
entists working on this specific field, prefer, never­theless, to emphasize the primary importance ofMesopotamia (Sumer). To support their view, theycite the numerous concordances existing between
the two countries’ mythology, they mention theabsolute similarity of the Sumerian and H ungari­an names for Sun (Nap), Lord (Ur) and God(Isten) and insist upon the parallels existing be­
tween the two countries’ inhum ation practices. All
these concordances, as well as m any others are
undisputable. Non the less, the concordances be­
tween Hungary and Ancient Egypt are by far
more numerous and far more im portant. N ot only
were the general names of the Sungod identical:
Ur, Isten, Nap, M addr, but also the specific names:
Sky-God {^g Ura), Eye God {Szem-Ur), Travell­ing Lord (Ut-Ur), as well. A similarly striking
resemblance exists between the priestly class ofthe two countries, beginning with the generic namePap ‘Priest’. Egypt had also its Eye-priests (Sempriests) whose ceremonial garment, also of spottedpanther skin, was thrown across the shoulders.
Egyptian priest, gods and high-ranking officials
also often appeared in ornitomorphic garments,
as did their H ungarian counterparts who had, atleast, one bird-feather fixed upon their heads. The

feast of the reborn Sun (December 25) was cele­
brated all over Egypt with the same ardour a s
in Hungary, and so was the im portant d a te(June 21) of the sum m er solstice. The Sungod’s
param ount symbol was, on both occasions, th e
shining disc. T he burying of the deceased was ju s t
as ceremonial in Egypt as in Hungary. The Egyp­tians also believed th a t the soul of the deceased
departed from the body a t the m oment of d eathand flew on wings to his heavenly creator to
become his companion for ever. In Egypt th ephysical rem ains of the dead person were also p u t
in a grave, accompanied by such objects the de­ceased m ay have need for in his new life, whichis also similar to Hungarian practice. And in th e
‘house’ of the deceased in Egypt, an opening or
shaft had to be made so th a t sunbeams could
penetrate through it a t certain hours of the day.
Even a ladder was put into the grave, or a t least
the picture of a high ladder, to enable the deceased
to climb on it and see the Sun. W ithout adding
any more to the list of Egypto-Hungarian concor­
dances, we may conclude by saying th a t H ungary
has preserved alm ost the entire mythological heri­tage o f A ncient Egypt o f the I lir d a n d I ln dmillenia B.C., even two thousand years afterEgypt’s beacon had been extinguished.
5.
Traces o f a second religion can also be de­tected in H ungary’s folklore. This was the socalled fertihty cult which was totally different
from the Suncult. Its purpose was earthly: toinsure fertility both in the hum an and animal
worlds. Its central divinity was the M other(loddess whose two main H ungarian names were
(ireat Lady (Nagy Asszony) and Happy Lady
{Boldog Asszony). Her memory is preserved inanthropom orphic symbols, the so-called Venuses,
which are small statu ettes representing a naked
woman.
Ample anthropological evidence suggests th a t
the fertility cult is as old in Hungary as the
Suncult itself. Scholars have, indeed, dug up aconsiderable num ber of Venuses dating from the
Neohthic Age (3000 B.C. —or even earlier). Thesefigurines are of two kinds: elaborate, ornate
anthropom orphic Venuses, and small statuettes of
baked clay. A particularly ornate Venus statu ette
was found on the Neolithic site of Kokeny-Domb,near H6d-Mezo-Vdsarhely which possesses all thecharacteristics of a M other Goddess, including her
strongly accentuated feminity. Small Venuses
were found on alm ost every excavated Neolithic
site. In Mehtelek, however, near the Upper Tisza
river, a single place has yielded over sixty such
figurines. Amongst these statu ettes several wereof steatopygous type, indicating the presence ofAfrican elements in the population.
Comparative archaelogy has established beyond
a doubt th a t the Hungarian fertility cult originat­
ed in the E astern M editerranean, especially C an­aan, Syria, Phoenicia and Anatolia, which were
the homelands of the Baals, A s-Tart, As-Turat,

Kedves, Telepinus an d others with clear H ungari­an names which seem rath er coarse to-day. The
fertility cult seem s to have been the apanage o f
the darkish coloured ethnic element whose princi­p a l lifestyle was stock-breeding, while the Suncult
may be attributed to the agricultural, white popu­
lation.

3. The Oriental background of the first
Hungarian dynasty
1.
T he origin of the first Hungarian dynasty isshrouded in deep mystery. One thing is however
certain, namely th a t Prince A lm us, father ofA rpad, was its first great figure. His throne-name,
Almus, is a compound-word of two elements: El6+ M asa and signifies ‘Deputy for the Living(God)’, an Oriental title, perfectly suited to de­scribe the oflftce Almus held, th a t of the native
ruler of the autonom ous group of Hungarians,
subjects of the Chasar Great-King, the ‘living god’.
T h a t Almus was a ruler’s title is confirmed by theadditional fact th a t the native ruler of the Bulgars,
who lived on the shores of the river Volga in c.
921, had an identical throne-name.
Further evidence th a t Almus was the first im ­p o rtan t figure of the Hungarian dynasty is his
divine origin. In the Ancien Orient, it was indeed
a widespread belief th a t great kings, especiallyfounders of dynasties, were superhum an beings
and were therefore fathered, not by ordinary
earthly beings, as the common mortels, but by the
Heavenly God. This god was supposed to returnto E arth in the shape of a bird, on the very nightof the conception of a future sovereign, to impreg­nate the expectant m other personally. In ancient
Mesopotamia the divine im pregnator took theform of an eagle, called Turullo; in ancient Syria
the fertility god was A s-Tur, and in ancient Egypt
the Pharaohs were conceived directly by Ra, theSungod.2'^ The m other of Almus was also visited
th a t specific night by a divine bird called A stu r( < Az Tur) or Turul ( < Tiir6 L6) ‘Fecundator,
Im pregnator’, who foretold th a t from her womb
glorious kings would be born.‘^<" Because of theirdivine origin through the solar bird Turul, thedescendants of Almus were known as the Turulprogeny.
In addition to the “T urul legend”, the Oriental
background of the first M agyar dynasty again
becomes visible in the physical features of the first
divine infant, Almus. “He was pleasant-faced, but
darkish coloured; had big eyes, a tall and slenderstature, with big hands and puffy fingers.”-^ The
description of Almus’ general appearance baffledscholars ever since, because the Prince resembled

25. “Each time a Pharaoh was conceived, Ra was said tohave returned to earth to espouse the queen’ (P 045
p. 50).
26. The corresponding passage by Anonymus reads thus:“matri eius pregnanti per sompnium apparuit divina
visio in forma Asturis que quasi veniens earn gravidavit
et innotuit ei quod de utero eius egrederetur torrens
et de Hmbis eius reges gloriosi propagarentur” (P 120
I p. 38).
27. “erat enim ipse Almus facie decorus sed niger, nigros
habebat oculos sed magnos, statura longus et gracilis,
manus vero habebat grossas et digitos prolixos" (P 120
I p. 38).

an Egyptian Pharaoh of the late dynastic times
much more th an the presumed Uralo-Siberian
white man. The features of Almus are no longer
a problem: on the contrary, they provide further
strong evidence of the dynasty’s N ear-Eastern
origin.2«
In the year 895,when the m ilitary conquest of
Hungary was in progress. Prince Almus led thesouthern wing of the army-group, scheduled topenetrate into the C arpathian basin from thesoutheast, by way of the Lower Danube. His son,Prince Arpad, headed the northern army-group,
which was equipped in Kiev, and was supposed
to enter into the selected land through the n orth­eastern pass of Verecke (841 m). Father and son
both were to meet inside the C arpathian arc, on
the lowland, the military target of their giant
pincer-movement. Almus was however unable tocomplete his task in time due to the unexpectedassault of the Petchenegs from behind. For his
misfortune, it seems, he was ritually killed by his
followers on the outer foothills of the Carpathians.
This barbaric custom of eliminating an unsuccess­ful leader was another Oriental practice, similar
to th a t of Biblical Moses who would not see the28. The grandson of Prince Arpad, Taksony, was of white
complexion, while Arpad’s great-grandson took after
him: “He had beautiful big eyes and soft dark hair”.
Certain kings of the dynasty were of very high stature,as, for example, St. Stephen, King Andras I, St. Ladislas
and King B61a III.

promised land, but had to die before he reached
his goal to atone for some sin he had committed.
2.
A rp a d is the m ost illustrious name in H u n ­gary’s history. According to records preserved inmedieval chronicles, this Prince was a descendantof King Attila, the world-conqueror (+453). His
illustrious kinship with him might have been,
however, only a distant one, considering th a t more
th an four hundred years separated Arpad from his
presumed forebear. Anonymus, the unnamed m e­dieval historian (c. 1200), when discussing thissubject seems to share this view, stating simply
th a t Prince Almus, father of Arpad, descended
from an offspring of King Attila. Be it as it may,the real or fictive kinship with A ttila helped Prince
Arpad trem endously to consolidate his grip upon
the entire central D anubian basin, the future
Hungary. He proclaimed indeed, everywhere andrepeatedly, th a t he was not coming as a vulgar
conqueror to create bloodshed, but as the legiti­
m ate successor to his forebear King A ttila, to takepossession of his heritage. And the inhabitants of
the land, hearing this and seeing Arpad’s mighty
armies, bowed before their new master.
The name Arpad was also a throne-nam e witha definite meaning. Chronicler Anonymus, theoften cited notary of King Bela, spells the nameon one occasion thus: ARpad (P 120 I p. 57), with
the intent perhaps to warn us th a t the name is
a compound, made up of i4r + Pad. If so, he wasright, because Ar-Pad follows the pattern ofM at + Ar and Hung + Ar, with the difference th a t
in Arpad the composing elements appear in an
inverted sequence: A r-Pat instead of Pad-Ar. Now,
(he meaning of Ar is known: ‘Lord, Ruler, Sover­eign’; and so is th a t of Pad or Pod (to-day: Fold)‘E arth, Land’ (after P > F soundshift and theelision of the jam m ed L in Fold). Accordingly,
Arpad means ‘Sovereign R uler of the Land’. Onceagain, the indication of the Prince’s statu s is exact:
it reflects the Chasar king’s policy to graduallypromote the H ungarian native ruler to a more
independent status.
Further light can be shed upon Arpad’s Oriental
connections by examining his N ear Eastern hom ­onyms. There was, indeed, a “Kingdom of Arpad”
in ancient Syria in the first millenium B.C. It wasa city-state located near the great bend of theE uphrates river, some 20 km north-west of Aleppo.
Its former site is known today as Erfet (after
P > F soundshift), to which an im portant ford
on the E uphrates belonged. The Kingdom is men­tioned several tim es in the Bible (II Kings c. 18/34
and c. 19/13). Its m ortal enemy was the Semitic
Kingdom of Assyria, against whom King M ati’ilus(= Magyar) organized the common defense with
the U rartian king Sarduris III. The formidable
Assyrian arm y had to lay a three-year siege aroundthe city before reducing it into submission in 740
B.C. A few years later, the ruler of the kingdom
tried to regain his independence, but he failed andhis domain was completely obliterated. The popu­

lation fled on the only escape route th a t was still
open: northwards, through the E uphrates valley,
to settle beyond the Caucasus m ountains. All
these tragic events m ust have been linked some­
how with the emergence of a Caucasian Hungarian
Kingdom, proof of which is th a t in both areas —in Syria and in the Caucasus — M agyar placenames are to found in super-abundant numbers.
Regarding the throne-nam e Arpad, it goes backinto history even farther. The ancient Egyptians
revered, e.g. a ruler of th a t name as their very
first king.--' The name Arpad or E rpet is mentioned
several times in the Egyptian “Book of the Dead”(P 027 pp. 18, 138, 435 and 649). It was again an
Arpad who, after having reunited the desintegrated country, assumed the royal dignity in Thebes
and founded the X lth Dynasty (P 025 II p. 196
and f., see hieroglyphs ibidem). Due to the greatrole Arpad played in ancient Egypt, Prof. G ar­diner and W. Budge made extensive researches tofind out more about this legendary name. They
concluded th a t it was wi-itten with four soundsigns as AR-P-A-T or AR-P-A-D, followed by two
determinatives. The first one was th a t of ‘Cloth,
E arth, Land’, and the second, a hum an figure,indicating th a t the person so named was a greatman. Thus the Egyptian name Ar-Pad m eant
29. Prof. Gardiner states that the Egyptian Arpad may
have been “perhaps the first to become ruler upon earth
over the autochthonous Egyptians, after whom fol­
lowed Osiris and the Horus” (P 052 p. *110).

literally ‘Land Lord’, i.e. owner of an im portant.ifiricultural domain somewhere along the fertile
shore of the river Nile.'*'* When the determinatives
were om itted, as was usually the case in wellknown names, the expression became a simple
name. These data prove th a t ‘Arpad’ was a veryancient royal title and th a t its bearers had so­journed a t length in Syria and especially in Egypt,
before entering into D anubian Hungary.^i
3.
How were the titles o f the H ungarian kings
written pictorially? It was done with the figureof a Hon, because the name of this animal, OroszIdn, sounded like the expression Ur-Os-Leny ‘Pri­
meval Being of Divine Origin’. The earliest extant
lion symbol used by the Arpad dynasty in Hungary
was the one carved upon the crystal globe of thecoronation sceptre, originating from the X th cen­tury. According to archaeologists, the crystal in
30. See the following references: P 052 I pp. *14 - *19, *103
and *108; and P 026 II 94 - 100, 109, 153 and 374. If the Sumerian name for Earth was also Pat, Pot, theSumerian ruler’s title Pat-Esi (= H. Fold Ose) alsomeant ‘Land Ancestor’ or ‘Land Lord’.
31. Many rulers of the Hungarian Arpad dynasty had
throne-names with a clear Oriental meaning, and this
explains why certain names appear so often, like Istvan(five times) and Bela (four times). In the Old Hungarianspelling Istvin or Estdn was the word for Isten ‘God’.
Bela (in O.H. Bala, Baal, Bika) was the Syrian namefor Great-God. They were used in an abridged form,
all bearing testimony that their wearers were ‘Living
Gods’, i.e. Gods on Earth, exactly as was the practicein the Ancient Orient.

question is of Egyptian origin, this being the only
country where it is found (P 003 p. 59, 62). A moreelaborate lion-symbol was found painted on aninterior wall of the royal palace in Esztergom, built
in the X llth century. It could be reconstructed
into its original form with w hat remained of its
former parts (Fig. 21). O ther lions kept close guard
before an interior well of the royal palace ofVisegrad (XV th century). Furtherm ore, the sevensovereign M agyar princes who elected Arpad tobe their ruler and commander, also had lions on
their coats of arms. The custom of representing
royalties by lions also goes back to Mesopotamia,
Egypt and India, as mentioned before. In Mesopo­
tamia, the lion had already been the royal symbolof Gilgamesh, the legendary ruler of Uruk, who
was usually shown with a lion cub. In Egypt, thelion was the regular companion of the kings andfarther east, in India, it was particularly in evi­
dence during the M aury (= Magyar) dynasty.
These kings erected huge columns with lions
placed on top throughout their vast domain. Thus,
there can be no doubt as to the origin and meaningof the lion symbol which clearly indicates theOriental background of the Arpad dynasty.
The A rpadian coat o f arm s had seven horizontal
stripes, four red and three white. It perpetuatedthe memory of the Seven M agyar Princes who
concluded a contract of m utual blood-relationshipto henceforth form a single nation. The stripes,
in horizontal arrangem ent, signify, in the old

I'lu.vptian hieroglyphic system, as m any ‘Land
L o rd s ’, H on-ur (Aner). Thus the seven stripes
nu an H H H onur ‘Seven Land Lords’. The num ber
se ven was considered the lucky num ber all overI he Ancient N ear East. In addition to the striped( Scutcheon, H ungarian kings used a second shieldas well, consisting of a double cross rising froma three-arched base. When these elements are readaccording to the rules of the carved script, thefollowing word emerges: the double cross carries
the syllable eGY, one arch is the sign for the Sh
sound, three arches signal the plural case: Sh.ek,
and these sounds, put together, form the wordegy-esh.ek, i.e. Egyezseg, meaning ‘Agreement,
Pact, Alhance’, which is another reference to thecontract of blood-relationship.^^ The stripes andthe double cross were later placed upon a single
shield, which was divided into two halves by avertical line. Thus, the shield conveys the follow­
ing meaning to us: H et H onur egyezsege ‘Agree-

32. Babylon was surrounded by seven walls; the Mesopota­
mian Ziggurat had seven floors; Mesopotamian noble­
men wore seven ruffled kilts; Egypt had seven great gods;
the Egyptian Heaven had seven divisions; the Hittite
Empire (the Biblical H6th) started with the fusion ofseven lands; the Etruscan nation began with the federa­tion of seven cities; Rome was built on seven hills; etc.
etc.
33. According to Prof. Aldasy, the double-cross cannot be
considered an apostolic cross; this latter was always asingle cross (P 001 p. 63). Thus, he indirectly admits
the pre-Christian origin of this important symbol.

m ent of Seven Princes’. This combined figure
became H ungary’s heraldical symbol until it was
officially discarded by the communist regime.
At first, Hungary, had two royal crowns, aCorona Graeca and a Corona Latina, so named
after their respective origin. A few centuries later,
th e two crowns were welded together, to form asingle one. There is no plausible explanation forthis act, says Prof. Aldasy, a leading authority in
H ungarian heraldry. The mystery may, however,be solved since a similar event had taken placein ancient Egypt. Originally, there were twocrowns in this country, one for Upper and anotherfor Lower Egypt. And when the two lands werereunited into a single domain, and the fusion ofth e two states had reached an advanced stage, thetwo crowns were reunited into one. It is possible
th a t the fusion of the H ungarian crowns m ay havebeen prom pted by this or by some other similar
event.
Through the various facets of the first Hungari­an dynasty (1000-1301) which we analyzed, wewere led to the conclusion th a t this dynasty was
deeply imbued with Oriental thinking. A n d w hat
regards the founder o f this dynasty, Prince Arpad,
there cannot be the slightest doubt that he de­scended from a long line o f ruling families, experi­
enced in leadership.

1. How the Nation remembered its origin
Most of the existing traditions relating to theorigin of the H ungarians have been recorded dur­ing the X n ith and X lV th centuries. These written.u counts, called Gesta (deeds of valour) or Chron­icles (annals) are continuous narratives, usuallyin the Latin language, reflecting a religious andpatriotic spirit.^^ The earliest and most valuable
Gesta Hungarorum was written by the unnamed(Anonymus) notary of King Bela, between 1196 and1203. The author, a former student a t Paris Uni­
versity, served in the royal H ungarian Chancel­
lery, and was later elevated to the rank of bishop.
The topic of his work is the successful re-conquestof the Middle Danube basin by Prince Arpad,
leader of the M agyar tribal confederation a t theend of the IX th century. The next im portantnational chronicle was written in c. 1282 by Magister Sim on de K eza (‘Kezai’ in H ungarian), court
chaplain of King Ladislas IV (1272-1299) a ruler
with avowed heathen leanings. The freer atm o­sphere prevailing in the king’s court perm itted
Kezai to devote a large part of his book to theold fatherland and to assert the identity of theMagyars and Huns, regarding A ttila as a Magyar
34. The best edition of the medieval national chronicles isthat of Emericus Szentpetery, former professor at Buda­
pest University (P 120 I-II).

king. Therefore, in his view, the advent of Prince
Arpad and his followers in 895 appears as the“second en try ” of H ungarians into the chosen
land. After Anonymus and Kezai, several othernational chronicles were written, one of the mostem inent having been the admirably illustrated
Chronicon Pictum (c. 1385). There is also a Tarih-i
Ungurus (History of Hungarians), translated into
Turkish from an unknown Latin original, after1543.
W hat the chronicles knew about the H ungari­ans’ ancient history is briefly summarized on thefollowing pages, namely: (1) the genesis of thepeople, (2) the geographic location of the oldfatherland, and (3) their migration toward theWest. Both Anonymus and Kezai were convinced
th a t the Magyars are an ancient people, originat­
ing right after the Flood, when all hum an beings
were drowned, except a single family: th a t of
Noah. They assert th a t the early M agyars were
the direct descendants of two sons of Noah: Japhet
and Cham. Those who recorded the descent from
Jap het claimed th a t Magog, the first king of
Scythia, was the namegiver of the Magyars.'^"’ Thescholars holding the second version say th a t theMagyars originated from Kush (Cush), the dark
complexioned offspring of Cham. While studying

35. “Et primus rex Scythiae fuit Magog filius Japhet, etgens ilia a Magog rege vocata est Moger”, — writes
Anonymus (P 120 I p. 35).

(he contradictory versions of the M agyars’ ethnic
origin, later chroniclers stressed their own casemore emphatically. The advocates of the Japhetist
descent underscore the fact th a t the Hungarians,
being white, could not have originated from Kush,
who was a dark coloured man.^*5
A similar controversy arose about the brothers
H unor and Magyar, the direct forefathers of all
Huns and all Magyars. At one time they were said
to have been the children of M enrot, the giant(an E g y p tia n ? ),w h o was a descendant of Japhet(the white) through Tana; and a t another, as thesons of Nem roth (Nimrod), a Babylonian, de­scendant of Kush (the dark). The chroniclers did
not consider the possibihty of a dual origin of theN ation, according to which the main branch, theagriculturist white Magyars, would have absorbed
a notable num ber of dark-complexioned, mainly
pastoral elements in the earliest phase of theirformation. The fusion of the said two ethnic ele36. On these conflicting views see, particularly, the Chronicon Pictum (P 120 I pp. 243-250, and the Hungariantranslation: P 053 pp. 35-37).
37. No Hungarian historian has taken notice until now that
Egyptian literature also know of a hunting hero, Onuris
by name (like the Hungarian Hunor), who had a matecalled Mehit, ‘lioness’. See the somewhat confused pas­sage in P 032 p. 227, which reads: “His (Onuris’) cultfigure was a man wearing a long skirt, his feet poisedwell apart, to enable him to aim a spear downwards
at some monstrous foe. His worship was centred inThinis, a district which also included Abydos.” The
Coffin Texts, III 334 j. are given as reference.

m ents was first ascertained only later by Deseritzky (P 092 p. 179). Disregarding the above
differences, there exists a general agreement
am ongst our medieval historians th a t the H u n ­garians were a very ancient people and the Scyth­ians a n d H uns were closely related to them andspoke the same language.
Where was the Old Fatherland located? Some­
where in the “H ot Zone” (torrida zona), “where
the climate is not tem perate and where snakes ofall kinds, frogs as large as small pigs (= tortoises),basilisks, m any venomous animals, also tigers andrhinoceroses are to be found.” T h at was a land
where great quantities of gold and silver weremined and many pearls discovered. It is unfortu­
nate th a t the chroniclers did not elaborate andth a t they om itted to give the name and the precise
location of this country. In the absence of preci­sion, we can only rely upon conjectures, conclud­ing th a t the description given fits best to the region
west of the Red Sea, the S-form bend of the Nile
where ancient Nubia and Magaria were situated.
There were the famous gold fields, wherefrom theEgyptian Pharaohs obtained their enormous gold
supply and where all the tropical anim als m en­tioned are common. G iant tortoises are the typicalcreatures abounding in the Red Sea.-^'^
38. The original wording is thus: ‘Ubi propter intemperiem
illius zonae sunt serpentes diversi generis, ranae velut
porci, basilisci, et plura animalia toxicata; tigris et
unicornis ibi generantur.” Where gold, silver and pearls

There are indications in the national chronicles
which suggest th a t a second old H ungarian father­land may have existed, south of the Caucasus,
extending to the M editerranean and including
Syria, C anaan and Asia M inor as well. It was inthis same area th a t the H ittite Empire had comeinto being, called the ‘Land of Seven’, because it
started with the unification of seven provinces
governed by as m any princes. The chronicles men­tion th a t the same region has been an old H ungar­
ian fatherland. In fact, the chronicles say th a t “thesons of Japhet/from whom the bulk of Hungarians
originated/owned the northern region in Cilicia
and Syria, extending from the T aurus and Amanus
m ountains to the river Don, which is already in
Scythia” (P 120 I p. 243 f.). We even have certain
evidence of the existence of a third Hungarian
homeland which was situated in the hinterlandof the Babylonian Empire and included Upper
Mesopotamia and Caucasia. Our chroniclers be­lieve th a t Nimrod (Nemproth) was the first rulerof Babylon.
The making and the breaking-up of old H ungar­
ian fatherlands was usually accompanied by vastethnic movements or ‘migrations'. Their direction
was mostly northw ard and westward. In the na­
tional recollection, the earliest recorded migration
started in the desert region of Dancalia (today:
are also to be found (P 120 I p. 253. See also P 130
p. 164, where another location is suggested).

Danakil), between Somalia and Eritrea, and pro­ceeded northwards, bypassed Memphis and Baby­lon (today: Old Cairo) and stopped for a while
in Eiulath, a t the end of the Gulf of Aqaba (P 088
p. 17; P 120 I pp. 143-145; P 014 p. 167). The two
hunting heroes, H unor and Magyar, who happened
to be born in Eiulath, later crossed the Caucasus
and entered Scythia a t the Marshes of Maeotis(the present day Azov peninsula).
The M agyar chronicles are, of course, primarily
interested in the ethnic groups which moved wes­
twards and eventually reached Hungary. One such
migration started from Troy in Asia M inor andwent throught the B alkan peninsula. It was thepeople of Priamos, the last king of Troy, who went
th a t way after the fall of their city-state in c. 1260
B.C. They settled in Hungary, near the greatsouthward bend of the Danube, where they built
a stronghold called Sicambria. They remained in
the country for about four hundred years, whenmany of them moved over to France, settling in
the Paris region. They had fled in panic fearing
th a t other Oriental nations were already on their
way to the Danube basin (P 120 I p. 245).
The chronicle writers had preserved more details
on a second overland route, leading from theOrient to Hungary. It ran above the B lack Sea,
through a large and open country called Scythia(the present southern Russia). Although Scythia’s
climate was a healthy one and favourable for the
propagation of a hum an race, it was nevertheless.oiisidered as a transit country only. This land\\ as, indeed, overcrowded with various peoples andhad become more and more insecure. As is known,
I lie H un-H ungarians were the first great group to
set out from there, m arched westwards and weresuccessful in establishing a new empire in Central
lOurope, with its capital in Hungary, near the
confluence of the rivers Tisza and Maros. After(he collapse of their rule, they were followed by
the M agyar-Hungarians, whose group first con­centrated in the Lower Don region, called DentuMoger by Anonymus. Chronicler Kezai enlarges
the territory of the H ungarians in Scythia consid­
erably, insofar as he includes the Touranian Low­
land around the Aral Sea and the Oxus river into
it, which he calls Magoria.
In short, these are the outlines o f the image theH ungarians kept alive in their collective memoryof their origin, old fatherland, and wanderings.
We m ust feel a certain adm iration when studying
their records, all the more so since modern histori­
cal science appears generally to support theirclaims.

Fig. 24. A typical Troy-II
vessel, c. 2300 B.C.

Fig. 25. Gold badge ofa high priest. Mojgr&d,
H ungary, Bronze Age.

P A R T TWO

THE GENESIS OF THE
DANUBIAN HUNGARIANS

I'HE NEOLITHIC AND BRONZEAGE HUNGARIANS

I. Implantation o f the Higher C ivilization
into the Danubian basin
1.
“Higher Civilization” is the comprehensivei< rm for the m ajor m aterial and spiritual innova­
tions made by m an during the Neolithic and
Uronze Ages. It signifies a settled way of life
( haracterized by food-production through agricullural activity and stock-breeding. In view of th e
scarcity or total absence of contemporary w ritten
evidences, this early period of hum an life is usuallyreconstructed with the help of its material re ­mains, whose study is archaeology. In the follow­
ing account, we frequently use another scientificterm as well, which is “historical Hungary”. It
means the unitary area of Central Europe w hichis bounded on three sides —north, east and so u th ­east —by the C arpathian m ountain ranges, in th e
south by the Low Danube and the river Sava, a n d
to the west by the first elevations of the A lps(Fig. 1). After its principal mountain-range a n dprincipal river, it is also known as the “C arpathian
Land” and “Middle Danube basin”, or, more p re ­cisely, the “Carpatho-D anubian area”. For overa thousand years (until 1920), this area form ed asingle political entity, the Kingdom of H ungary.

‘Historical H ungary’ is rich in archaeologicalremains. The most significant finds which weremade there until the mid-fifties, have been de­scribed by E dith B. Thom as in her German lan­
guage A rc/iaeo/o^/sc/ie Funde in Ungarn (P 125).
Since th a t time the soil has yielded so much
valuable new m aterial th a t this basic work needed
to be completed. The two most im portant comple­
m entary publications are from Nandor Kalicz:
Archaeology o f the Neolithic and Bronze Ages in
Hungary, in H ungarian (P 074) and Neolithic
Finds at M ehtelek (also in H., P 075). The inter­national connections of the Hungarian New Stone
Age have first been recognized by Gordon Childe
in his fundam ental work The Danube in Prehistory(P 031), while the great role the Middle Danube
area played in spreading Higher Civilization wes­
tward, has been summarized by Jacquetta Hawkes
in several of her comprehensive studies (P 064;
P 065 and P 066). The excellent maps ofH. T. W aterbolk (P 134), showing the diffusion offood-production-methods, especially into Europe,
are indispensable even for the student of Hungari­an archaeology. These publications may give thereader a perfectly clear idea and up-to-date infor­
mation about the various archaeological aspectsof early Hungary.
2.
Neolithic agriculture found very favourable
conditions in Hungary, where it flourished rapidly,
especially on the great Central Plain and wheremighty rivers — the Danube, Tisza, Maros andKoros — assure abundant year-round w ater sup­ply. Moreover, Hungary has extensive loess soil,
which is easily handled, even with primitive imple­
ments, because it consists of very minute,windblown particles of high capillarity. In addition
to agriculture, breeding of domestic anim als (cat­tle, sheep, pigs, goats and dogs) played an impor­
ta n t p art in early food-production. In this regard,a long-horned, Oriental cattle-race deserves special
mention because their descendants can be admiredeven today in the Hortobagy N ational Park near
Debrecen. M anufacturing of pottery, spinning andweaving were the m ost im portant industrial activ­
ities. Large vases were made for storage purposes,
smaller ones for every-day use, while ceramic
statu ettes and other artistic products satisfied theneeds of the Church. Timbered houses above theground and small, self-sufficient villages, as wellas incipient writing completed the Neolithic wayof life in early Hungary.
There are over 200 known sites th a t bear testi­
mony of the m aterial remains of H ungarian Higher
Civilization. All were located on virgin soil, i.e.
they form the oldest layer in excavated sites. Thisis an im portant fact because it indicates th a t there
is no trace of previous more primitive food-production in the C arpatho-D anubian area. There, theNeolithic appears unprecedented and suddenly, ina fully developed form. Consequently, this was nota phenomenon of local origin bu t was caused byimmigrants coming from another region.

The Neolithic Age began in Hungary in the fifth
millenium B.C. It first appeared along the Koros
river, in the central part of the G reat Plain, hence
its name: Kdros culture. It remained the dom inantneohthic group for a period of over a thousand
and five hundred years, until about 3200 B.C. andhas left lasting m arks upon all subsequent, similar
Danubian cultures. The most sensational remainsof the Koros culture have come to light at Mehtelek in 1973. This tiny village is in the Upper Szamos
valley in an isolated location: about 200 km awayfrom the centre of this culture. This unique loca­
tion is explained by the presence of enormous
quantities of obsidian, a very precious industrial
m aterial during th a t epoch, for whose exploitation
a whole colony was set up. In order to fathom
how im portant this exploitation was, it is signifi­
cant th a t the five pits which were open so far byarchaeologists yielded several thousand raw lumps
and finished wares, as compared with barely ahundred which were previously inventoried for allof Hungary. Another surprise: nearly sixty Venusstatu ettes were dug out in th a t area, as comparedwith a total of forty th a t were previously discov­ered. No other such rich obsidian centre has everbeen found elsewhere in Europe (P 096 and P 075).
During the era of the Koros culture, Transdanubia and Upper Hungary were covered with an­other neolithic culture, the so-called Danube-I,
radiocarbon-dated c. 4430 B.C. From its decorated
pottery, it is also known as Linear Pottery Culture,

i>i liandkeram ik and its preference for loess soil
IS particularly visible. A third m ajor Hungarianneolithic culture was the B anatian culture (c. 3200
n.(".-2300 B.C.), which included the Transylvanian( )lt basin (Erosd) and formed a link with the moret‘xtensive Tripolje culture in E astern Europe,
famous for its painted pottery. The fourth was(he Tisza culture (c. 2800 B.C.-c. 2500 B.C.) which
produced the finest and m ost valuable pottery.
'The fifth or last one was the Peceli culture (c.
2100 B.C.-1900 B.C.). It already covered the wholeterritory of H ungary and the Vienna and M ora­
vian basins as well.
H ungary’s five neolithic cultures cover an unin­
terrupted period of over two millenia and show
a surprisingly high degree of uniformity over thewhole area. They have successfully incorporated
alm ost all the m aterial and spiritual innovationsof the world’s first H igher Civilization whichflourished in the A ncient N ear East, an d became
a secondary centre o f diffusion for the benefit of
all central and north-western Europe?^
39. This is the opinion of many international authorities,
like C. Dawson who writes this: “It is certainly in the
Danubian region that we find (in Europe) the mostcomplete and typical example of any early peasantculture” (P 039 p. 53). And H. T. Waterbolk: “(Toward
3000 B.C.), the Hungarian Plain was a dominant centre
which had incorporated all the major achievements of
the nuclear area in the Near East and which had added
to these an adaptation to the European deciduous
forest” (P 134).

3.
M etal-using cultures appeared in Hungary inthe middle of the I lird millenium. The first period,
from c. 2500 B.C., is characterized by an abundantuse of copper and gold; the second, from c. 1900
to 800 B.C. by its preference for bronze. Hungarianarchaeologists therefore like to speak of separate
Copper and Bronze Ages, yet the two periods
constitute but a single one, bronze being an alloyof 90% copper with 10% tin or antim ony. T h at
Hungary was capable of developing a brilliant
metallurgy before any other European country is
due to the rich copper mines in her m ountains,
and the abundance of alluvial gold deposited in
the tributary stream s of the Tisza.
A good illustration of H ungary’s richness inprecious m etals a t th a t time is the gold plate of
Mojgrad in Szilagy county (Fig. 25). It weighs
750 gr and reflects a neolithic pattern, insofar as
only the eyes and the nose are represented on it,
while the m outh is omitted. The plate was, in allprobability, a sacred object whose brilliant face
represented the Sungod. It may have been theidentification plate of a high priest when officiat­
ing. The most distinctive H ungarian product was,however, the hammer-axe, with a disc for the b u tt
(Fig. 26). It was a native form, derived from anearlier copper shaft-hole axe, this last being thederivative of a stone axe. The m etallurgic centresof Hungary were so productive th a t they literally
inundated contemporary m arkets with their dag­gers, swords, spears, arrow-heads, goblets andl)iacelets. The proper evaluation of H ungary’s
metallurgical activities, both in the Copper andBronze Ages, can be derived from Prof. Dawson’s
remarks, who summed up his findings thus: “Itis clear th a t during this period Hungary was thecentre of a brilliant development of culture which,from the artistic point of view, surpassed anythingthat existed elsewhere in Central Europe... The
splendid H ungarian swords and axes, often orna­
m ented with elaborate spiral decorations, areperhaps the finest specimens of European bronze
work, and supplied the models for sim ilar typesof the Nordic Bronze A ge” (P 039 p. 326).

Fig. 26. H ungarian ham m er-axe w ith disc for a butt.
It w a s in great dem and in the B ronze Age.

4.
As already pointed out, the neolithic way oflife was not indigenous to Hungary, but came froman outside geographic area. According to ourpresent knowledge, this can but be the Ancient
N ear-East, where all the wild ancestors of domes­
ticated plants and animals were present and wherefood-production was achieved a t an earlier date.
The accuracy of this fact has subsequently been
proven with comparative archaeology. Scholars ofth a t study discovered, indeed, a strong affinity,
both in form and style, between the earliest H un­
garian artefacts and their Oriental counterparts.
It was, in particular, noticed th a t the Hungarianaxes strongly resembled those found in the Royal
Cemetery of Ur, th a t Transylvanian sickles origin­ated from Mesopotamian forms and th a t the ol­
dest H ungarian pottery was similar to th a t foundin the oldest layers of the ruins of Ur, Kish, Assurand other ancient cities of Mesopotamia. Concor­
dances found in the Nile valley were ju st as
convincing: long-horned Egyptian cattle, native of
the Delta, survives 3000 years later in the H ungar­
ian N ational Park of Hortobagy. In the same park,
specimens can be seen of a special breed of sheepwith twisted horns, spread horizontally a t an angleof about 120 degrees, now called Racka. In ancient
Egypt these sheep were sacred to the God Khum,the ram-headed divinity. This race has since be­come extinct there. In the grave of King Hasekhemui of the Second D ynasty (c. 2703 B.C.-2686
B.C.) a gold object was found, whose m aterial may
originally have come from Hungary. It is indeed
covered with a thin layer of antim ony (Sb) andtellurium (Te) which occur only in the gold of
the C arpathian basin. Another proof of the ancient
Egypto-Hungarian connections is the splendid jar
found in Egyed, in Sopron county. The God T hot

recording the sins of the deceased is depicted on
its sides.
The civihzation of the ancient N ear-East em­
braced not only M esopotamia and Egypt, which
we ju st mentioned, bu t Syria and AnatoHa as well,with which countries the C arpatho-D anubian re­gion was already directly connected. Such contacts
were numerous, as shown by two enormous rapiers,
over 90 cm in length, which were found in the heartof Transylvania. They correspond exactly to theso-called Shardina-sword from Palestine (now in
the British Museum). There were also bracelets
and beads made from M editerranean shells. More­over, certain idols of Hungary are the exact duplicates of those found on the Island of Cyprus (Elet<\s Tudomdny, 1974 no. 38). The Boghaz-Koi (Hittite) pottery designs from the X lV th century B.C.
had their duplicates in the Maros valley in H un­
gary. Hungarian gourd-shaped vessels were like
Cappadocian specimens, while H ungarian bronze
jars found in Ozd near Miskolc, and elsewhere,
were similar to their Trojan prototypes fromaround 2100 B.C. And the gold plate from Mojgradshows a close resemblance to a similar figure from
Troy n. Thus Higher Civilization from the Orient
reached Hungary overland, through the B alkan
corridor formed by the narrow valleys of the
Vardar and Morava rivers. This route was in use
Ibr over two thousand years and its importanceonly began to decline after the fall of Troy H,

c. 1200 B.C. The route has been practically closed
since the V llth century B.C.
In spite of the close links with its Oriental model,
the Higher Civilization of Hungary was not a
simple copy of it, since it could boast of several
original features. One of the most im portant ofthese was dry-farming. As a m atter of fact, theH ungarian rivers, unlike those of Mesopotamia
and Egypt, had no regular floods. Therefore,- pro­duction by irrigation was not practised to a great
extent here. Instead, the D anubian farmers select­
ed the windblown, porous loess soil for cultivation,
after having cleared it of its small growth. Later,
with the appearance of metallic tools and othermore efficacious agricultural implements (plough),it was possible to include heavier bu t better clay
soil as well into the cultivated area. T hanks tothis and to similar inventions, D anubian farmers
were highly superior in production to those on the
Balkans, including Greece. The adaptation to E u ­ropean environment was a significant innovation;
it opened the door for H ungarian farm ers to
spread out westwards, into Central and W estern
Europe.
Besides the Danubian Neolithic, early Europe
possessed two other neolithic cultures: the
Tripolje or Black E arth culture, with its painted
pottery, and the Lake Dwelling culture in Switzer­
land. The first one unfolded in E astern Europe,
between the Dnieper and the Low Danube. Its
exact origin is still unknown, although it is certain

th at it owed its existence to the same source th a t
gave rise to the D anubian neohthic civilization.
The Tripolje culture disappeared, however, quite
soon after the so-called Battle-axe people ap­
peared, whereas the Lake DwelHng, on accountof its very special conditions, could not be intro­
duced elsewhere. As a result, the H ungarian or
Danubian neolithic culture remained w ithout rivalin central and western Europe. This privileged
situation explains its lasting influence over vast
areas for about two thousand years. The westward
extension of the D anubian civilization proceededalong the Danube and its interconnections on the
one hand, and along the Vistula and Oder on theother. In the words of Prof. G. Childe: "for over
two thousand years it (the Danube) form ed thechannel by which the influence o f the Higher
Civilization o f the Eastern M editerranean basin,
including A natolia and Syria, was transm itted tothe barbarian N orth and even to distant B ritain”(P 073 p. 413).^<'

40. for the westward diffusion of the Hungarian Neolithic
and Bronze Age civilizations see, in addition to thequoted references in the text, in particular P 039 pp.
51 and 169.

2. The advent o f the first sedentary
population
1.
In the two thousand years immediately pre­ceding the Neolithic Age from c. 5500 B.C. to 3500
B.C., neither the Middle Danube basin nor Central
Europe in general had any perm anent population(P 134). This fact excludes the possibiUty th a t theD anubian cultural and technical upswing might
have been the result of borrowing through com­
mercial contacts, no one being present a t th ereceiving end. It is therefore generally assumed
th a t the introduction of the Higher Civihzationin the C arpatho-D anubian area was the work of
actual colonization by im m igrant farmers andm etal workers.
In fact, the first colonists began to reach H u n ­gary immediately after the climatic change, in th e
so-called Subboreal Period. During th a t period th e
average rainfall was less than today, and th e
yearly tem perature was 7°C above the present
average. W ith the increasing dryness, dense forests
thinned out, marshes shrank to a sm aller size oreven disappeared, more room becoming available
for ethnic movements. The Vardar-M orava corri­dor, which cuts the Balkans right in half, opened
up and funnelled m igrant groups of cultivators an dherdsmen in an ever increasing num ber into H un-

(Mi y. The bulk o f migrants came from the westernparts o f the A ncient N ear East: from Syria and. \ natolia, although the original p o in t of departurei)f m any o f them was M esopotamia and Egypt.
The described ethnic movement can best be
Ibllowed with the study of old place-names, the■toponymy’. Its usefulness for detecting ethnic
movements stems from the general hum an beha­
viour th a t immigrants, as soon as they settle ina free place, give names to the surrounding geot^raphic features. When correctly interpreted,these names may disclose the geographic originof the first colonists, the time of their arrival, thestate of their civilization, their language, theirethnic appurtenance, and even the area of coloni­
zation in the new land. For all these advantages,
toponymy has become one of the most productive
subsidiary branches of history; it may open “daz­zling perspectives,” —as the French linguist Albert
D auzat expressed it (P 037 p. 70). The historicalinterpretation of place-names needs, however, avery careful analysis, because they were them ­selves subject to phonetical distortions, following
the various sound-shifts, the vowel harmony andthe shifting of accent. Therefore the first task ofthe toponym ist consists of elucidating the oldest
spelling of a given place-name, which usuallyconserves the original meaning of the name mostclearly. In this respect, however, the effective
contribution of H ungarian Hnguists to our knowl­edge in this particular field was, until recentlyinadequate, due to their rather conservative frameof mind (cf. P 009 p. 56 f.). Under these circum­
stances, this author had to supply the basic docu­
m entation for this chapter.
2.
A first group of H ungarian place-names,
throwing hght upon the geographic origin of her
inhabitants, includes such names that are identi­
cal to those o f their previous dwelling places. The
immigrants, indeed, make use of the same vocabu­
lary in christening, to which they were accus­
tomed. This habit is verifiable even in our days,
and it explains why we have so many ‘London’,‘Paris’, ‘A thens’ and other European names in
America, duplicating the toponymy of their former
country. In a similar way, there is, in Hungary,a series of place-names which are repetitive tothose of Anatolia, Syria, Mesopotamia and Egypt.
Let us quote a few such names. First, the nameof Troy (anc. Turia), in western Anatolia, also
occurs in Hungary as Torja and Tiirje. The nameof A rza w a in southern Anatolia is dupHcated insouthern Hungary as Orsova. The Phoenician cityof A ra d has its Hungarian namesake in the greatcity of Arad. Two H ungarian villages called H aldp
(located in the counties of Zala and Bihar) corre­
spond to the im portant city of Haleb (today:
Aleppo). The Syrian B ukk valley has its namesakein Hungary in the B iikk m ountain and Biikk town.
The Palestinian Pilis country or Pilis-Ta is identi­
cal to the Hungarian Pilis name, used as a county,
m ountain and village name. The Palestinian riverK ishont also re-appears in H ungary in the same
form as Kishont, a county-name.
The list of similar place-names continues with
Egyptian and Mesopotamian names. Ancien
Egypt had a border-land called Zala or Sala. It
was a m arshy region in the north-eastern Delta,
where a fortress was located to guard the m ilitaryroad to Syria. The same name occurs in Hungary,in both forms as Zala and Sala, a county which
formerly resembled a marshy border-land in its
southern parts. Egypt’s N itra is duplicated in
Hungary with Nyitra (anc. N itra) as a county,
city and river name. The southern part of the Sinai
peninsula, under Egyptian rule since the unifica­tion of the “Two Lands” in c. 3200 B.C., was known
as Bakon', its Hungarian homonym is also Bakony,
a forested area to the northwest of the Balaton
Lake. Even Egyptian king-names were used as
H ungarian place-names, so th a t Tata, Papa andM enes are Tata, Papa, Menes, Menfo, Menfa.
There are several duplicates of the Mesopota­
mian river names in Hungary. E. g. K herka and
Sajur, both tributaries of the Tigris, appear in
Hungary as Kerka and Sajo. The M esopotamian
native name of the land beyond the river
Euphrates was Burattu; its H ungarian equivalentis Berettyo. The Hungarian Karas, Koros andKrasso correspond to the Mesopotamian Karasu.
Finally, northern Mesopotamia was called Subaru
and Subartu to which the H ungarian Szabar
village-names in the Vas, Gyor and N6grad coun­ties correspond, as well as Sabaria, the capital
city of former Pannonia. Such parallels are notmerely coincidental, since certain Arab historicalsources mention th a t the H ungarians were for­
merly called by the ethnic name SabartoiAsphaloi.
A second series of N ear-Eastern — Hungariancommon place-names are those th a t contain thename o f an Oriental pagan divinity. We havealready mentioned some of them in a previous
chapter dealing with mythology. So it suffices here
to remind the reader th a t the most frequent divinenames in question are the Sungod’s various names,such as ‘lord’ {Ur, Ra)\ ‘Eye God’ (Szemes); ‘Sky
God’ i^g-U r); ‘The E nthroned God’ {Szek-Ur);‘Heavenly Horse’
Ld). The second popularpagan divinity whose name is used in Hungarianplace-names is B dl (Baal), the Syrian Fire God.
Places bearing the name of this god are mostfrequent in the southern half of the country, in
the B alaton Lake area and in Transylvania. This
regrouping suggests th a t the Baal-worshippingcolonists may have arrived after the Sun-worshippers. T he third most frequently occurring divinity
name was th a t of the God Thot, protector of artsand letters in Egypt. Finally, a third series of
H ungarian place-names of Near Eastern origin arethose which are form ed with Oriental ethnic or
tribal names. These are e.g. H etes or Metis, m ean­ing ‘Seven Ancestors’ and Heteny, recalling thedescendants of the H ittites, who were led byexactly seven (Heth) princes. Another Oriental
ethnic name is Pilis, which was already mentioned.
These three series o f specific H ungarian placenames — duplicating names, divine names andi’thnic names — prove th a t ancient H ungary re­ceived the greater p a rt of its first perm anent
population from the A ncient N ear E ast during
the Neolithic and Bronze Ages. The first wave wasm ade up mostly o f agriculturists coming into the
Carpatho-Danubian area through the B alkan
corridor o f the Vardar-M orava valleys.
3.
Having clarified the geographic origin of
H ungary’s first sedentary population, our a tte n ­tion will be focussed next upon their territorial
expansion in the land. Our research in this con­nection is based partly upon the three series ofplace-names ju st discussed, and partly upon placenames which include one of the following six Old
H ungarian formative suffixes denoting dwellingplaces: 1. Ta (variant: Da) meaning ‘L and’; 2. H on
(var. On, An, O ny) ‘Home’; 3. Szek (var. Szeg, Szik)‘Residence’; 4. Ko (var. Ka, Ke, Kev) literally‘Stone’, also ‘Village’; 5. Pis (> B iz, Viz) ‘W ater’;and 6. M a t (var. Ma, Mad, M ata) ‘Field’. Proofof the great antiquity of these six formative suf­
fixes is the fact th a t today they are no longer used
for name-giving purposes, th a t they are common
in the entire Finno-Ugric language group and th at
the words in question were in continuous use in
the Ancient Orient since the H lrd millenium B.C.
a t least.

We begin our illustration with the word Ta. It
occurs in the following N ear E astern place-names;
Pilis-Ta, Heti-Ta, Cre-Ta, Kushi-Ta, Subar-Tu,
U rar-Tu, etc. In European Hungary the following
names are formed with the same element; Ago-Ta,
Bago-Ta, Bak-Ta, B6-Ta, Bucsu-Ta, Cinko-Ta,
Csaj-Ta, Csasz-Ta, Galdn-Ta, Ino-Ta, K adar-Ta,
Kalo-Ta, Laj-Ta, Panko-Ta, Pilis-Ta, Pusz-Ta;
further; Ab-Da, An-Da, Or-Da, Ra-Da, Tor-Da,
Vdr-Da. The suffix Hon (frequently w ithout thefirst letter, H) was also common in place-names
both in the Near E ast as well as in Hungary. In
the Orient the m ost widely known such names are;
Ir-An (<U r-H on), Tour-An (<T 6-U r-H on),
Makr-An (< M ag y ar Hon), and Macar-On(= M agyar Hon); and in Hungary; Bak-On, BakOny, Balat-On (< B al-O tt-H on), Mos-Ony, etc.
Place-names to which the formative suffix Szek
is added are; Bakony-Szeg, Bata-Szek, Bor-Szek,
Biikk-Szek, Eger-Szeg (< E g Ur Szeke), E-Szek( < 0-Szek), Feher-Szek, Harom-Szek, Kis-Szek,
Ko-Szeg, Rona-Szek, Szi-Szek, and Szek-Acs,
Szek-Szard, etc. W ith Ko: Barat-K a, Szabad-Ka,
Pat-K a, Dobo-Ka, Raj-K a, Resz-Ke ( < Rez-Ko),
Pisz-Ke, Bel-K6, Ko-Szeg. Names with Pis:
Danu-Bis, Ti-Bis, Cola-Pis (the medieval form of
the present Kulpa), Fischa ( < Pis); and the dwell­ing names Pis-Ki, Pis-Ko, Pis-Karos, Pisz-Ke, Pozsony ( < Pis-Hon), Pos-Tyen. And finally placenames in Hungary with M at: Doz-Mat, Dai-M at,
Ko-Madi, Kecske-Met, Madi, M ata, Modor.

After having selected, by the above-mentioned
method, all the eligible place-names of Oriental
origin — over 2,000 names — from the Directoryof H ungarian place-names (P 094 and P 095), andlocated on a m ap showing the 63 counties of
Hungary, the following statistics emerged:
Number of Old Hungarian place-names by counties
In Transdanubia
In Transylvania
153
99
13. Bihar.......................
•>. V as.
105
14. Szolnok-Doboka.... 62, 96
15. Kolozs...................... 58
57
4. Baranya.
90
16. Szilagy....................
17. Maros-Torda.......... 55
45
18. S zatm ^ ................... 54
43
33
19. Arad........................ . ..32
27
31
20. Beszterce-N............
21
21. Mdramaros............. 2621
22. Torda-Aranyos......
11
13
...4
.................................................
T otal............................. 481,655
lielow the Maras R.
24. Krass6-Sz.
27. Temes.

t.'l. Nagykukiillb.

36
..28
..22
21
19
18
..16
16
9
8
7
0
200

In Upper Hungary
35. Nyitra.................... .
36. N6grdd................... .
37. Gbmor.....................
38. Bars.........................
39. Pozsony..................
40. Trencsen................
41. Hont........................
42. Szepes.....................
43/44. Z61yom-Lipt6...
45/46. Arva-Tur6c......
T o ta l............................

41
40
35
28
24
23
17
14
11
7
240

134

THE EARLY HUNGARIANSIn the Upper Tisza valley
47. Ung...................... .........48
48. Borsod................ .........44
49. Abauj-Torna..... .........44
50. Sdros...................
42
40
51. Zemplen.............
52. Szabolcs.............
40
53. Bereg...................
34
54. Heves..................
30
55. Ugocsa................ ....... 0
T otal........................
322

In the Flood area of theTisza
56. Pest (P-S-K)
73*
57. Bdcs-Bodrog........
34
58. B6k&...................
16
59. Toront61............... .... 117
60. Csongrad.............
7
61. Jasz-Nk-Sz..........
62. Hajdu...................
6
0
63. Csanad.................
154
T otal.........................

Totals by region
1-12. Transdanubia.......................655
13-22. Transylvania........................481
23-34. Below the Maros river......200
35-46. Upper Hungary...................240
47-55. Upper Tisza valley.............322
56-63. Flood £irea of the Tisza.....154
Grand Total............................. 2,052*** Notwithstanding that Pest county has 73 ancient placenames, its territory is not meu-ked with squares on ourmap, because its oversized extension, but with dottedlines only.
** O ur d ata relatin g to th e cou nties betw een th e rivers
Driivji iiiid S/.iiV!i an- incotnplcti-.

The results of the above statistics have been
illustrated on a m ap (Fig. 27), including the eight
counties between the rivers Drava and Sava.
Marked with squares are the most densely settledcounties, i.e. in which a t least 45 Old Hungarianplace-names have been found. The less densely
populated areas are marked with dotted lines, i.e.
counties having a t least 30, but not more than
44 Old Hungarian place-names, while the sparsely
populated counties, with less th an 30 old placenames, are left in white.
This precious map, issued as a result of a m inuteinquiry, reveals th a t the first perm anent popula­tion o f the Carpatho-Danubian basin was not
spread out evenly over the whole country. It con­centrated upon two m ajor areas: 1. Transdanuhia,
with prolongations northwards into the Vag valleya n d southwards into the Drava and Sava regions;a n d 2. Transylvania with extensions into the val­
leys o f the right-bank tributaries of the Tisza. The
two areas were separated from one another bysparsely populated, marshy zones. Thus, as far
as the degree o f civilization and geographic con­ditions allowed it, the land was already filled tocapacity in the Bronze Age (c. 1900 B.C.) by aperm anent, mostly agricultural population. The
areas that were still available for future migrants
consisted o f flooded and mountainous regions,
excellent places for pastoral population that soon
came wave after wave.

-' , 1' 1 A. ' 1 1 , 11 m
' ''

'.

I ' I ■, I' 11J.
1,M ' 1 ,'^ IrM.'-

I I ^J1/ -! " ' , I -..I: 'i I :I ' I ' w' - /,' I !>'''' ■'' 1' 1 "Fig. 27. Map sh ow in g the den sity o f H ungary’s popu­
lation by the end o f the Bronze Age (squares indicate(he m ost densely settled areas).

3. The identity o f the first settlers

The reader has no doubt noticed th a t most of
the old place-names which were handed down by
the first population of the Carpatho-D anubianarea had some definite meaning in Hungarian. This
fact suggests th a t they probably spoke Hungarian.
This question shall now be analysed in more detail.
The archaeological remains of the epoch allow
us to distinguish the presence of three closely
related but different ethnic groups. The largest
one was made up of farmers, usually referred toas M agari (Magyars) or A n (Aryans). The second
largest consisted of those engaged in anim al hus­
bandry, and were called Siculi, Sikeloi (Sz^kely),while the third and smallest group were pastoralist
people, an occupation frequently connected with
the Kush. The following explanations support thethreefold division, based upon the respective eco­nomic activity.
1. T h at the D anubian farmers were Aryans andfirst practised their trade all over C entral Europe,
was first noticed by L.A. Waddell, who stated th a t“the Aryans were the forerunners of the agricul­
tural stage in the world’s civilization” (P 132
p. 49). T h at these farmers were MagAri, or M a­gyars, appears from the analysis of the Magyar
name itself, whose etymological meaning is, strict­ly speaking, ‘farm er’. It was used, and still contin­
ues to be in th a t sense, both in Hungary and its
neighbouring countries. In Hungarian, indeed, a‘farm stead’ was M ajor (pron. Moyor), and in theAustro-Bavarian German dialect, the word for‘peasant’ is similarly M ayer and Meyer. Farther
west in Germany, however, the common word forthe same term is ‘Bauer’.
In addition to the semantic connection of ‘agri­
culturist’ with the M agyar name, there is muchevidence suggesting th a t the bulk of the Neolithic
and Bronze Age inhabitants were really Magyars.
Such evidence includes the ethnic symbols, withwhich they identified themselves in pictorial w rit­
ing. The most widely used ones were: (1) the bird
(M adar), because it sounded like Magyar; (2) thelion, which was M agaru (= Magyar) in SumerianHungarian; and (3) a bee (Meh), which combinedwith the wearer (Ur) formed the symbol M ehar,
which also sounded Hke Magyar. The role of thefirst two symbols as M agyar ethnic identification
badges was already discussed, therefore there isno need to return to this subject. For the use of
the bee-symbol, however, we mention two in­stances: first, th a t the famous neolithic obsidian
factory was operating in Hungary a t M eh-Telek,
i.e. on a ‘Bee-Plot’ and secondly th a t Herodotus
records th a t in the C arpatho-D anubian region
there are great m ultitudes of ‘bees’, so th a t it is
impossible to visit th a t land (P 067 Book V
cap. 10).

At this point we wish to introduce a uniquesiMluette as well, found in a site of the neolithic
I’isza-culture (Fig. 23). It represents the harvest
ilivinity, holding a sickle in his right hand, an
implement whose form is the wellknown abbrevia(ion in the H ungarian carved script for Isten ‘God’.
I’lie sta tu e tte in question belongs to the category()l the so-called ‘talking statues’, because its poslure coveys a message (P 074 p. 21). We can readil by naming its conspicuous elements one after.mother: the clenched hand (MArok), the armsin the plural KAR.ok, the face AR, and the belt
RA. These elements identify the God as being
Isten, M A -K A R .ok Ura ‘God, Lord of the Maf^yars’. The ancient Egyptian kings, who were also
considered earthly deputies for God, were fre­quently represented in exactly the same posture,
as for instance King Ramses II, whose image isshown above (Fig. 22). The strong Egypto-Hungarian relations, which are apparent even here, do
not surprise us for all three m ajor M agyar ethnic
symbols originated there. In ancient Egypt, thebird was the param ount divine symbol, the lion
usually accompanied the royal image, while thebee in the royal cartouche was used to render the
king’s title as ruler of Lower Egypt. This suffices
to conclude th a t the bulk o f the first sedentary
population o f Old Hungary consisted of H ungari­an-speaking, agricultural Magyars. These early
settlers transplanted Egyptian agricultural know ­how, tradition and m entality into the M iddle
Danube basin.
2.
H ungary’s next most numerous people of theBronze Age, known by name, were the Siculi or
Sikeloi inhabitants, whose descendants are called
Szekely (pron. Sakaly). They form a solide blockof two and a half million M agyar-tongued inhabi­
tan ts in the heart of Transylvania, the eastern
province of historical Hungary. Their admirable
folklore is their most characteristic ethnic featureand is fully perm eated with the old solar cult. The
visible image of their pre-Christian divinity, theSundisc, is usually displayed in their coat of arms,
together with the waxing Moon and the eightpointed star. They are identical to those seen on
ancient Mesopotamian documents. The Siculi be­lieved their God was a hum an shaped giant, riding
on a horse or in a brilliant chariot in the sky. All
the words used by the Siculi in connection withthe said idea-complex — Sun, Sky, Horse, Chariot,
Way, Seat and so on — belong to the oldest layerof the Hungarian vocabulary. The etymologicalmeaning of their name is also Hungarian, andcorresponds to their intim ate religious life. Sikeloi
is, indeed, a compound with the following ele­ments: S-IKE-LO-I, which would be spelt today
A z Egi L6-i, meaning ‘Follower of the Celestial
Horse’ or, more plainly, ‘Believer in Sungod’.
The Siculi or Sikeloi always played a significant
p art in H ungary’s history. Prior to their alliancewith Prince Arpad, they were allies of the Hun-I lungarians, in the Kingdom of Attila, according(o our national Annals (P 120 I p. 101). They ^Isolook p art in the decisive battle which brought
about the downfall of the Hun Empire. Three(housand Siculi cavalery-men managed sometiow
to escape from the bloody battle and went into
hiding in the unidentified Chigla-Field, waiting forthe return of “other” H ungarians {usque (idaliorum Hungarorum reditum, P 120 I p. 279).
As a m atter of fact, when they found out, a t theend of the IX th century, th a t a new M agyar group
was on the way to Hungary under the leadershipof Prince Arpad, the Siculi horsemen, who had
been living in the land for a long time, galloped
to the Carpathian passes to great their brethren.
Then, according to their agreement, they helped
unify the land into a single dominion. From th atmoment on, the fate of the Siculi merged 'vith
th a t of the Arpad Hungarians.
During the reign of King A ttila, the bulk of the
Siculi-Hungarians still dwelt in the w e ster nborders of the C arpathian land; in Upper Hungary
and in Transdanubia. They were the stock­
breeders of the epoch, belonging to a semi-militaryorganization in charge of the defence of the ^vestern boundaries of the Hun Empire. They weredirected by chiefs called Ld/b, literally ‘Greatm en’, a title equivalent to the medieval marquis.
After the Hun-era, when the desintegrated
country was re-united by Prince Arpad and the
Nation was converted to the Christian faith, theeastern borders of the lan d became the mostsensitive ones. Therefore, th e first M agyar kings
transferred the SicuU frontier-guards from Upper
Hungary into T ransylvania for further duties.
This displacement is evidenced by a series ofmedieval charters and more recently by a toponymic study showing th a t 36 village-names of T ran ­sylvania are the exact duplicate of as m any Upper
Hungarian place-names {M agyar M ult, Sidney,
1977 no. 2). The T ransdanubian Siculi, who were
not involved in the massive transfer, remained intheir original location in th e West. T heir long stayhere explains the surprisingly high num ber of solar
place-names, especially in Zala county, and also
the existence of certain common dialectal particu­
larities between the Transylvanian and the T rans­
danubian populations of today.
The fact th a t the Sicuh’s first places of habita­tion were in the western p arts of historical H un­
gary, suggests th a t they m ay have entered into
the land via the Adriatic Sea. The probability ofthis itinerary is dram atically confirmed by thepresence of other Siculi on th e western side of the
Adriatic, namely on the Italian peninsula. This
fact also suggests a sim ultaneous arrival into bothlands in question, around the X lth century B.C.
(cf. P 100 ‘Sicel’). T h a t the Italian Siculi formed
the integral p art of the great Siculi migration isfurther evidenced by the fact th a t they too were
led by chiefs called Syc-Lo-Pe and Laes-TuriGones, as reported by Thukydides in a distorted

lorm (P 126 Book VI cap. 18). These term s wouldl)c, in the more correct spelling, Sikel L6-F6 (after(he P > F soundshift in Lo-Pe),meaning ‘Siculi(Ireat M en’; and Lovas Turi Hon6s ‘M ounted
Trojan Ancestor’ re s p e c tiv e ly .A n o th e r signifi­
cant detail: one of the Siculi kings, Italus by name,l)ecame the namegiver of the whole Peninsula, andalso of the present Italian nation.^^The Siculi in Italy were not numerous enoughto keep the whole peninsula for themselves. A ctu­
ally, they were driven out therefrom around 1035
B.C., when the m ajority of them crossed over tothe island of Sicily and forced the earlier inhabi­
tan ts to retreat into its western parts while theyoccupied all the rest of the land, changing its nameto ‘Sicilia’, They lived in peace on the island about
41. In the light of the etymology given there, we have toabandon the fantastic explanation of the Greek writersof the past, who believed that the Italian Siculi weregoverned by One-Eyed Giants, interpreting the Syc-LoPe expression as being the Greek word Cyclops.
42. Thukydides relates that “the country owes its nameof Italy to Italus, a king of Sicel, so called.” Now, Ital,
as a Hungarian word, means a ‘drink’, and Italos some­body ‘fond of alcoholic drink’. The explanation seems
to be a fitting one, because the early Sicels are said
to have been fond of wine, which they drank in the
Scythian fashion, i.e. unmixed with water (P 067 Book
VI cap. 84 and Book I cap. 106). — Incidentally, theGreek name of Sungod, Apollo, is, in their language,a Hungarian loan-word, made up with Pe -I- L6, andthe prefixed definitive article A, whence A Pe-Lo, con­tracted into Apollo, Hterally means ‘The Chief Horse’.

three hundred years, until the Hellens began todrive them out. In the V lth century B.C., theSicilians were defeated in battle and their separate
national identity was gradually dissolved, — ac­
cording to Thukydides.
Outside of Hungary and Italy, numerous Siculi
tribes were also to be found in the northwestern
Punjab (India). They were locally known as Sakai
or Sakae (P 044 ‘Sakai’), the same as the H ungari­an Szekely. These Hindu-Sikeli were also followersof the Sungod, calling him Sacra ( < Az Eg Ura)
‘Lord of the Sky’. His female associate was Sacra
N i (H.: Sacra Neje) ‘Wife of the Heavenly Lord’.
All the Hindu Sikeli were engaged in anim al hus­
bandry. To sum up, the Siculi were a widely
diffused ancient race o f the Iln d and 1st millen^
iums B.C. One o f their branches became, together
with their M agyar brethren, the founders o f E uro­pean Hungary, as seen from an ethnic standpoint.
3.
Traces of a third people are also discernable
in the Neohthic and Bronze Ages in Hungary.
They originated from the Kush or Cushan folk,
usually referred to in the scientific language as
M editerraneans or Dinarians w ithout, however,
sufficiently emphasizing their characteristic
brownish complexion. The Kush race was first
identified in Eastern Africa, around the G reat
Lakes. It was also a widely diffused old race, but
broken up into a m ultitude of sm aller or larger
ethnic entities th a t lacked any comprehensive
political organisation for a long time. They werethe first great historical people to send out colo­
nists into southwest Asia and into Europe, includ­ing Hungary.
The European branch of the Kush seems to havespoken the H ungarian language: w hether throughorigin or by assimilation, is not yet clear. At any
rate, all their identifying symbols are Hungarian.
The most widely used such symbol was the ram:it accompanied them through all their wanderings,
in Egypt, Hungary, as well as in India and Touran.
Ram in H ungarian is Kos (pron. Kush), which was
also their national name. Their rulers, both terres­trial and divine, were called Fd-Kos, ‘The Principal
K ush’, and his distinctive symbol was a kind of
spontoon, called Fokos in Hungarian, a word th a tsounds like their name. Kristof Lukacsy, a distin­
guished H ungarian historian of the X lX th centu­
ry, was positively convinced th a t the language ofthe Kush was Hungarian, even while they werestill sojourning in the Oxus region of Touran(P 092 p. 85).
T he early presence of the Kush in Hungary isevidenced by a ram-headed a ltar found in a neo­lithic layer near Szeged. And the last notablegroup of them lived in Upper Hungary, during thereign of King St. Stephen (1000-1038). Their dis­
trict was known as ‘Dark H ungary’ (Ungaria
Nigra), as opposed to ‘W hite H ungary’ (UngariaAlba), so called after the skin colour of the respec­tive inhabitants. W ith the conversion to Christen­dom, the cohesive force of the Kush was broken

and the people was absorbed into the m ajority.
Their memory still lingers in such place-names as
Kosd ( < Kush-Ta), Kosna ( < Kos Hona), K ustan( < Kus T anya) and the family name of Kos.
To complete the presentation of the European
Kush, we m ust also mention th a t classical andmedieval historical sources inform us th a t both
Britain and France have a considerable num berof Kush absorbed in their national body, who werelocally called Picti (P 132 pp. 111-126 and P 065
p. 394). The Romans believed th a t they were socalled, because their faces were “painted”, as theLatin word Pictus suggests. This view is, however,unacceptable because the Kush were already darkby birth and were called black well before theexistence of the Latin language. The key to thesolution lies in the Hungarian language, in which
black is Fekete, whose old H ungarian form had
been Pekete, Pekte, prior to the P > F soudshift.
Consequently the oeiginal signification of the local
name of the West European Kush simply m eant‘dark’ and not ‘painted.’ Another local name ofthe dark people in the British Isles was Cassi, fromwhom the Scots originated.
All the details listed above, when combined into
a whole, are decisive proof th a t the earliest inhabi­tants o f the Carpatho-Danubian area were H u n ­garians: variously known as agriculturist M a ­gyars, stock-breeding Siculi-Szekely, and darkish
coloured pastoral Kush. In other words thepresent-day H ungarians seem to be direct de-stcndants o f the first inhabitants o f the land uho
tu rd there four thousand years ago.

4. The testim ony of the Tat&rlaki (Tartaria)
tablets
1. The first inhabitants of the Carpatho-D anubian area have bequeathed us with decisive histor­
ical evidence of their ethnic and hnguistic identity,
in three inscribed clay tablets found at T atarlaka(now T artaria), near the river Maros, in 1961
(Fig. 28). They turned up in a mound barely
measuring 240 m X 100 m. One of the tablets isa roundel with a hole, while the two others arerectangular. The larger rectangular one also hasa hole, but the sm aller one only bears the pictureof a horned goat. All three tablets appear to havebeen locally made, while the accompanying ob­
jects come from the M editerranean and were ei­
th er Cretan or Cycladic. The tablets aroused
world-wide interest, because they gave scholars a
concrete chance of identifying the language spoken
by the earliest population of the Carpatho-D anubian basin.
Our inquiry about the tablets in question re­quires an answer to the following three questions:(1) for which purpose were the tablets made? (2)w hat message is written upon them ? and (3) towhich historical period do they belong? Amongst

and the people was absorbed into the m ajority.
Their memory still lingers in such place-names as
Kosd ( < Kush-Ta), Kosna ( < Kos Hona), K ustan( < Kus T anya) and the family name of Kos.
To complete the presentation of the European
Kush, we m ust also mention th a t classical andmedieval historical sources inform us th a t both
Britain and France have a considerable num berof Kush absorbed in their national body, who werelocally called Picti (P 132 pp. 111-126 and P 065
p. 394). The Romans believed th a t they were socalled, because their faces were “painted”, as theLatin word Pictus suggests. This view is, however,unacceptable because the Kush were already darkby birth and were called black well before theexistence of the Latin language. The key to thesolution lies in the Hungarian language, in which
black is Fekete, whose old H ungarian form had
been Pekete, Pekte, prior to the P > F soudshift.
Consequently the oeiginal signification of the local
name of the West European Kush simply m eant‘dark’ and not ‘painted.’ Another local name ofthe dark people in the British Isles was Cassi, fromwhom the Scots originated.
All the details listed above, when combined into
a whole, are decisive proof th a t the earliest inhabi­tants o f the Carpatho-Danubian area were H u n ­garians: variously known as agriculturist M a ­gyars, stock-breeding Siculi-Szekely, and darkish
coloured pastoral Kush. In other words thepresent-day H ungarians seem to be direct de-stcndants o f the first inhabitants o f the land uho
tu rd there four thousand years ago.

4. The testim ony of the Tat&rlaki (Tartaria)
tablets
1.
The first inhabitants of the Carpatho-D anubian area have bequeathed us with decisive histor­
ical evidence of their ethnic and hnguistic identity,
in three inscribed clay tablets found at T atarlaka(now T artaria), near the river Maros, in 1961
(Fig. 28). They turned up in a mound barely
measuring 240 m X 100 m. One of the tablets isa roundel with a hole, while the two others arerectangular. The larger rectangular one also hasa hole, but the sm aller one only bears the pictureof a horned goat. All three tablets appear to havebeen locally made, while the accompanying ob­
jects come from the M editerranean and were ei­
th er Cretan or Cycladic. The tablets aroused
world-wide interest, because they gave scholars a
concrete chance of identifying the language spoken
by the earliest population of the Carpatho-D anubian basin.
Our inquiry about the tablets in question re­quires an answer to the following three questions:(1) for which purpose were the tablets made? (2)w hat message is written upon them ? and (3) towhich historical period do they belong? Amongst

the m ultitude of studies already devoted to clear­ing up the mystery of these written documents
found on the soil of ancient Hungary, the mostvaluable is th a t of Prof. M.S.F. Hood (USA) eventhough he failed to discover the purpose of thetablets and denied th a t there was actual writingin the signs carved upon the pieces.^-^ Concerning
the age of the tablets, there were two opinions.
The first emphasizes the M esopotamian characterof the writing and, on th a t basis, suggests th a t
the tablets may have been made in the Urukperiod, somewhere around 3000 B.C. The second
opinion, th a t of Prof. Hood, insists upon their
Cretan parallels and upon their Aegean and Ana­
tolian connections in general. Accordingly, theholder of this second view assigns a considerably
later period to the objects and suggests th a t they
may have been made between 2000 B.C. and 1700
B.C. Since then, no new judgem ents have been
form ulated so th a t the mystery of the T atarlaki
tablets continues to remain unsolved, more than
tw enty years after their discovery.
2.
In our procedure of trying to find the secretof the T atdrlaki tablets, we m ust first ascertain
43. Prof. Hood is reluctant to see actual writing upon thetablets: “But do the Tartaria ( = Tatarlaki) tablets
actually be£U‘ writing? Probably not... It seems quitepossible that they were merely an uncomprehending
imitation of more civilized peoples’ written records... apretense by some illiterate barbarian to command themagic embodied in an art he had witnessed but did notunderstand” (P 068).

the purpose for which they were made. This inqui­ry begins with the etymology o f Tatdrlaka, thename of the village where they were discovered.
It is a H ungarian compound, whose last element(-Laka) m eans a detached, small cottage, Hterally‘the dwelling of. B ut the first part of the name(Tatdr) cannot be interpreted as having been thedwelling of some T artarian person, because T a r­tars never lived in Hungary, particularly not in
pre-Christian times. The full name in question is
actually made up with the following elements:
Tat-Ar-Lak-a, the vocalized form of an original
deeper sounding T6t-Ur-Lak-a, with the literalmeaning of ‘God T h o t’s Cottage’. T h a t makes
sense, because God T hot was an im portant Egyp­tian divinity: patron of writing and reckoning, who
was also in charge of measuring time and doing
solar observations for the purpose of calendar
making. In th a t perspective it seems logical toconjecture, th a t the T atarlaki tablets themselves
may have been used for solar observations and,ultim ately, for setting up calendars.^^ This conclu­
sion is supported by other, circum stantial evi­
dence.

44. The calendar was a precious instrument in the handsof every farming community of the Antiquity. It enabled
the peasants to know the most appropriate time to carryout certain important tasks, such as plowing and sowing
in particular and it was also useful for the timing of
religious festivals.

To begin with, the plot where the find was madeis a small one, inadequate for farming. It was,however, large enough to make astronomical ob­
servations, especially during the summer. Then,the picture of a crab and a horned goat, engraved
upon the tablets, is further evidence supporting
this idea. The same animals, indeed, are part of
the Zodiac, the crab being the symbol of theCancer constellation, and the horned goat th a tof the Capricorn. Moreover, the circular hole ap­
pearing both on the roundel and upon the larger
rectangle m ust have been connected with celestial
observations, because this latter hole is surroundedby sunbeam s to show, unequivocally, th a t therising Sun is m eant thereby. Finally, the mostconspicuous details of the roundel supply us withthe decisive word: Calendar. In fact, the circularhole represents the Sun, in H ungarian NAP, thegiant cross intersecting the roundel carries thesound-value of T, and the circular rim of the object
supplies the final constituent AR. These sounds,
put together, give the word Nap-T-Ar, Naptdr,
which is the H ungarian word for ‘Calendar’. It
seems thus certain that the Tatdrlaki tablets werecomponents o f a sophisticated solar observatory,
and were used for determining time:^-^45. In atlantic Europe, the observation of the various sea­sonal positions of the Sun, in reference to the zodiacal
star-clusters, was made with the help of heavy megalithic structures (e.g. Stonehenge). In the Danubian region,

3.
Before proceeding to our next task, i.e. deci­phering the script engraved upon the tablets, wem ust take a glimpse into the astronomical thinkingof Antiquity. At th a t time, the Sun was considereda hum an-shaped divinity always on the move inthe sky, following a fixed yearly path, during which
it bypasses 12 im portant stations or groups ofconspicuous stars called constellations. Several ofthese groups appear before the eyes of observers,
as shaping celestial animals. Hence their names:
Aries, Crab, Lion, Capricorn and so on. All to ­gether, these anim als form the ‘Animal belt’ or
Zodiac. The Zodiacal constellations were closely
watched by ancient astronomers, because they
were suitable phenomena for meeisuring time. Cer­tain ones heralded the beginning of the seasons
on a fixed day: Spring (M arch 21), Summer(June 22), A utum n (September 23) and W inter(December 22). In the northern hemisphere, theconstellation th a t could be observed most easily,
was the one which signaled the beginning of Sum ­mer. Daylight lasts longest on th a t day, when the
Sun ceases to ascend higher on the horizon, andbegins its downward course. This change of direc­
tion takes 11 days, during which the Sun rises
every morning a t the same time and on the same
point of the horizon, as if it had stopped moving.
the more advanced microlithic structure prevailed. Thisis the significant difference between the two halves ofEurope, although this has never been pointed out untilnow.

So much suffices to understand the sense of themessage upon the roundel, to which we now return.
The sound-signs appearing on the round tablet;ire, in our opinion, not Sumerian picture-signs,
hut more advanced carved signs. Most of themcorrespond to Old H ungarian writing signs (seeKig. 14). The only m ajor difference the T atarlaki
tablets display vs. the Old H ungarian letters liesin their outward appearance: the Tatdrlaki writing
lias a marked preference for linking signs together
into bizarre geometric shapes. The very close re­semblance of the T atarlaki signs to the Old H un­
garian ones invites us to try to read the mysterious
message in Hungarian, beginning with the roundel,
according to our Fig. 29, whereon the signs are
separated into words.
The first p art of the message is placed in theupper half of the object in question. It reads fromleft to right and the signs are transliterated asfollows: eZ. iR-aNY-O(n) J.6N eS.T.eN. 4. 05

Fig. 29. The soim d-signs o f th e Tat&rlaki tablets, sep­arated into w ords.

0-Ra.K .oR . W ith present spelling; E z irdnyon jo n
Isten 4.05 orakor, in literal translation; ‘God
comes (= the Sun rises) in this direction a t 4;05
o’clock.’ The second p art of the message, inscribedon the lover half the roundel, reads in the reverse
direction, from right to left, as is indicated by theso-called turning letters, specially N, R and K.
It runs thus; E LE .R E aR.dK. S.iL.oK eg.oV6.Be(n) 5 + 5 + eGY (= 1 1 ) E.Ta.K -aN , inpresent spelling; Elore a rdk csillog egoveben 11
ejszakdn ‘Beforehand the Crab is twinkling in its
celestial zone for 11 nights.’
Is our reading reliable? It is, when considering
the following. First, the decipherment produceda coherent and closely reasoned message, in which
all the written signs appear with their own soundvalue. This fact alone is usually considered as
sufficient proof for the correct reading. Secondly,
the message uses a highly technical language,according to the time and circumstances, which
we can however understand, since we alreadyknow the fundam entals of ancient m entality. Be­
sides, it follows the golden rule of the well written
ancient inscriptions, inasmuch as it uses sevenwords — not less, nor more — in both sentences.
Finally, all statem ents refered to in the inscription
are accurate, and all have been confirmed, sincethen, by modern science. In fact, on the first day
o f Sum m er (June 22), the Sun rises at Tatdrlaka,
on the 46th parallel, exactly at five m inutes p a st
four o’clock.

Our next problem is to decipher the messageiiis< I il)t*ci upon the larger rectangular tablet. It is111\ idl'd into three com partm ents. We are, alas,
1111;11)Ie to make out the meaning of the signs placed1111() ( he first com partm ent; but the remaining part
IS ( li'ar enough and says: ‘Here the Sun rises in
I I l f Cancer (constellation) on the day of...’ (missing

Ki. The step-by-step explanation of the inscription is thus:
in the second compartment we can distinguish the risingSun, in Hungarian A Nap. On its right side, the contours
of a mouse (H.: A z Eger) are visible, with its thin, longtail. The picture of this animal is here because it ishomophonous with the expression A z £gre, ‘to the sky’.
So, the thusfar deciphered words say this: A N ap az
Egre ‘The Sun to the sky’. After that, we read the signs
placed in the left and right columns, saying: the crosssign iT, the crab A RAK, followed by a sign for thesound-group KUR/KOR, and finally the word for don­key IA. In modern Hungarian: Itt a rdkkor j6 ‘Comesat this spot in the Cancer constellation’. The directive
continues in the third compartment thus: aN -aP Je-Le
aR -aK oV-Be... ‘The day’s symbol in the Cancer zone
is... The complete message in better English reads: ‘Here(at Tat&rlaka) the Sun appears on the horizon in theCancer constellation on the day of... —The homophonyexisting between ‘Sky God’ (Az Egicr) and the mouse(Az Eger) was probably the origin of the never-explained
Oriental custom of keeping white mice in Sun-temples,
as was the case in Babylon and Egypt. The presenceof these small animals was a mean amongst a hundred
others, to remind the believers that God may hidehimself in any of his creatures to watch over their
behaviour.

The smaller rectangle has no carved script
scratched upon its surface, nor a hole to let thesunbeams penetrate into the observatory room. On
its surface is a horned goat with an elevenbranched tail, symbol of the Capricorn constella­tion which announces the beginning of Winter.
Behind the goat, the outlines of a roaring animal
are discernible, probably th a t of the celestial dog,
urging the Sun to ascend on its brilliant way again.
T h at the goat’s picture holds for the Sun, isevidenced by its having five legs, five being thesacred num ber of the solar divinity. To make ahole on this tablet would have been useless, be­cause in winter the sky is usually overcast in
T atarlaka, and no astronomical observations canbe made.
4.
The last question in connection with the
T atarlaki tablets deals with the setting of theapproxim ate date when the tablets could havebeen in use for solar observations. Prof. Hoodapproached this question by comparing the tabletswith similar archaeological rem ains found at
Knossos in Crete and concluded th a t the T atarlaki
tablets cannot be older than their Cretan variants,
i.e. not older th an c. 1900 B.C. Therefore, he added,
if the solar equipm ent in question has been foundin a neolithic layer, th a t could only have happened
if the pit in which it was found had been dug froma higher archaeological level. Our own estimation,
based upon the history of writing, supports theopinion of Prof. Hood all the more, because certain(1; Il ing terms, such as “eleven tim es”, appear on
I lu* similar Cretan tablets as well. Since, however,I h e writing on the Tat^irlaki tablets is more mat u r e , a younger age would be more suitable fort l i e m . This age can be determined through am athem atical operation, by converting the si­
dereal time given in the inscription, into ourpresent time-computing system, taking into con­sideration the phenomenon of precession. This
term designates the specific rotation of the E a rth ’saxis which causes the beginning of the various
seasons not to always occur in the same groupof stars (constellation), nor on the same day. Thevernal point actually advances upon the ecliptic
at a rate of one day in every 72 years. Therefore,
after a shift of 30 days, i.e. 2160 years (= 30 X
72), the sunrise will already occur in anotherconstellation. The T atarlaki tablets report th a t
the Sun’s descending course happened on theeleventh day of the Cancer constellation. On theother hand we also know th a t the Cancer constel­lation lasted from c. 2220 B.C. to c. 60 B.C. (P 118
p. 78). Thus, its approximative age results fromthe m athem atical operation: B.C. 2220 minus
II X 72, th a t is 1428 B.C.
As it disclosed, the T atdrlaki inscriptions consti­
tu te decisive historical evidence, whereby it be­comes clear th a t the first perm anent populationo f the Carpatho-Danubian basin spoke H ungari­an an d that their leaders had highly sophisticatedknowledge. That H ungarians were in evidence inCentral Europe considerably earlier than was
heretofore believed, is a fact which obliges us to
substantially modify our historical conceptions
about the peoples o f Europe in the Neolithic andBronze Ages.

Fig. 30. The m ost beautiful Scythian gold-stag everfound in H ungary. T&pi6-Szent-M6rton, Vth century,
B.C.

THE SCYTHIAN HUNGARIANS
1. Their origin and civilization
The history of the Scythians is so complicatedand forms such a tangled skein of varied problems—says A. L. Mongait —th at, in spite of abundantsources for its study, “the Scythian problem re­mains an intransigent subject, th a t is still far fromsettled” (P 097 bis p. 153). At one time the Scyth­ians are said to be Indo-Europeans, on the basisof the similitude of their language; a t another, they
are considered Huns, with whom they shared theircultural features. Elsewhere, it is maintained th atthey belonged to the Hungarian-speaking groupof peoples (Uralo-Altaians), with whom they wereclosely linked throughout their history, both in
the Orient and the Occident. All these opinions
circulate freely, since nobody has, as yet, correctly
analysed the Scythian tongue, nor deciphered anyof their w ritten messages. W hat is definitely
known about the Scythians, however, is th at they
did not all live in a single political structure, bulwere broken up into several political entities, withas m any individual ethnic denominations. I'iie
lack of political unity of the Scythians could not,however, conceal their close affinities: they all
spoke the same language, had the same solar cult,the sam e civilization and “were linked by some
sort o f racial tie” (P 123 p. 42).

Their original homeland, or more precisely, thegeographic area where history first detected them,
was the northern hinterland of M esopotamia and
Syria. From these regions they were graduallysqueezed out by the continuous razzias of the
Assyrians, a Semitic population swarming out
from the nearby deserts. They subjected the whole
Scythian Old Fatherland to their iron rule during
the V lllth century B.C. The destruction of theKingdom of Arpad, on the great bend of theEuphrates, in 743 B.C. and the capture of the
C ity-State of Karkemish in 717 B.C. were the final
stage of Semitic expansion to the North. The
Sythian tribes, driven out of their old homes, first
concentrated along the Araxes and K ura rivers,in the swampy region of thousands of islands.
T hereafter they gradually occupied the higherlying Terek and Kuban regions, and finally tookpossession of the large trac t of land above the
Caucasus, up to the elbow of the Volga.
W hen they were a t the zenith of their history,
in the first millenium B.C., Scythian kings ruled
over the immense natural grassland stretchingfrom the C arpathians and the Lower Danube
eastward, above the Black sea, to the Caucasianm ountains (European Scythia) and the Caspiansea, including the T ouranian Plain and the Oxus
valley (Asiatic Scythia). In addition, detachm entsof Scythians occupied other farflung regions, suchas northw est India and the eastern Asian sectionof the steppe, extending up to the Chinese borders.

lluling over such an extensive territory was only
possible thanks to the large scale use o f the riding
horse, which allowed rapid communication be­
tween widely separated areas. This innovation
explains why the Scythians became the first politi­
cal organizers in the history of the entire Eurasian
steppe. Prior to the use of riding horses, greater
political units could be established in large rivervalleys only, where boats fulfilled the same role,as in the Nile valley and also in the E uphrates
and Indus valleys.
It was between 750 B.C. and 500 B.C. th a t theindividuality of the Scythians emerged. They hadthen a mixed economy; some agriculture, large
scale stock-raising, (in which horse-breeding was
predom inant) and also mining and m etal working.
They lived under kings and princes whose principal
identifying emblem was the golden stag medal.
They always moved around on horseback and wore
close-fitting pantalons. T heir most im portant arm
was a longrange bow, having arrows fitted withtriangular m etal heads. Under the im pact of the
new equestrial armies, the Scythians evolved apeculiar defense system, consisting o f earthworks.
Its purpose was to render any sudden mounted
attack against hum an settlem ents impossible. The
system included a fortified ram part or dike witha deep and wide ditch, filled with w ater on its
outside. The ram part was then planted withthorny hedges, shrubs and trees. These fences
extended for hundreds of miles and surroundedthousands of acres of soil as well, to keep the
livestock protected against predators. This Scyth­ian m ilitary strategy set the pattern for the entire
steppe-population and was to remain unchanged
for centuries to come.

2. Scythians in Hungary
Owing to the growing pressure of the Sarmatians, another m ounted steppe people, the E uro­pean Scythians slowly drifted westward. They
percolated through the Carpathians, and gradual­
ly brought the G reat Hungarian Lowland, thewestermost fringe of the great Eurasian natural
grassland, under their control. They soontransported hereto their royal seat and thus H un­gary became the center o f Scythian rule. The first
Scythian group reached H ungary around 550 B.C.
They were called A gathyrsi and have establishedcampsites in the Upper Maros region. They were
followed by other groups, occupying m any placeson the Great Plain, the Transylvanian plateau andin the Bukk and M atra area. The Scythians were
the first D anubian people to establish effective ruleover the entire population of Hungary. Thus, theCarpatho-D anubian basin was first unified politi­
cally by them. During their rule in Hungary (c.
500 B.C. — 350 B.C.), the Scythians came into
contact with the aboriginal M agyar population on

;i large scale, through intermarriage. Following
I h i s historical process, all the M agyar speaking
PDimlation o f the Danube basin began to callt/icmselves “Scythians”, an appellation th a tstrongly influenced the view of the medieval
I hroniclers, who considered the M agyars as a Gens
Scythica. The long stay in Hungary of the Scythi ; i n ruling clan is evidenced by the most beautiful
Scythian treasure ever found, consisting of two
uold stags, discovered at Tapio-Szent-M arton andat Zold-Halom-Puszta respectively (Fig. 30-31).
The last m ajor detachm ent of Scythians entered(he land under the general name of Sarm ati (Sar-Fig. 31. .S cy th ia n gold -stag from Z5ld>Halom-Puszta
in an unusual posture. H ungary, Vth century B.C.

m atians). They are, however, m ost frequently
mentioned by their clan-names, as A lani, Yazigues
and Roxolani. The Yazigues settled in Hungary
in A.D. 20, and occupied the pasture-land between
the Danube and the Tisza rivers, where they
erected strong fortifications. Thanks to their inac­
cessible territory, they could preserve their au to n ­omous rule during the Rom an occupation of Pannonia and Dacia. They lost their ethnic identity
during the Hun period, but a large district anda county still retain their name.
The presence of Scythians in Hungary is super­
bly documented by the archaeological remains of
their civilization; grave-mounds and colossal de­fence installations. The grave-mounds or barrows
resulted from the earth they heaped up upon thetombs of their defunct leaders, kings or princes.
Grave-mound in H ungarian is Sir-H alom or sim­ply Halom. This term forms part of several dozens
of old place-names all over the country, such as
Herceg-Halom, ‘Prince’s M ound’; Zdld-HalomPuszta ‘Green Mound on the Steppe’ (there are
four such names), in one of them a precious gold
stag-medal was found, proving th a t the mound isreally a princely one; Sas-H alom ‘Eagle’s M ound’;Hegyes-Halom ‘Pointed M ound’ (two such
names); Szdz-H alom ‘Hundred M ounds’ (wherethe victims of a huge battle have been buried in
the Hunnic times). Until 1939, 85 Scythian burialsites were excavated in Hungary, a testim ony of
the numerous Scythians who were living there.

The innum erable remains of the former Scyth­ian defense system allowed the archaeologists toreconstruct its whole extension. The main line,
often in triple rows, started at the Danube elbow
at Vdc and proceeded eastwards along the n orth­ern edge of the G reat Plain through Eger and'Pokaj to Nyiregyh^za. At th a t point it turned
southwards, by-passed Szatm dr, Nagyvarad,
Gyula and Versec, and a t th a t level, it reachedthe Danube again. At certain strategically impor­
ta n t points, such as a t Sopron on the west, andthe region of Di6sgyor in the northeast, moreelaborate em bankm ents were constructed. Sec­
ondary or disconnected ditches existed near rivers
at crossings and fords (Garam, Vag, Maros, Temes,Olt), and in m ountain passes as well. The rectan­
gular rich land between the Danube and the Tisza
to the south was protected by triple lines on its
open northern side. The total length of the em ­bankm ents and ditches in Hungary exceeded
1700 km, while the enclosed and protected area
measured 62,000 km-. The building of these de­fence lines required the removal of 20,000,000 m ‘of earth (P 084 and P 102). The technical terms
for the various parts of the defence installations
were the following: the general name of earthen
stronghold was Fdld-Vdr; the ditch was Arok; theram part or em bankm ent was Gat; the fence orhedge on top of the em bankm ent Sdveny; theenclosure or area surrounded with entranchm ent
was Sane or Udvar. These technical term s occur

dozens in Old Hungarian place-names; one^nly to open the Directory of H ungary’s^ ^ 'n am es to be convinced about this. We have
I names as Duna-FoWudr, A rok Szallas, GdtSOveny-HAza., Sane, Sdnci-Puszta, SdncUdvar-Hely, etc.
•, ,^en was this system built and who were its^^rs? It is obvious th a t the whole system was^t'ected a t one time. Certain sections were, inProbability, completed during the last centuries
first millenium B.C., toward the end of^ian domination, when their rule was^.^^^tened. O ther parts were built by the Sarmathe successors of the Scythians proper, bewee^^ 2 5 0 and 300 A.D. Furtherm ore, the work
WHS 1%
Continued during the Hun period as well.
, . ^times the ditches’ names may give a clue to*^Uestion, which are in English: ‘Ditch of the
M en’^^ ’
Devil’, ‘Ditch of the Dark
theArka, Csorsz meaning ‘D ark’ in^ c a l parlance). Other names point to aperiod, such as ‘Ditch of the H uns’, ‘Road° , ^ila’, ‘Ditch of the Avars’ and ‘Rom an Em•'“ K e n t s ’.

tic emany mounds, and build such giganic^^H hen strongholds, it was necessary to havestan^^® central authority, unified planning, connum b
work and, above all, a great
not apeople for m anual work. It follows th a t^ "few” Scythians h a d come to live in HunQg
earlier erroneously supposed, but

“m any”: ordinary people, as well as kings andprinces.

3. The language of the European Scythians
Ancient authors, such as Herodotus, Strabo,
Plinius, Jordanes and others agree th a t all Scyth­ian people spoke the sam e language, and modern
scythologists have also accepted this view almost
unanimously. The controversy begins with thenext question, viz. w hat was this language andwith which language group was it affiliated? In
trying to solve this mystery, we will examine, inturn, common Scythian words recorded by foreignauthors, then Scythian ethnic and personal names,and finally Scythian symbols and other written
evidence.
One of our principal sources is, of course, Hero­
dotus who had such a keen interest in the Scythian
way of life th a t he undertook the tiresome journey
to Olbia on the Black Sea shore to find out more
about it. He noted th a t every Scythian carried
an inward curving sharp knife strapped to his boot,and called “A Cina Kesh”. In present graphic form,
this expression would be A csizma kes (The Boot
Knife), whose most im portant element Kesh,‘Knife’ is Kes in Hungarian as well. Herodotus also
relates th a t one of the Scythian names for Sungod
was Oetos-Ur-Us, which is also a Hungarian nameOtos Ur-Os ‘Num ber 5 D ivinity’, five being thesacred num ber of the Sungod, as already m en­tioned. The M aster also noticed th a t Upper
Scythia is often snow-covered in winter, for which
reason the soil is concealed from view for months.
And he adds th a t the Scythians call the snow­
flakes ‘feathers’. Similarly, in H ungarian the sameword FHhe is used for both the fine feathers andthe light snow-flakes.
The father of historiography was charmed withall th a t he had learned about the principal Scyth­ian river, the Dnieper, then called Danaber, some­thing like Tanya B or ‘River of the Field’ in H un­
garian. It was also called B or Ysthenes, which isagain a H ungarian name, meaning ‘Divine W ater’or ‘Fine W ater’. Then Herodotus lists a series ofargum ents why the river is so fine. This river “hasupon its banks the loveliest and most excellent
pastures for cattles; it abounds in the most deHcious fish; its w ater is most pleasant to the taste;its stream is limpid.” All these added expressions
bolster the Hungarian etymology of the word
Ysthenes. And the other part of the river’s name,‘Bor’, signifies in the local Sekeli-Hungarian dia­lect of Transylvania, ‘drinking w ater’, m ost often
of therm al origin.
Turning now to the Scythian ethnic and person­
al names, we again refer to Herodotus who says
th a t the name by which the Scythians above theBlack Sea called themselves, was Scoloti, whereas
the Assyrians called them Ishkusai or A shguzai

and the Greeks simply Skytoi. When these names
are placed back into their original spelling, accord­
ing to the phonetical evolution of the Hungarian,t hey prove to have been taken from the H ungarian
vocabulary. All the names in question term inate
with the adjectival suffix -i, which gives the namethe meaning of ‘originating from’, ‘coming from’or ‘native o f. It follows th a t the preceding word
m ust indicate the specific geographic area where
the Scythians formerly lived. In the case of Scoloti( < H.: Os-Kelet-i) this original homeland is ‘An­
cient O rient’ (the same as Chaldi, Khaldi), bywhich name Babylon was also called. The meaningof Ish-Kuza-i and Ash-Guza-i presents no diffi­
culty, when remembering the easy interchangeabi­lity of the kindred consonants K, G and H. It
means in H ungarian Os-haza-i ‘Originating fromthe Old Fatherland’, —again Mesopotamia, thesame geographic area. At first sight, less evident
is the etymology of Skytoi, which may be theGrecized form of the original H ungarian Szigeti‘Coming from the Isles’, a reference to their so­journ in the thousand islands of the rivers K ur
and Araxes in the southern Caucasus.
All the names analyzed were first given to the
Scythians while they were still living in the Cau­
casian region, busy reconstructing their political
set-up with various ‘blood-contracts’. They re­tained these names even later, when another of
their group settled in a similar region, around theother side of the Caspian Sea (in Touran). Because

of the m ultitude of isles in th a t area as well,
Ptolem y called it Insulae nationum , ‘Isles of N a­tions’. From the third century B.C. onward, when
the Scythians had already lived for generationsin their acquired ‘Scythia’, they were no longer
considered as newcomers, bu t as ‘natives’ in theirown country. Accordingly, they began to be called
Hon-i, or in ancient Hungarian spelling: H uni‘Natives’, ‘C ountry-M en’, again in plain Hungari­an. The first Scythian detachm ents posted on
H ungarian soil were the Agathyrsi, in the Upper
Maros valley, Transylvania. They were assigned
to frontier-guard duties, as their name clearly
implies: A Gath Yrsi < A Gat Orzo ‘Guardiansof Em bankm ents’. The last Scythian confeder­
ation of tribes to settle in Hungary were theYazigues: they settled between the Danube andthe Tisza rivers, in the southern central p art of
Hungary in A.D. 20. By trade, they were cattle
keepers and shepherds, as is proven by their name:
Yazigue < Jo szdg (or) being ‘C attle (keepers).
The list of Scythian ethnic denominations canbe completed by a few royal names with a clear
meaning. These are mainly the ones which include
the distinguishing word ‘A ryan’, Ur, Ar in H ungar­
ian, as Aria-Peita < A rja Fajta ‘King who is of
Aryan origin’; A ri-A ntus < A rja Honos ‘Aryan
Land Ancestor’; Scyl-Urus < UrOs ‘Szekely Ances­
to r’. All the foregoing details are sufficient toconvince the reader th a t the Scythians were m is­ju d g ed until now as fa r as their ethnic and lin-f’uistic identity is concerned. I t seems absolutely
certain to-day that they were M agyar tongued andbelonged to the once widely diffused Hungarianrace.
The written documents the Scythians left be­hind them bring fresh and decisive evidence to theabove conclusion. Amongst such documents, theoldest one is w ritten by the pictorial m ethod whichconveys abstract ideas by images of similar-sound­ing concrete objects, as has been indicated several
times. In Scythian practice, and also elsewhere,
the pictorial writing was mainly used to express
royal titles, such as Ancestor, Divine Ancestor. For
the former title, the image of an eagle was used,
whereas for the latter, th a t of a stag. The namesof these animals in Hungarian, Sas and Szarvas,
sounded, indeed, like A z Os and A z Ur6s respec­tively. This m ethod of identifying rulers by th a t
way was very widespread, especially in the firstmillenium B.C., so th a t a golden stag found ina Scythian mound was considered by archae­ologists as the supreme evidence of being connect­
ed with a royal tomb.
Because of inherent difficulties, pictorial writing
was rarely used for communication of messagesof any length; we know of only two such examples,both recorded by Herodotus. The first message
narrates how the newly acquired Scythian King­dom was inherited by Colaxis, the youngest of thethree sons of Targitaus, the conqueror (P 067 Book
V n cap. 64). God had strewn upon the earth, fromthe sky, four golden implements: a plough, a yoke,a battle axe (sagaris) and a drinking cup. The
Kingdom should be inherited by the one of thethree brothers who could pick them up. The twoelder brothers failed to do so because the gold
took fire as they approached it. But when theyoungest born neared the treasure, the flamessuddenly vanished, and he picked up the gold.
W hat was the divine message w ritten with these
golden objects? We can find out by writing down,
one after another, the names of the four items
inthe
Hungarianlanguage:
EKE.IGA.
SAGARIS.KUPA, which gives the following simi­
lar sounding sentence: E /K E IG /A S /A G A R IS /K EPE: E kOlydk az Egurds kepe ‘This child isthe deputy for the Heavenly Lord’. T h a t meant,in contemporary language, the Colaxis (the Child)m ust assume the title ‘God on E a rth ’, i.e. the royal
dignity. The children had understood the message
and they agreed to bequeath the kingdom to theyoungest born —says Herodotus.
The second known pictorial message of the
Scythians, also in the Hungarian language, wassent to King Darius in 512 B.C., when the latterinvaded Scythia to avenge the destruction of As­
syria, a hundred years earlier. As the Persianarmies bogged down, following the scorched earth
pohcy of the Scythians, Darius, to save face,declared th a t he would be satisfied with a symbolic
submission by receiving the usual water and earth
gift from the Scythian king. But, instead of therequired gift, the Scythian king sent Darius a bird,
a mouse, a frog and five arrows. The Persian kingthereupon consulted his chief advisors to find out
the meaning of the message. There was, indeed,
no doubt th a t this was a written document. The
advisors were divided in their interpretation: somedeciphered it as a peace-offer, the Scythian kingwould be willing to make to the Persians. Others
thought th a t the message contains a serious
threat, viz. th a t all the Persians will be killed witharrows. Darius agreed with the second reading and,panic stricken, left Scythia on one of the followingnights. To find out the meaning of the strange
message, we again write down the corresponding
Hungarian words: MADAR. EGER.BEKA. OT.
NYIL and we find the similar sounding, sentence:
M agyari ker beket ondla, ‘M agyar asks forpeace with him ’, exactly as the first group ofadvisors had deciphered the message. A second
interpretation is possible, when the word for mouse(eger) is replaced by another one for the same
animal, Sir, used by the kindred Komi (P 060 p.
19). In th a t case the message reads thus: M agyar
sirba ku ld nyillal ‘M agyar will kill thee witharrows’. And th a t was the way Darius himself
interpreted the intention of the Scythians.
Besides the pictorial writing, the Scythians werealso acquainted with the carved script and be­queathed us a unique message w ritten in th a t way.
It is engraved upon a silver dish 14 inches widefound near the town of Sakiz to the south of Lake

Urmia. It is decorated with anim al figures in a
row between two concentric circles. Its featured
decor was a golden horse, set in the centre. The
treasure was m eant for a wedding present offered
by a Scythian prince on the occasion of the m ar­
riage of King B artatu a or King Madyes, to an
Assyrian princess in the second half of the V llth
century B.C. (P 054 p. 106; P 123 p. 22 f.). The
script (reproduced in P 054 p. 109 and explainedin P 007 II p. 63 f.) reads thus in Hungarian: E
kis tdlcdt valaki bUkeziien neki adja; as eke 16‘This small tray is generously given to him bysomebody; its adornm ent is a horse’. After th a tfollows the value of the ware, in conformity toancient uses and customs. Now, the expression ‘its
adorm ent is a horse’ conceals the identity of thedonor as SekeU, ‘a Siculi’.
Finally, we m ust mention th a t the Scythians
probably had studied and used Greek letters as
well, proof of which are two coins of the Indian
Saka-dynasty (first century B.C.). On one of thecoins the following Magyar words appear:
TURANNO UNTOS ‘ERAOY and on the otherside: SAKA KOGGANOI. On the second coin:
YRKODOY MAKAROV, and on the back:
SK ’W R (i.e. SAKA UR), (transliteration in P 059
p. 133). According to the present H ungarian ortho­
graphy, the inscriptions would read thus: 1. Turdni
Honds, Kirdly — Szekely kagdn ‘Touranian land-ancestor, — Siculi kaghan’ and 2. Uralkodoja

M agyar — Szekely ur' ‘Its ruler is a Magyar, a
Siculi Prince’.
The three kinds o f writing illustrated —pictori­al, carved a n d alphabetical — definitely prove ourprevious statement: that the Scythians were a
H ungarian-speaking people, literate and skillfulin writing.

4. Who were the Kelti or Celts?
History books tell us, th a t around 300 B.C. thename ‘Scythian’ abruptly vanished from circula­tion, and th a t per contra, the Kelti name madeits appearance at about the same time. Is there
any connection between the two phenomena? No­
body knows with any certainty, in spite of ample
available m aterial for the study of Celtic problems.
In Hungary alone, for example, over 590 Celtic
sites were discovered until 1976, — says Mikl6s
Szab6, author of a book on the Celts in Hungary(P 119 pp. 36 and 16). The basic two volume
publication of Henri H ubert (P 070) gives a great
deal of factual information about the general
history of the Celts, bu t is already somewhat
antiquated. Two smaller recent works, the com­prehensive study of Venceslav K ruta (P 083) andJan Filip (P 049) respectively are far from able(o fill the gap. None of the authors mentioned
look full advantage of the invaluable help topo­

nymy offers to scrutinize the Celtic place-, ethnic
and personal names, although such names are
copiously recorded even in J. Caesar’s De bello
Gallico. Furtherm ore, Celtic inscriptions engraved
upon coins and other archaeological finds were also
not taken into due consideration. We even ignore
the m eaning o f the very name: Kelti.
As regards the ethnic identity o f the Celts, it
was thought, two generations ago, th a t they werean individual, original hum an species, i.e. men ofhigh statu re and fair complexion. To-day ourscholars are inclined to see in these ‘first Europe­ans’ rath er sm all-statured, lightly brownish complexioned ‘M editerraneans’. Again others are of
the opinion th a t the Celti were only a ruling classover the previously immigrated, predom inantly
pre-Indo-European population. Still others think
th a t the Celts were Indo-Europeans who strongly
mixed with the aborigines. We do not lack hypoth­eses, but the tru th is, as V. K ruta puts it: "Forthe time being, there exists no indisputable evi­
dence for the ethnic appurtenance o f those whohave been called the ‘Princes of the first Iron A g e”
(P 083 p. 64).
In the present state of our researches, we m ust
make use of circum stantial evidences to learn more
about the ethnic identity of the Celts. A closer
look a t the m anifestations of Celtic civilization,
convinces us th a t they contained no new feature;
all their m ost striking characteristics having al­
ready been evident in the previous, Scythian civili-

/at ion. These included the fortified place protectedl)v embankments, ditches and hedges, the multiI i i d e of animal images which pervaded their arts,
I l i e use of horses and sunworship, a heritage fromt h e New Stone Age. There was only one newaddition to Celtic culture: the extensive use of iron.
It follows th a t the ‘Celts’ m ust have been an
amalgam of the previous non-Indo-European in­
habitants of Europe. This is exactly w hat scholars
have discovered during the course of their compar­
ative studies. I t was found, indeed, th a t the Pictiof northern Scotland were already Celts — “early
Celts” — who called themselves by th a t word in
the form of Khaldes or Chaltis, which is the Kelti
in ancient graphic form (P 132 p. 139). J. Hawkes
also places the m akers o f the bell-shaped vessels
into the category of the Celts. There too, thepeoples o f the barrow-graves can be found (i.e.
the Scythians, P 049 pp. 16 and 20), and also theTuroni, who migrated from Central Europe to thebanks of the Loire (P 089 p. 11), as well as the
Secani, who went from Hungary to France, etc.
There were also peoples called Kelto-Scythians,
Kelto-Ligurians, Kelt-Iberi. Thus, it is evident,
th a t the Celts were not a new race in Europe,and the Celt or K elti name was used as acomprehensive designation o f the entire preChristian population o f Europe.^"^47. «La science considere aujourd’hui que les Celtes iu‘
constituent pas une race, dans le sens propre du ternic,

The huge and kindred Celtic mass of B.C.
Europe was linked together by a common language
as well, in addition to the above-mentioned identi­
cal elements of their civihzation. According to theestim ate of Camille Julien (Paris) “a hundred
million” Europeans spoke the Kelti language inthe second half of the first millenium B.C. Conse­
quently, there was no linguistic barrier in ancient
Europe.4^ In spite of these categorical statem ents,
nobody has, alas, identified the Celtic language,
nor proved its affiliation with any other. In th a t
respect we are still completely in the dark. The
reason? Nobody has yet approached the Celtic
problem with the Hungarian key. In the following,
we shall try to analyze the etymological meaningof the fundam ental word: Kelti.
Before us, Henri Hubert, the most eminent
French specialist of the Celts has made great
efforts to find out the meaning of the Celti name.
He carefully noted all the various graphic forms
in which this name occurred and concluded (1)th a t it reached its widest diffusion during the sixthand fifth centuries B.C., and (2) th a t it contains

maia ont toujours 6t6 un groupe de peuples, formant
un agr^gat de types du point de vue anthropologique»(P 057 p. 10; and see P 070 I p. X and P 132 p. 128).
48. The thesis of the linguistic unity of Celtic Europe isstressed by almost every author, as for example P 037
p. 12; P 057 pp. 10-12; P 070 I pp. 49, 51. The hundred
million Celts £U-e mentioned in the publication P 057
p. 11.

(he rootword Kel (Quel in French graphic form),"implying the idea to rise” (P 070 I p. 27). He
mentions this meaning as the most probable one,amongst m any other conjectures listed in a foot­note. He could, however, not go any farther in
his explanations, thus the question remained unsolved.^^In Hungarian the word K el signifies ‘to rise’ andKelet the cardinal point where the Sun rises, i.e.
‘Orient, E ast’. And the same word, when the -i
suffix is added as Kelt-i, Kelet-i m eans ‘He who
has come from the direction of the rising S un’,i.e. from the Orient. In ancient times, this word
was spelt in various ways, such as Chaldi, Chal­dean and Scoloti. Like most ancient Hungarian
ethnic names, it indicates no ethnic particularity,
but is merely a geographic appellation recalling
their previous fatherland. As such, it was a fitting
comprehensive name, because all the pre-IndoEuropean ethnic groups originated from the same
region: from the ancient Orient. Thus, the name
K elti or Keleti was the general term designating
all the H ungarian speaking ethnic groups whichh a d m igrated to Central and W estern Europe
from the ancient Orient since the New Stone Age.

49. Henri Hubert consoles himself by saying: «Rien d’^tonnant que ces noms soient difficile i expliquer et queleur sens etymologique se soit 6vanoui» (P 070 I p. 27
f.).

The Kelti were a very cultured hum an mass,to whom Europe owes a great deal. They were
the one who christened all the great rivers andm ountains of th a t continent, who designated theplaces of the future great cities, and planned thefirst network of communication. They were the‘first Europeans’. Had History given them anotherhundred years, they would have formed a great
unitary nation, centered around Gallia and H un­
gary. B ut this century had not been granted tothem. As is known, the Romans, “who have be­come the enemy of the race which founded it”,
literally destroyed this nation during its gestation.
The holocust of the Celts in Gallia was perpetrated
by Julius Caesar and his legions, in the first
century B.C., between 59 and 51. They system at­
ically massacred all the political leaders of th a tnation, their soldiers and priests, killing altogether
three millions and setting fire to eight hundred
towns and villages. After that, the people were
economically ruined, terrorized, assimilated andRomanized. The history o f Europe does not knowo f any other sim ilar killings. Yet, Caesar h a d been
whitewashed by historians o f all his crimes andstands before us as a “Great European". Only theK elti in Hungary were capable to outlive thecentury o f hell in Europe.

THE HUN-HUNGARIANS

1. The Roman and Germanic influence upon
the ethnographic conditions in the
Carpatho-Danubian basin
1. The peaceful penetration of Magyar-speaking
Oriental tribes into the Carpatho-D anubian region
was interrupted after the Scythian and Celtic
periods and was replaced by armed interventions
from the West. First came the Romans, an imperi­
alist people. After having created a solid basis on
the Apennine peninsula, they gradually extended
their dom ination over the entire M editerraneanarea during the second and first centuries B.C.
Thereafter, for growing security and economic
reasons, they extended the frontiers of their Em ­pire up to the Danube, which m eant, for Hungary,
the occupation of her western province, Transdanubia. After a difficult and long war (from 12 B.C.
to 9 A.D.) they besieged it and about fifty years
later converted the conquered land into a Roman
province, under the name of Pannonia. They ruled
this province for about four hundred years, andthen gradually handed it over to the Huns, be­tween 409 and 433.

The Kelti were a very cultured hum an mass,to whom Europe owes a great deal. They were
the one who christened all the great rivers andm ountains of th a t continent, who designated theplaces of the future great cities, and planned thefirst network of communication. They were the‘first Europeans’. Had History given them anotherhundred years, they would have formed a great
unitary nation, centered around Gallia and H un­
gary. B ut this century had not been granted tothem. As is known, the Romans, “who have be­come the enemy of the race which founded it”,
literally destroyed this nation during its gestation.
The holocust of the Celts in Gallia was perpetrated
by Julius Caesar and his legions, in the first
century B.C., between 59 and 51. They system at­
ically massacred all the political leaders of th a tnation, their soldiers and priests, killing altogether
three millions and setting fire to eight hundred
towns and villages. After that, the people were
economically ruined, terrorized, assimilated andRomanized. The history o f Europe does not knowo f any other sim ilar killings. Yet, Caesar h a d been
whitewashed by historians o f all his crimes andstands before us as a “Great European". Only theK elti in Hungary were capable to outlive thecentury o f hell in Europe.

THE HUN-HUNGARIANS

1. The Roman and Germanic influence upon
the ethnographic conditions in the
Carpatho-Danubian basin
1.
The peaceful penetration of Magyar-speaking
Oriental tribes into the Carpatho-D anubian region
was interrupted after the Scythian and Celtic
periods and was replaced by armed interventions
from the West. First came the Romans, an imperi­
alist people. After having created a solid basis on
the Apennine peninsula, they gradually extended
their dom ination over the entire M editerraneanarea during the second and first centuries B.C.
Thereafter, for growing security and economic
reasons, they extended the frontiers of their Em ­pire up to the Danube, which m eant, for Hungary,
the occupation of her western province, Transdanubia. After a difficult and long war (from 12 B.C.
to 9 A.D.) they besieged it and about fifty years
later converted the conquered land into a Roman
province, under the name of Pannonia. They ruled
this province for about four hundred years, andthen gradually handed it over to the Huns, be­tween 409 and 433.

W hat interests us, regarding the Rom an ruleof Pannonia, is to ascertain w hat h a d happened
to the large M agyar-speaking population there.
In th a t respect, we m ust first recall th a t the
Rom an conquest was prom pted by strategic con­siderations and its military character was predo­
m inant up to the very end. Above all, the Romans
wanted to build a strong military barrier along
the Danube. Secondly, the province’s Rom an gov­
ernors were not as blood-thirsty and ruthless as
was Julius Caesar in Gaul. Thanks to these cir­
cumstances, the Rom an conquest was neither fol­
lowed by wholesale massacres of the inhabitants,
nor by the exterm ination of the upper classes, nor
by the colonization of the land by a Latin-speaking
population. The former tribal structure of thesociety was m aintained, including local adminis­
tration (P 087 pp. 112, 117). The legions whichwere keeping watch on the Danube, and thevarious auxiliary personnel employed for guarding
the military roads were mostly manned by a local
population, including their commanders. More­over, w hat was no less im portant: the Romans
did not suppress the native beliefs. Thus, once thewar was over, life, on the whole, followed its
ancestral course. Taking all th a t into account, ourscholars evaluated the effect o f R om an rule inPannonia, from an ethnographic point o f view,as harmless.
Those who studied Hungarian life in Pannonia
under Roman rule more closely, have pointed out

certain linguistic facts which evidence the survivalof the H ungarian language. The very name of theland Pannonia, for example, is a Hungarian com­pound with Pan and Hon ( = H .: Fenn-Hon)
meaning ‘Upper L and’. The most im portant city
was Savaria, so named after the Sungod (of. Savitra, Savarna, P 044). In th a t city, God was wor­
shipped in a great temple, which had an immense
Sundisc above its altar. The present-day villageof Szabar, near ancient Savaria, probably retains
the ancient city’s names.
For the survival of the H ungarian language
under the Rom an rule, it is highly significant th a t
the Rom an emperors, coming from Pannonia, used
H ungarian throne-names, as did H ad-R i-A nus(117-138), A ur-E li-Anus (270-275), Val-Eri-Anus(253-260), and Sev-Erus (193-211). In these names
the H ungarian component -Anus (= Honos) often
appears, meaning ‘Country Ancestor’, or the word
-Erus (Uros) ‘Divine Ancestor’. It is not surprising
to find so m any H ungarian traces in Pannonia,
since the political and military centre of the
Rom an Empire was, in the third and fourth cen­turies A.D., no longer in Rome, but in Pannonia
and Illyria instead. During this time, these prov­
inces, or rath er their inhabitants, supplied the best
soldiers, governors, and emperors, and also
‘R om an’ virtue.
After the conquest of Pannonia, the Romans
conquered the eastern p art of Hungary as welland emperor T rajan converted it to anotherRom an province named Dacia. The emperor per­sonally conducted the military operations (101105). The occupation of this land was actuallyprompted by economic reasons: the Rom ans
wanted to lay their hands upon the abundant
supply of gold, silver, copper and salt which wasmined there. Dacia’s occupation was, however,short lived, lasting about a century and a half.
Indeed, the province had to be abandoned in 271,
when Rom an personnel was evacuated and w ith­drawn to the southern shore of the Danube. The
three most im portant Dacian cities, SarM izegeth-Usa, Napo-Ca, and A-Pu-Lum haveclear Hungarian meanings. The first name would
be in present spelling Sdr-M ezdket-Aso (city)‘Where gold fields are dug’, the second N ap-Kd‘Sun C ity’, and the third A Fd L6 (varosa) ‘(City)of the Principal Horse’, also a Sun city.
The Roman never subjected the m ountainous
northern section of Hungary, nor the great Central
Plain, between Pannonia and Dacia, to their rule.
The tribes living in th a t p art of the land m ain­tained their independence. So, Roman domination
passed w ithout vital harm in Dacia as well. But,
by dismembering the C arpatho-D anubian land
into three parts, they retarded the unification of
the diverse social groups into a single nation, aprocess which h ad been going on since Scythiantimes. Thus it happened that the territorial re-unification o f the entire Carpathia area and thebuilding o f a nation befall the next generation ofgreat leaders: K ing A ttila and Prince Arpad.
2.
Shortly after the Roman Em pire’s entry into
the C arpathian basin, Germanic tribes also began
their penetration into the land. They started fromtheir northwestern homeland Scandia (Scandina­via) pushing eastwards on the East-European
table-land until they had reached the River Don
in the third century A.D. They were called Goths,
and formed two separate groups, the Ostro-Goths
and the Visi-Goths. A third Germanic tribal feder­
ation, the Gepids, was formed inside the C arpath­ians, in Transylvania, above the Maros river, as
far as the Tisza.
The appearance of Germanic tribes in Eastern
and Central Europe filled the Rom ans with fear,so they encouraged the Huns, who were also
threatened, into action. The tense situation pro­voked the armed intervention of the Huns in 375.
After this, Germanic rule crumbled away and theHuns gained control over all eastern and central
Europe. This is all well known in history, so th a t
we do not need to discuss it. B ut less known isthe ethnic build-up of the Germanic tribes inquestion. It is, indeed, a false assumption th a t theGermanic tribes were as fully Germanic in Eastern
and Central Europe as they were when invading
continental Europe from Scandinavia around
Christ’s birth. The explanation is obvious: when
the Germanic tribes started for the distant adven­ture, they usually travelled w ithout women folkand therefore strongly mixed with local population
during their wanderings. T h a t had the effect, th a t
within three or four generations, they were acompletely different people from the one th a t set
out. The following short analysis will show how
the Germanic tribes mixed with H ungarians when
they reached the domain of the M agyar ethnicbody.
The name Gepida was given to the confeder­
ation of Germanic tribes which occupied northeas­tern Hungary. It has no accepted etymology in
the Germanic language, but has in Hungarian,
where Gyep-i Ta means ‘(Men) of the Grass-Land’,
where the Gepids actually lived. And in the caseof the Visi-Goths, which name is supposed tosignify ‘West G oths’ in the Germanic language,
the H ungarian gives again a more plausible expla­
nation. In it Visi (in to-day’s H ungarian Vizi)
means ‘Those who live near water courses’, which
was again true of the Goths. The Germanic ethnic
identification symbols were also taken over fromthe local population, particularly the eagle, typicalsymbol of the steppe population, and also birds
in general. We should also not forget th a t Gothic
script, the so-called Runen, was a simplified M a­gyar carved script. Its German name originatedfrom the Hungarian word roni ‘to carve’. Thus,
we should agree with the statem ent of Gyula
Laszld, according to which “the scant upper classof the Goths, the conquering layer, underw ent an
alm ost complete transform ation under the impact

of local traditions and customs” (P 087 pp. 161164). The modified social structure of the Goths
and Gepids was one of the main reasons why they
accepted to stay in the C arpathian land so readilyeven after the H un conquest, faithfully serving
their new king A ttila. All th a t considerably modi­
fies the image we had of the migration of theGermanic peoples, a t least in the sector of south­
eastern Europe. It altogether confirms th a t theaboriginal H ungarians could keep their own eth­
nic identity unchanged. A n d that was the mostim portant feature o f the M iddle Danube basin on
the eve o f the coming o f the Huns.

2. The coming o f the Huns
The Huns emerged in history as an Oriental
people living on the pastures of the Oxus rivervalley, to the south of the Aral Sea. However, inthe second century A.D., most of them had alreadyskirted the southern end of the Caspian Sea andwere in possession of the land above the Caucasus
m ountains up to the m outh of the Don river, thesteppeland of former Scythia. T heir westward
move was prompted by fatal climatic changes
which transform ed their cradle-land (Touran) intoa semi-desert. Increasing tem peratures resulted ina considerable reduction of the w ater supply and(he grass of the fields vanished. T hus the Huns,
living from animal husbandry, had to move andlook for new grazing land. At the same time, as
ju st mentioned, Germanic tribes were advancing
eastwards on the great European Plain, by
occupying more and more pasture, until they too
had reached the river Don and came in directcontact with the Huns.
Alarmed by their double misfortune, the Huns
felt th a t their very existence was being threatened
and th a t provoked their violent reaction. Under
their first great king Balamber, they attacked theOstro-Goths, their nearest adversaries, and swiftly
broke their power. T he Ostrogothic ruling class
took refuge in Pannonia and proceeded to Italya little later. The bulk of the Gothic population,
however, subm itted to the Huns and was incorpo­
rated into their politico-military system as a sepa­
rate entity under its own leaders. The next
Germanic tribal federation, the Visi-Goths, locatedon the northern bank of the Lower Danube, seeing
the defeat of their brethren, offered no resistence,but gave up their land, crossed the Danube andentered into the Rom an Empire. Thus, the Huns,
with a single sweeping action, arrived a t the foot­hills of the C arpathian m ountains in 375 A.D.
Immediately thereafter, the Huns began plan­ning the occupation of the last western segmentof the great Eurasian steppeland, the C arpathian
Lowland, inside the m ountainous arc, by conclud­ing pacts and alliances with their kindred tribes:
the Yazigues in the Danube-Tisza quadrangle, theSkirs ( = Sikeli) in the western half of the country.

the Carpodari in Upper Hungary, as well as with
the Rom ans themselves, whose famous general
Aetius became their most im portant ally. By vir­tue of these m ultiple alliances, the Huns gained
control of the whole basin inside the Carpathians,
w ithout employing military force. Since the land
was given over to Hun sovereignty peacefully,
w ithout war, and with the blessings of Rome, thelocal population had no particular reason to expeet
hardship. It remained intact and offered its ser­vices to the Hun king, a friend of Rome. The Huns
set up their perm anent head-quarters in the heartof the land, at the confluence of the rivers Tisza
and Maros, wherefrom King O ktar (-1-430), King
Ruga ( + 434) and thereafter King A ttila (-1-453)
governed their extensive empire. Thus, with thecoming o f the Huns, Rom an and Germanic do­
minions in Central Europe were liquidated andthe aborigines liberated.
Aetius continued to court the Huns, even after
their installation in Hungary, encouraging themin their westward advance, in order to ease theGermanic pressure on the northern borders of the
Roman Empire. For the Huns, the prospect of a
possible extension of their sway upon the wholeof Europe was an alluring offer, but, as it turned
out, a miscalculation. King A ttila was unable to
win a clear victory in the great battle at Mauriacum, near Troyes, France, in 451. The immense
efforts this war required in men and material, andthe authoritarian m anner A ttila handled his sub­alterns, overstrained the socio-political structureof his realm. So, when A ttila suddenly passed awayin 453, his empire crumbled, in large p art becauseof the intrigues and rebellion of the Germanic
tribes. A ttila’s sons were defeated in the struggle
for the succession (455) and returned with theirclans and kinsmen to Scythia, the tra c t of land
above the Black Sea, beyond the Carpathianranges. They did not, however, forget their ancientgrandeur and Prince Csaba, the youngest son of
A ttila, as soon as he was back in the old country,
began to spread the idea of an armed return toPannonia (= Hungary), to take revenge upon theGermans, whom they considered as the main a rti­
sans of their defeat. On his death-bed, he boundhis people by oath, to return to Hungary, as soon
as they had gathered enough strength, to rebuilda Hun state. Thus, the Huns did not disappear
as it was sometimes surm ised in certain historicalbooks. They stayed in the immediate neighbour­hood, waiting until the clock would strike the houro f their return. This m om ent arrived in 568.
At th a t time, a strong federation had come into
being with the fusion of two great tribes: the A variand Chunni consisting mostly of white Huns. The
name Avari ( < H.: A var-i) means ‘He who comesfrom an embanked stronghold’, and Chunni( < H.: Hun-i, i.e. Hon-i), Huns. J. Thury, a H un­
garian historian, established th a t 37 different
sources identify the Avars ethnically as Huns
(P 059 pp. 113,128). In the Carpathian basin, they

mainly occupied the G reat C entral Plain and
T ransdanubia and also considerable parts ofpresent-day Austria and D alm atia. The A vars
kept their empire and their independence until
796, when they were defeated by the Franks underCharlemagne, who destroyed their State, whereby
the pendulum swing, once again, westward.

3. The ethnic identity o f the Huns
The true identity of the Huns has not yet beenclearly established: “We know nearly nothing
about their early history” and “the history of
A ttila is still to be w ritten” (P 061 p. 127). Ourevidence on the anthropological build-up of thisnation is scanty, because the Huns cremated theirdead, thereby leaving no direct anthropologicaltraces of them. Hence, w hat we know about themcomes mostly from second-hand records. In con­tem porary and later accounts, the Huns are said
to be of mixed origins, like all nations with an
Oriental background. A m ajor proof of this, as is
usually pointed out, was their skin colour which
was generally brownish, although there were typi­
cal white Huns as well. Their colour difference
subsisted even in the fourth and fifth centuries,
which indicates th a t the fusion of the two racialelements of this people had not yet been achieved
a t th a t time. This state of their ethnic evolution
explains why they were not only called by theircommon name Huni, but also by other names
which emphasize their racial origin. They werecalled K ush when their darkish colouring was moreevident (P 092 pp. 14 f., 19-22), andA o'O 'is ( < H.:
Uri, Ari), when the white complexion predomi­
nated. King A ttila is described in the chronicles
as a short-statured, darkish complexioned man, of
haughty walking."''*The various appellations of the Huns all havesome significance in the Hungarian language.
T heir m ost frequent H uni ( < H.: Hon-i) name,often written w ithout H as Unni, Uni, means ‘He
who lives in the same land’, i.e. who is a nativeof the country, a compatriot. It is a geographic
and political term, irrespective of racial origin, as
were also the previously analysed names of M a­gyar, Hungar, Siculi and Kelti. Thus, the main
connecting link amongst all these peoples was theircommon H ungarian language and their identical
Oriental origin. Therefore, they mixed easily, once
they were placed under a same sovereignty. And
there can be no m istake if A ttila is referred toas the King of H ungary {rex Hungariae), sincethe Huni were considered as Hungarians {Hunisive Hungari).
In addition to their general names (Huns, Kush,
Hungarians) the various factions of this people
50. “Erat enim rex Ethele colore teter, oculis nigris etfuriosis, pectore lato, elatus incessu, statura brevis,
barbam prolixam cum Hunnis deferebat” (P 120 I p.
151).

also came under local d e n o m in a tio n s .T h e s esecondary names were mainly noticed after thecollapse of the Hun Empire, when several smaller
political entites came into being. These names
usually included the distinctive word -Ag-Ur‘R uler of the branch so and so’. Examples: KutziAg-Ur, Hun-Ag-Ur, Sdr-Ag-Ur. T he ethnic iden­tity of the Huns is nevertheless best evidenced bytheir own written records, which we discovered andwhich we are now going to analyse in more detail.

4. Hun-symbols and w ritten records
It is often assumed th a t the Huns were an
illiterate, barbaric people who left no written
records. This opinion actually stems from theinability of scholars to identify and decipher theirscript. In fact, as shown below, the Huns be­queathed us with a considerable am ount of written
records, most of which turned up in Hungary, theone-time centre of their vast empire. A part fromsources of archaeological provenance, diplomaticrecords also mention their ability to write and toread. We have, in this respect, the rare testimonyof Priscos Rhetor, one of the most credible ob51. Author Agathias writing about the Hunnorum Gens says
this: “Hi vero omnes communiter Scythae et Hunni
vocabantur, privatim autem, secundum nationes alii
aliter ex patria cuique et usita appellatione nominabantur”, quoted by P 092 p. 130.

servers of the Huns, who led an embassy to thecourt of King Attila. He mentions in his reportth a t the King requested the extradition of certain
fugitive Huns, whose names he read out in his
presence from sm all wooden sticks, from the By­zantine emperor. Another proof of the H uns’ w rit­
ing abihty is the fact th a t the incised or carved
script was always called a “Hun writing”, “Hunletters” and “Alphabet of the H uns” in Hungary.
The legend about illiterate Huns m ust be aban­
doned.
Most existing Hun inscriptions have gold as
supporting m aterial and as such display a solemn
character. But the daily records which Priscos
R hetor himself had mentioned were made on woodor on other perishable m aterial, which deteriorated
and are now lost for ever. Another preliminary
question to be answered is whether the existing
Hun inscriptions, especially those engraved upon
expensive materials, could have really belonged tothem a t all. We have no reason to doubt this, since
our historical sources are positive in stating th a t
the Hun kings were, in general, fond of gold, like
all Oriental rulers. We read in these records th a t
A ttila’s dining table was made of solid gold, andhis cooking dishes were also of g o l d . T h e same
sources mention the existence of a huge Hun
golden treasure, which later on became the prop-

52. “Mensa erat tota aurea, vasa etiam coquinaria aurea
erant”, - records Simon de Keza (P 120 I p. 262).

erty of the H ungarian kings by law of succession
and was always kept in Hungary, a t the royalcourt. The treasure included the legendary swordof Attila, the so-called Sword of God, implying
A ttila’s divine origin. Moreover, Hungarian medi­
eval charters certify th a t O ttokar H of Bohemia
was asked to restitute all the gold to the Kingof Hungary, which his grandm other, Ann of Masovia, unlawfully carried away from Hungary to
Bohemia. Amongst these precious jewels “was an
expensive gold dish, adorned with the finest andmost beautiful precious stones, as well as m anyother famous jewels, which were kept in Hungary
from the time o f A ttila, king of Hungary, and his
successors until now."-''^ The listed d ata dispel eventhe slightest doubt one may have th a t A ttila had
been the owner of gold dishes and other precious
jewels, which were inscribed.
On the following pages we will show a few Hun
symbols, to begin with, which were used for the
purpose of identifying the ruler by means of homo­phony, i.e. the pictorial m ethod of writing which
was common to all Oriental rulers during Antiqui­ty. A ttila’s best known such symbol was the AstUr bird, whose image he wore on his shield. This
word sounds like Est-Ura, ‘Ruler of the W est’.
This title may have originated from the time when
he was only ruHng the western half of the Hun
53. Clenodia aurea que a tempore regis Ungariae Attila etab aliis successoribus suis usque nunc in Ungaria fuerant
conservata” (P 099 p. 187 f.).

Empire, his brother Bleda having been in chargeof the eastern part. Furtherm ore, A ttila was also
called God’s Whip, which is another play on soundfor the same title, whip being Ostor in Hungarian,homophonic with Est-Ur. Finally, a widely used
Hun badge was the stylized insect having theoutlines of a bee (H.: Meh), which identified its
bearer (Ur, Ar), as M eh-Ar, i.e. M ahar or M a­gyar.
A nother group of Hun-identifying objects con­sisted of quadrupeds: mostly dogs, foxes, andwolves. They were used as totems, designating theclan from which they had originated. On the basisof such assumed names, certains Huns could haveconsidered themselves as “Sons of the Dog” or“Sons of the Fox”. King Ruga was probably ‘Fox’(H.: R oka), while King O ktar may have been
‘Mr. Dog’ (H.: A kutya ur). T he speech of theHuns, especially their battle-cry, was said to re­semble “the roaring of Hons” (P 099 pp. 64, 147,
178).^->

54. It should be noted, once again, that the ancient royal
Egyptian symbols also included the bird, the whip andthe bee.
55. Incidentally, ancient Egyptian kings had the same cus­
tom: “The warrior kings of the XVIIIth and X lX th
Dynasties were pleased when the court scribes related
in commemorative inscriptions how their lords raged androared like lions as they mounted their chariots andset out to crush the foolish enemy” (P 026 I p. 25 f.)

The author has deciphered several of the H un
inscriptions which are engraved upon gold dishes,found at Nagy-Szent-Mikl6s, to the south of theriver Maros, which was the central district of the
Hun Empire. The cache was discovered in 1791and yielded 23 pieces (dishes, juges, goblets, etc.),
all made of soHd gold, weighing altogether 9,925 gr.
The commodities were probably not for everyday
use, because they are conserved in alm ost perfectcondition, w ithout any trace of wear or tear. It
is likely th a t the purpose of these jewels was rather
to preserve im portant historical messages for theprogeny, like royal records. In addition to theindividual inscriptions, five richly adorned vessels(numbered 9, 10, 17, 22 and 23) bear an identicalshort script. It always reads from right to left andwas written in memory of the goldsmith who madethe decorations: pictures and interwoven figures.
The script (Fig. 32) reads in Hungarian thus: aR-U
Ke-Pe.T 1 T.eR.eK U.N CSi-Na.Ta, in present
H ungarian orthography: Arii kepet egy derek hun
csindlta, in English: ‘The adornm ent of this article
was made by a skilled H un.’Fig. 32.

.<H.<F(+I.<6 .CC .+M .<]+.+F .<iO
Fig. 33. H ungarian language m essage engraved upona H unnic gold tray. Treasure o f N agy-Szent-M ikl6s,
H ungary.

A longer inscription appears on a gold tray
(Fig. 33), marvellously adorned with a Tree of Life
(genealogical tree), flanked on both sides by two
stylized a tten d an t animals. In the higher ranking
position there are two dog-like creatures withpointed ears, and on the second one are twoquadripeds with birds’ beaks. The picture may
point out the two m ajor Magyar-speaking peoplesof Hungary a t th a t time: Huns and Magyars. The
one line inscription below the picture reads fromright to left and is transliterated thus: aD-iSZ.eN
iR-T eR.aN-O.Ni Ro.Ko.N-oK E.L-aT-Ne-Fe-Ke
E.L-T-eK J-U F6-T, in present H ungarian spelling
it would be thus: A diszen irt Irdn-honi rokonok
dllatnevekkel eltek; jo volt. Its meaning: ‘The
Iranian relatives represented on the ornam ent,
used to live under assumed anim al names; th a t
was an advantage.’
The longest inscription shown here is engraved
upon a golden dish of which there are two identical•(d .Na>. €lc S-y .Ha .c . n M "M \ r.jL .ATG .cuhr^n -M.<L(?

Fig. 34. The great seal o f King Oktfir th e Hun w ith
legend in H ungarian.

ones (Fig. 34). Its distinctive feature is an equilat­eral cross-sign, placed in the middle of the dish,and is surrounded by a circular inscription. It was
executed with great care, no doubt because it was
King O ktar’s royal seal, bearing his full title. We
shall not enter into discussing the complicatedmeaning of the cross-sign, but only of the script
itself, which reads counter-clockwise, starting a t
the 12 o’clock position. The transliteration of thesigns is thus: Ne.Te.T.I-K uN Ki.Rd O.K.T.aR
O.R-SZ-E-EGe A.Ra-K Jo.K-oN Ve-Te P-A.RaTo.K -T-O (l) Po.N -T.I-aK I.SZ.T(er) Vi-Te.Ki-EK O.Ra-Li-aK To.T-oK U-RA. In full Hungarian:Negyedik hun kirdly O ktdr orszdga. 0r6k jogon
vette bardtoktol. Pontiak, Ister videkiek, Uraliak,
Totok ura. In English: ‘Realm of the fourth Hun
king Oktar. He bought it from friends by heredi­tary right. He is the ruler of those living above
the Pontus (= the Black Sea), in the Ister(= D anubian) region, in the Ural area and of the
Slavonic peoples.’The last Hunnic inscription we will be discussing
was found outside Hungary. It is incised on thependant of a necklace found in Wolfheim, Rhein­land. The name of the village where it was found,signifies the ‘Dwelling Place of Wolves’, a typicalHun designation. The relic comes, in all probabil­ity, from a group of H uns who found refuge there
after the collapse of their Empire. The message
on it was preparaed with philological precision

(Fig. 35) and is transliterated thus: E.N-GaR N.E-N-eT.oL EL-O.N-A.N-aK Na.T.A-P.A
Ungdr nenitol Ilondnak, Nagyapa ‘From Aunt
Ungar to Helen, G randfather.’
The contemporary written documents of the
H uns constitute the decisive evidence that thesepeople were literate, having strong cultural rela­tions with ancient Egypt, and spoke Hungarian.
Their records repeatedly say that they originatedfrom the A ncient N ear E ast (Iran), and had
acquired their Carpathian land peacefully, by
virtue o f diplomatic accords.

Fig. 35. D edication incised upon the pendent o f a Hunnecklace in H ungarian. W olfheim , Germ any.

5. The bad image o f the Huns in Western
EuropeAfter all we have said about the Huns, thequestion th a t comes to mind is how could they
have had such bad press in western Europe to thisday. This hatred is focussed mainly upon KingA ttila, the most brilliant figure of his race, second­ly, upon the Hun people themselves.
As is disclosed from the analysis regarding thissubject (P 099 and P 072), chronicler Jordanes, am an of Gothic descent, started the defamation.
It was he who invented the tale th a t A ttila was
not a hum an being, but rather a monster, hornfrom the love o f a dog and a witch and h a d adoglike appearance (canis aspersus), with pointed
ears. This monster image has come into circula­tion, in all probability, through m isinterpretationof the Hun custom of using anim al symbols to
indicate their tribal or national appurtenance. So,
when the Huns said th a t they originated from awolf or a dog, the naive western priests and chronicle-writers took these expressions literally, andjustified their abhorrent image with the H uns’ own
words.
The H uns’ m onster image was confirmed by asecond feature, namely th a t God had selected the
Hun king to fulfill the ungrateful mission to be

God’s whip (flagellum Dei), a kind of Anti-Christ,
to punish, especially the Latin peoples, for theirwickedness and crimes. This second gossip origin­ated obviously from the m isinterpretation of the
H uns’ original symbol, the whip, which in theirsymbolism, m eant simply th a t A ttila was the rulerof West, as explained above. T hus the whip in thehand of A ttila had as little to do with a punishingmission as the one in the hands of Egyptian
Pharaohs. If Jordanes, this first western propagan­
dist, could have had the opportunity to travel
throughout the H un Empire, he probably would
have avoided spreading so much inconsistency
amongst his countrym en. Herodotus, almost athousand years earlier, did his reportage on the
Scythians more conscientiously. He spared notrouble and travelled to Olbia, on the Black Sea
shore, to gather firsthand information. The de­scription of Priscos R hetor is similarly much moreaccurate because he had m et A ttila personally.
Ordinary Huns were also heaped with slander.
It was asserted th a t they were subhum an beings,
the descendants of Scythian witches and of unspe­
cified devils, and th a t their way of life consisted
only of looting, perpetrating robberies and killings.
And their speech? Oh, they did not have any, theirm outh could only give out short and inarticulate
sounds like fleeing anim als.’’*’ This latest Hun-fea56. “Sie besassen keine Sprache, sondern stiessen kurze,rauhe Laute aus, wie Tiere auf der Flucht” (P 113 p.
17).

ture also originated from the miscomprehensionof the m etaphor, according to which the Hunbattle-cry was likened to the roaring of Uons, as
the ancient Egyptian kings have done when inbattle. To sum up, all the interpretations theWesterners invented reflect their naivety, lack o fexperience a n d a great deal o f bad faith.
The Hun armies never sacked Rome, the holycity of Christendom, although they could havedone so in 452, having arrived a t the gates of theCity. In the western interpretation this was notdue to A ttila’s orders, but to a miracle: the apostles
Peter and Paul appeared with shining sabres above
A ttila’s head, and this sight frightened the wouldbe robber who fled. Thereafter, the lucky city was,however, repeatedly robbed and burned by Ger­
manic tribes. First by the Visi-Goths of Alaric in
410 A.D., and then by the Vandals of Gaiseric in
455, when the two saintly apostles failed to pullout their sabres to chase away the real robbers.
B ut such argum ents would carry no weight withthe makers of m yths who persisted in their behef
th a t with the Huns, the scum of E arth had inun­
dated Europe.
The traditional Hun-phobia of medieval western
writers clouded the clairvoyance of the modern
historians as well who were unable to reason
otherwise and saw in A ttila the prototype of the
Barbar: the uncut, savage man who built nothing
and destroyed everything for the sake of destruc­tion. They forget th a t the mass-murderer Julius

Caesar was the true scourge of God in Antiquity,and th a t the words Vandal and VandaHsm, were
not a Hunnic, but of western origin. Fortunately,H ungarian historians have never accepted the
Hun-image elaborated by their western colleagues.
For them . King A ttila was the first great Magyar
ruler in Europe, who liberated their forefathersfrom the western yoke, stopped both Roman andGermanic penetration, and rolled back the in­vaders of the C arpatho-D anubian basin thus pre­serving the precious ethnic and political equilib­
rium in central Europe. H ungarian historians,
also, did not ignore the military genius of Attila,
and stated emphatically, th a t the Huns had not
only a highly developed culture, but th a t they had
doubtlessly surpassed western civilization which
was a t th a t time, in its darkest “dark age” (deca­
dence of the Rom an and Byzantine empires). Even
Charlemagne, the great Frankish ruler, could notsign his name.
We have to admit, however, th a t the western
historians o f today are m aking efforts to form amore truthful view o f the Huns, bringing it more
into harm ony with our modern scholarly stan ­dards. After this cleansing operation, all the incredi­
ble features of the H un-portrait have been dis­carded, notably those concerning the H uns’m onstruous origin, their animal language and theirso-called earthly mission. B ut it will be some time
until past conventional wisdom is replaced by the
results of modern research. As an illustration ofture also originated from the miscomprehensionof the m etaphor, according to which the Hunbattle-cry was likened to the roaring of lions, as
the ancient Egyptian kings have done when inbattle. To sum up, all the interpretations theW esterners invented reflect their naivety, lack ofexperience and a great deal o f bad faith.
The H un armies never sacked Rome, the holycity of Christendom, although they could havedone so in 452, having arrived a t the gates of theCity. In the western interpretation this was notdue to A ttila’s orders, but to a miracle: the apostles
Peter and Paul appeared with shining sabres above
A ttila’s head, and this sight frightened the wouldbe robber who fled. Thereafter, the lucky city was,however, repeatedly robbed and burned by Ger­
manic tribes. First by the Visi-Goths of Alaric in
410 A.D., and then by the Vandals of Gaiseric in
455, when the two saintly apostles failed to pullout their sabres to chase away the real robbers.
B ut such argum ents would carry no weight withthe makers of m yths who persisted in their belief
th a t with the Huns, the scum of E arth had inun­
dated Europe.
The traditional Hun-phobia of medieval western
writers clouded the clairvoyance of the modern
historians as well who were unable to reason
otherwise and saw in A ttila the prototype of the
Barbar: the uncut, savage m an who built nothing
and destroyed everything for the sake of destruc­tion. They forget th a t the mass-murderer Julius

Caesar was the true scourge of God in Antiquity,and th a t the words Vandal and Vandalism, were
not a Hunnic, b u t of western origin. Fortunately,
Hungarian historians have never accepted the
Hun-image elaborated by their western colleagues.
For them , King A ttila was the first great Magyar
ruler in Europe, who liberated their forefathersfrom the western yoke, stopped both Roman andGermanic penetration, and rolled back the in­vaders of the C arpatho-D anubian basin thus pre­serving the precious ethnic and political equilib­
rium in central Europe. H ungarian historians,
also, did not ignore the m ilitary genius of Attila,
and stated emphatically, th a t the Huns had not
only a highly developed culture, but th a t they had
doubtlessly surpassed western civilization which
was at th a t time, in its darkest “dark age” (deca­
dence of the Rom an and Byzantine empires). Even
Charlemagne, the great Frankish ruler, could notsign his name.
We have to admit, however, th a t the western
historians of today are m aking efforts to form amore truthful view of the Huns, bringing it more
into harmony with our modern scholarly sta n ­dards. After this cleansing operation, all the incredi­
ble features of the H un-portrait have been dis­carded, notably those concerning the H uns’m onstruous origin, their animal language and theirso-called earthly mission. B ut it will be some time
until past conventional wisdom is replaced by the
results of modem research. As an illustration ofthis process, we read, in a recent publication, theadmission th a t “the th rea t which they (the Huns)
had posed to western civiUzation has probably
been exaggerated” (P 104 p. 69). German authors
recognize th a t the Huns, as body-guards, weremore rehable th an their own fellow countrymen.^^It shall also be noted th at, after all, the central
figure of the German sagas was precisely A ttila(cf. Nibelungen-lied). Germans even w ant to claim
th a t A ttila was one of their kinsmen, his namebeing a Germanic word, meaning something like“D addy”."^^ It is really high time that the distorted
image o f the Huns, this dark blot on western
historiography, m ake way for some more serious
consideration, wherein the great-power status of
the H uns and their world-empire are acknowl­
edged a n d appreciated a t their proper value.

57. “Sie sind treuer and barter als die Germanen, sie kennen
nichts als den Konig” (P 113 p. 130).
58. “Der Name Attila ist heute zweifelsfrei als Germanisch‘Vaterchen’ erkannt”, Die Presse, Stuttgart, 20, May
1975.

THE MAGYAR HUNGARIANS

1. Massive influx of Magyars into the
Carpathian Land and the birth of
Hungary-I
After the collapse of the Hun rule in Hungary(453), the m ajor Germanic tribes of the country— Goths, Gepids and Longobards (the latter since
526 only), — set up individual principalities andquarreled violently amongst themselves. The Lon­gobards were striving for predominance but, nothaving the necessary strength to achieve it, askeda Hun faction of Eastern Europe to help them
defeat their rivals. W ith the support of this M a­gyar tongued faction called Avari (Avars), theLongobards drove out the Gepids, but felt so
insecure in their domain th a t they deemed it
advisable to evacuate Hungary. They actually fled
to Italy in 568, together with their families. Afterth at, the A va r H ungarians set up their own king­dom (568-803) in the entire Carpathian area. At
the beginning, the Avar Kingdom extended fromthe Don in the E ast to the E nns in the West.
L ater it shrank and covered only the Carpathianbasin, the Vienna Plain and the Bohemian Pla­teau.

There was much speculation about the ethnic
identity of the Avars. But it seems certain th atthey already spoke Hungarian when they first
appeared on the scene of history. T heir name
A vari ( < H.: A var-i) means, indeed ‘Those wholive in enclosures (Rings)’. And the throne-nam eof their first great ruler, under whose leadershipthey entered the C arpathian land, was Bajdn( < H.: Be-Jon), a homophon of ‘He who comesin’. More information is available about the ethnic
identity of the second Avar ethnic wave (670),
composed of “W hite H ungarians”, as is definitely
stated in the Russian chronicle of Nestor. The
vastness of Magyar hum an m aterial th a t settled
thus in Hungary a t th a t time is reflected by thegreat num ber of their graves which have been
excavated, 40,000. The newcomers occupied theedges of the G reat Central Plain, and Transdanubia, and also southern Hungary, i.e. the best arable
lands of the country. The seat of their government
was in Gyor ( < H.: Gyiiru = ‘Ring’), a strategi­cally located and well fortified stronghold a t theconfluence of the Raba river and the Danube. The
Hungarian chroniclers never use the term Avar
when speaking about them. They call them simply
Hungarians, as do the m ajority of W est-European
chronicles as well. They add, a t best, a few adjec­
tives for the sake of a clarification, like “Avars
who are called Hungarians” (Avari qui dicuntur
Ungari); “Avars who are called Huns and H ungar­
ians as well” {Avari qui et H uni sive Hungari).

By the same token, un Avar king is mentioned
with the title of “King of H ungary”. The latterhas been a famous ruler because his daughter
Berthe became the wife of Pepin and subsequently
the m other of Charlemagne. The quoted dataclearly suggest th a t from 670 onwards, the M a­gyars already formed a united nation in the Carpatho-D anubian basin and had an organized S tate
headed by kings. T h a t was a historical event, andthis explains why Prince Arpad could set up asmoothly working S tate-apparatus so easily after
his entry into the land. For him, the help of the
Hungarians in the Rings was inevaluable.
The Avar-Hungarian kingdom lasted for about
two and a half centuries. Afterwards, the reorgan­
ized Frank Empire resumed past Germanic expan­
sion toward the E ast under the half-HungarianCharlemagne (771-814) who organized a series ofrazzias against Hungary between 796 and 803 anddestroyed its central government. Charlemagne
was not much interested in territorial gains. He
preferred to loot the Rings, where the nation’s
treasures —gold, silver and precious stones —wereguarded. On a single occasion, for example, he‘collected’ so much treasures th a t 14 wagons wereneeded to cart them away from Hungary. Chron­icler Eginard (Einhard) commented on th a t big
haul by saying: “According to hum an memory,there was no earlier war in which the Franks havebecome as wealthy as ju st now; for until now, they
were poor” (cf. P 098 pp. 113, 240).

As regards the M agyar population of Avar-Hungary, it survived the loss of their S tate and contin­
ued to live alm ost undisturbed. The largest adm in­istrative unit which continued to function was th atlocated around Lake Ferto, a rather swampy re­gion in western Hungary. It was last mentioned
in 873. A second surviving m ini-state was the realmof T udun, in Upper Hungary. This one endured
until the coming of Arpad in 895. The harm ful
consequence of Frankish incursions into Hungary
was the creation of a politico-military vacuum ina so vitally strategic pa rt of Central Europe, whichcaused a lot of inconveniences both to the local
population and to the Germans as well. Therefore,
emissaries were sent to the East-European Arpad
Hungarians even by the German king Arnulf who
urged them to come in to help stabilize the situa­tion. The craving for a new unifier was fulfilled
in 895, with the entry on the scene o f Prince Arpad.
H is coming opened a new chapter in Central
Europe’s history.

2. Hungary’s ethnographic and politicalconditions in the IXth century
1.
In the previous chapters we have explained
how Magyar-speaking ethnic groups continuously
poured into the Carpathian land, ever since Neo­lithic times. They came in successive waves, inincreasing numbers and under various denomina­
tions: Magyars, Szekely, Kush, Scythians, Celts,
Huns, Avars, etc. Their common starting point wasthe Ancient N ear-E ast and they were linked by
ethnic, cultural and linguistic ties. This morpholo­
gical coherence of the early Hungarians is proba­
bly the most im portant discovery in our recent
historical science.^'^ Now, it will be interesting tofind out whether the earliest population and its
descendants were still evident in the IX th century,a t the eve of Arpad’s coming.
A first indication of the presence of Magyars
is th a t the m ountain-, river- and village-names
they had imparted to the geographic features ofthe land were still all in use. Furtherm ore, theiridentification symbols: the bird, the bee, the lion
and the ram were also deeply embedded in thefolklore, which was strongly impregnated withsuncult and with general Mesopotamian, Egyptianand Syrian connections. All th a t would be impos­
sible to explain w ithout the continuous presenceof the same population and, w hat is more, several
other reliable sources especially mention the pre­sence of Hungarians in the land a t the said time.
During the reign of Charlemagne’s successors, forexample, a bishop Hungarus by name, is m en­tioned in a charter of 888, and Louis the German,
59. The Swiss anthropologist E. Pittard was one of the firstscientists to suspect the close affinity of the early
inhabitants of Hungary. He said; «I1 est probable, a voir
les caractdres morphologiques des habitants de la Hongrie, que parmi les peuples qui arrivaient de I'Est, il yen avait plusieurs qui etaient puises aux memes fonds
ethniques que les Magyars eux-memes» (P 103 p. 341).

for his part, refers to a m ountain called M arca
Vengeriorum, in his charter of 860 and even Char­lemagne had several times referred to a Hungarianstronghold in Transdanubia, Sdrvdr by name
(P 059 pp. 241-242). And, above all, there is a
recently discovered H ungarian chronicle whichsurvived through a Turkish translation (XV Ithcentury), which states th a t the H ungarians of
Arpad were greatly pleased to learn, upon theirarrival in th a t country, th a t its inhabitants spoke
the same language as they did. T hus it is evident
th a t Hungary was already populated with H un­
garian-speaking people before the coming of
Arpad.
2.
Anonymus, our best informer on the IX th
century events, records in his Gesta Hungarorum(c. 1200), th a t the Arpadians, upon entering the
C arpathian basin, had found a large population
there whom he calls Sclaui, R am eni and Blachi.
Scholars have been baffled by these names he alone
mentions, all the more since the proffered explana­tions led to chronological and linguistic absurdi­
ties. Who were these peoples? The etymologicalapproach gives us the first im portant key to thismystery. The Sclaui name, to begin with, is a
Hungarian compound word which includes thefollowing elements; S-K-Lau-i. At its ending wenotice the adjectival suffix -i, usually meaning‘Follower o f, ‘Coming from’. The word Lau, which
precedes the suffix, is the dialectal form of theliterary Ld, whose first meaning is ‘Horse’. Inancient times, however, the Sungod was m eant by
it, who was imagined as riding upon a horse in
the sky.'**’ The remaining part of the word, S-K,
when vocahsed appears as As ^ k , or in softened
form: A z ^ g , and means ‘The Sky’. T hus the whole
compound S-K-Lau-i = A z Egi L6-i means liter­
ally ‘Follower of the Heavenly God’, i.e. sunworshippers. Consequently, the form Sclaui is not an
ethnic denomination, but a religious one, meaning
simply sunworshippers.
The Sclaui dwelt all over the land, but theirmain settlem ent areas were in T ransdanubia andin Upper Hungary. Now, these regions were exact­
ly the same ones where the Szekely-Hungarians(Sikeli, Sikeloi, Siculi) lived until their partial
transfer into Transylvania. Incidentally, theirname includes the very same three consonants,
S-K-L, which are to be found in the name of
60. Several examples can be listed to prove that Horae (Lau)
was used to say Ra, the Sungod. In the Zagros moun­tains, to the east of Mesopotamia, there w£is a small
country called Lauristan (<H .: L6-Ur-Isten), ‘Land
placed under the protection of the Horse-Lordgod’ i.e.
Sungod. It was the unique task of the Scythians who
lived in that country to raise horses for the Persianarmies. Their popular art was also overladen with horse
representations. - Another example: The Armenian
bishop, Israyel, who travelled into the land of the Hunsand describe their beliefs, said this: “The Huns wor­
shipped their highest divinity in the form of a giant
warrior, mounted on horseback” (P 081 p. 65). - The
Hungarian AU sound usually changes into O, £is in thecity-name of Iglau, which is in modem Hungarian, Igl6.

S-K-Lau-i. Furtherm ore, in the present-day Szekely local language the word Ld (horse) is often
pronounced as Lau, and means, when used as atitle, not horse, but Lord, as in the nobihary title
L6-F6 ‘Highborn Man, M arquis’. Finally, the Sikeh were also ardent worshippers of the Sun andtheir popular art is full of the symbols of theancestral suncult. T heir name, in the form used
two thousand years earlier, was also analyzed as
signifying ‘Follower of the Heavenly Lord’. Uponthe basis o f so m any similarities, we m ust concedethat Anonym us had, no doubt, m eant th a t groupo f H ungarian-speaking people under the word
Sclaui, which was mentioned in earlier sources
as Sikeloi, i.e. the present-day Szekely, a groupprobably originating from the M esopotamian cul­tural sphere.
According to Anonymus’ narration, the Ram eni
were natives of Transdanubia. Their name con­tained the following components: Ra-Men-i, a fine
Old H ungarian word, meaning ‘Follower of theDivine StaUion’, i.e. again sunworshippers, but thistime of Egyptian persuasion. This term proba­
bly m eant a Hun faction (Huni or Honi =‘Native’), whose name he renders in Latin ashabitatores terrae. — The third group of H ungari­ans mentioned by Anonymus in their religious
context were the B lachi who used the carved script
to write, remarks the chronicler. This fact alonestrongly suggests th a t they originated from the
Syrian cultural sphere. T heir name confirms it.

since its etymological meaning is the HungarianB al-Lak-i ‘Originating from B aal’s Dwelling’, Baal
being the Syrian Divinity of Fire’, a local variantof sunworshippers. They are also called B alasi orBlasi, a synonym meaning ‘He who comes from
B aal’s House’. There are many Hungarian placenames compounded with the divine name Baal,such as Bala, B alaton, Bala-var, Balvanyos, Belko,
etc. The same name occurs outside Hungary, insuch well known geographic names as the Balkan
Peninsula, the Baltic Sea and region, Belgium, etc.
Julius Caesar mentions in his De bello Gallico th a t
Volok (Volcae) people were living, together with
Rutheni, on the northern foothills of the Pyrenees(P 030 H p. 36 and Index and map). T h a t all thesegroups of peoples were mentioned in their religious
connections is revealed by a rem ark by Anonymus,
a Christian priest, who said th a t the Sclaui andBlachi were the most wicked people of the wholeworld, simply because they served pagan divinities(viliores homines esse totius m undi quia essent
Blasii et Sclaui, P 120 I p. 66).
T he continuous use of Near-Eastern religious
names is an obvious proof th a t the descendantsof the NeoHthic and Bronze Age inhabitants of
Hungary still formed the bulk of the populationin the IX th century A.D. Nonetheless, it is impos­
sible to make an approxim ate calculation about
their numerical strength on the eve of Arpad’s
coming. We can only guess their relative impor­tance, on the basis of a specific archaeological fact:from the late Avar period, Hungary has 40,000
authentic excavated graves, whereas from theperiod of the reunification of the land under Arpad,
we only possess 10,000. T h at would mean th a t the
proportion of long settled H ungarians to the Arpadian newcomers, was 4 to 1. The survival o f H u n ­garians o f diverse religious affiliations in the
Danube basin since the Neolithic and Bronze Ages
m akes them the m ost ancient inhabitants ofEurope, who were capable o f preserving their
original ethnic, linguistic and cultural identity
throughout millenia.
3.
To complete our survey of the situation in
the D anube basis toward the end of the IX th
century, before the arrival of the last m ajor H un­
garian ethnic wave, we m ust take a look a t thepolitical build up of the land. It was a chaotic
one, because after the destruction of the AvarHungarian S tate in 803, the country’s organiza­
tion, in the absence of a central government,
relapsed to tribalism and regionalism. In
north-western or Upper Hungary, there existed asmall post-Avar principality centred around thefortress of N yitra and well protected by highm ountains. Its existence was continuously m en­tioned in historical annals until 875, date of its
conversion to Christianity. Upper H ungary’s most
famous ruler was Prince Tudun, whose name islast mentioned in a charter of Pope Eugene IIin 826, wherein he was admonished for building
Christian churches (P 109 II p. 35). T udun is anOriental throne-nam e ( < H.; Tud6-(H )0na:
I'oth-Hon) meaning ‘Land of God T h o t’ (theI’lgyptian divinity). At the time of the re-unificaI ion of the country under Arpad, the ruler of th a t
region was Prince Zobor (< H .: Az Avar) meaning■'Phe Avar ruler’.
South o f Upper Hungary, up to the River Raba,
and including the Ferto Lake, lay a second postAvar principality. Its adm inistrative centre was(Ivor ( =H .: Gyiirii ‘Ring’). Other minor principa­
lities were around Lake Balaton. All these western
Hungarian post-Avar principalities were given
more freedom of action after the division of theFrank Empire into three nationally based politicalentities in 843. They utilized their liberty by seek­
ing help from their fellow Hungarians, beyond the
Carpathian arc, in Eastern Europe.
The Great Central Plain of Hungary was under
the nominal sovereignty of the Bulgarian Empire
and was governed by native princes. At its south­
ern end, in the Danube-Tisza quadrangle, lived
the Alan people called Yazigues; they were obe­
dient to Prince Salan (< H . Az Alan) ‘The Alan’.
The separate identity of the Yazigues had alreadybeen erased in the Hun period, but their adminis­
trative autonom y subsisted until 1848. The north­ern portion of the Central Plain was under theauthority of another local prince, Laborci by
name, who ruled from his fortress-city of Hungvdr,‘Hun Fortress’, according to Anonymus.

To the east o f the Tisza, extending up to the
Carpathians three small principalities flourished.
The strongest of them ruled in the region of
Szamos and Koros, with a m ihtary base in them ountain fortress of Bihar. The last ruler of thisprincipality was M en-M arut, whose throne-nam em eant ‘Sungod’s Stallion’ (Men = Stallion;
M aruth = the Hindu name of the Sungod). Thism onarch lived in Oriental fashion, he even sported
a harem a t his court, and ruled over a mixed
population called Chozari (< H .: Kos-Ar-i). The
second eastern H ungarian ruler. Dux Gelu or
Gyula, governed the Upper Maros area in Ultransylvania, ‘Beyond the forested L and’, histhrone-seat being a t Gyalu. He was probably a
priest-king, whose symbol, a torch, was carried
before him when he travelled officially (P 120 I
p. 95). Another high official of this petty kingdom
identified himself by wearing a sun-disk. The last
Gyula m aintained his quasi-sovereign statu s until
the reign of King St. Stephen (1000-1038), who
had him captured and imprisoned for life, “because
he was an inveterate pagan, refusing to becomea C hristian and was, in many ways, an annoyanceto St. Stephen”, writes Anonymus. — The thirdand last east -Hungarian petty kingdom included
the area bounded by the rivers Maros, Tisza andthe Lower Danube, with a royal residence atOrsova (= Ur Szava) ‘Voice of the R uler’, likethe post-H ittite state in the Ancient Orient, Arzawa. The Prince’s name in Latin script was Glad('lad; it is the softened form of the original
Hungarian word Keleti, i.e. ‘O riental’.
As has been proven in the foregone analysis, allili(> princes and their petty kingdoms mentioned
III the historical sources of the IX th century defin­
itely bore H ungarian names and ruled over a
Hungarian-speaking population. Prof. Janos Melich, a very conscientious linguist, came to thesame conclusion in his last im portant scientificpaper (P 097). He re-examined the pre-Arpadianl)iince-list and found th a t M enm arut and Gladwere certainly native Magyars and th a t all theother local rulers spoke “faultless M agyar”. Healso stated th a t the great majority o f H ungary’s
population spoke H ungarian on the eve o f A rp a d ’s
coming and was racially inter-related.

<•1

3. The formation of the Arpadian people inEastern Europe
Recent historical studies emphasize th a t thehum an mass led by Arpad into the Carpatho-Danubian basin, significantly differed from those H un­
garians already living in th a t country. The Arpadians evolved, indeed, their ethnic constitution
during the sixth to the ninth centuries only, by
merging with westward-moving Hungarian andTurkish peoples, on the Eastern European Plain.
This all began with the sudden entry of the Turks
into the Caspian-Oxus-Aral area in 568 A.D. T h at
first blow was followed by a second and more

violent one in 597-598. As a result, all the tribes
living in the southwestern com er of the great
Eurasian steppe began to roll westwards.
The T urks were mostly stock-breeding, m ount­
ed nomads of inner Asiatic origin, having various
independent branches, Uke the Bisseni, Chasari
and Cumani, to mention only those with whom
the Magyars were to come into closer contact.
They had their own language, which has borrowedheavily from the Hungarian vocabulary, andwhich, most likely, also included their historicalnames. In fact, their names seem to have been
given by Hungarians, since they all have a definite
meaning in th a t language. The word Turki (anc.
form: Tourki), seems to have resulted from themerging of four elements into a single word; T6Ur-Ko-i, meaning literally ‘Those who dwell (-i),
in the Land (Ko), of the R uler (Ur) of the Lake(To)’, in short ‘Lake Dwellers.’ The implied lake
was no doubt, the Aral Sea, because it is surround­
ed by a lowland called T ouran ( < H.: T6-UrHon), ‘Home of the Lake Lord’. The name Bisseni,
Pissoni or Pice-Nati ( < H.: Pis-Hon-i; today:
Viz-Honi) means ‘He who lives by the W ater’; andPice-Nati, in inverted word order ( < H.: NagyViz-i) ‘He who lives by the Large W ater’, probablyreferring to the Caspian Sea, for originally they
had actually lived on its shores. As regards the
Chasars (Khazari, Chosari) their name is a com­pound with Kos -t- Ar -h i, i.e. descendants from themerging of (white) Aryans and (darkish) Kush

peoples, as rightly observed by the Arab writer,\l)ii-i-Feda, who said: “The Khazars... are of twoi v|)es: some are dark-skinned, often almost black;
I licse are considered as being of Hindu descent.
Th e second race is white-skinned and exceedingly
iK Hutiful” (quoted in P 081 p. 56). In the begin­ning, the Khazars dwelt on the northern shore<>l the Caspian Sea, whose original ‘H yrcania’( = Aryan) name was changed into Caspis ( < H.:
Kush-Viz) ‘W ater of the K ush’. All this points to
I he im portant fact th a t the Turki peoples were
(I combination o f the subjugated A ryan and Kush
population, with a significant adm ixture o f M on­gol elements.
The first Turkish ethnic branch with which the
Arpadians came into close pohtical union were the
Khazars, as was recently dem onstrated by A rthur
Koestler (P 079) and Vilmos Kovacs (P 081). The
Khazars spoke the Tchuvash dialect of Turkish
and had laid the foundation of their empire in thesecond half of the V lth century, more exactly in■)67. They became the mightiest power in Eastern
Europe in the V llth , V lllth and IX th centuries,
rhey had extended their domain over the entire
area to the north of the Caucasian ranges, andsubjected the westermost seven M agyar tribes,
living between the K uban and Don rivers, to theirrule, as well as those who dwelt between the Kum a
and Terek rivers, on the western coast of the
Caspian. All these M agyar tribes living in Cauca­
sia, originated from northern Mesopotamia, theKingdom of U rartu, and from the post-H ittitestates of Syria, especially from the Kingdoms of
Arpad, Karkemish and Damasek (Damask). They
had to leave their old fatherlands, following thebloody expansion of the Semitic Assyrian Empire,in the second and first milleniums B.C. In our
historical sources, the memory of the Hungarians
at the Don has been preserved under the nameof Dentu-M agaria and of those of the Kum a valleyas Kum-M agaria.
The Hungarians of Dentu-M agaria have been
incorporated into the K hazar Empire in 568 A.D.
and their symbiosis lasted for over three hundredyears. They were entrusted with the all-im portanttask of safeguarding the western flank of theK hazar Empire and to block the descent of the
Slavonic peoples toward the south. To fulfill theirduties more efficaciously, the seven M agyar tribes
in question were transferred later to a more suit­able location, between the Don and Dnieper, above
the Black Sea. The same strategic considerations
led the Khazars to place the M agyar tribes undera single command, for which Arpad was selected.
His installation as ‘Deputy king’ was carried out
according to K hazar customs, by elevating him
on shields. And the leaders of the seven tribes,
for their part, swore allegiance to Arpad, solemnly
declaring th a t they would faithfully carry out hisorders. All th a t may have happened around 850,
which may be considered the birth-date of theEast-European Hungarian nation, the D anubian

one having already been in existence for a longI mu*.

'The K hazar-H ungarian alliance worked well for;il»()ut two hundred years, but when the K hazarkill},' adopted the Judaic faith around 740 and
IDiced it upon his court and m ilitary men, the firstinternal tensions were quick to appear. A civil war
riu p ted in which the rebels were defeated. As a
rr.sult, three deeply involved K hazar tribes, called
Kabars, went over to Hungarian side and were,il)sorbed into their socio-political system. ThenI ame the renewed attack of the fearful BisseniI’urks, who had torn away the pasture-land fromt he Magyars and forced them to move more wes1wards (889), into the Dnieper-Seret-Lower-Daniibe area, thereby severing their secular alliancewith the Khazars completely. At th a t time, they
had already acquired enough political m aturity tomake their own decisions as to the best way toensure their survival in social surroundings th a t
were growing more and more precarious.
Their own worry, which was also shared by the
Danubian Hungarians, gave rise in c. 890 to theidea o f merging the two H ungarian nations into
one, inside the spacious Carpathian arena which
could be defended more easily than any tribal
community on the unbroken, vast plain beyond
the Carpathians. In the meantime, they had tofight a mysterious battle against the Cum an-Turks
near Kiev, of which we have no details. It isdefinitely known, however, th a t the Cum ans’

seven tribes were defeated and th a t they swore
an oath of allegiance to Arpad and then they too
were absorbed into the constantly swelling M a­gyar conglomerate, which already consisted ofseventeen tribes. Finally, the descendants ofPrince Csaba, the youngest son of King Attila,
also joined the Arpadians, together with theirinnumerable clans and cognates of the same re­gion. After all these happenings, the people Arpad
led into Hungary were considerably different fromthe D anubian Hungarians. Racially, they were of
Aryan, Kush and Mongolian factions. By religion,
they were sunworshippers, fireadorers, Ismaelitsand Moslems. Ethnically, they had strong Turkishtraits, bearing such names as Magyar, Khazar,
Kabar, Kuman, Hun, Bisseni, etc. —a real mosaic
with a Turkish veneer. In the Byzantine court they
were classified simply as Turki, and not Hungari­ans. How did it happen then, th a t they could,
nevertheless, build a Hungary with all its compo­
nents and not a ‘T urkey’?

I. I'he re-unification of the country and thebirth of Hungary-II as a modern stateI.
After the destruction of the Avar-Hungarian
Kingdom by the Franks in 783-803, the whole
I '.irpathian land relapsed into a state of politicaliiiarchy and became a battlefield for half a dozen
iliikedoms and neighbouring great powers. No
wonder th a t the Hungarians already in the land,li;i(l sent emissaries to their brethren on the others i d e of the Carpathians, urging them to move inIf) rebuild, together with their united forces, therealm of their great ancestor, King Attila. The
Ai padians received similar suggestions from theinterested great powers, namely from King Am ulf(M87-899) of Germany, and the Byzantine emperor
Lc*on the Wise (886-912) to help achieve their own
political objectives. By this means, the Arpadians
luid several opportunities of exploring their future
land, especially in 862, 881 and 892. A ll our evi­
dence points to the fa ct that the vital decision was
already taken in 892.
The preparations for the conquest were in fullswing a t th a t time. In Kiev, where Almus, thelather of Arpad was the deputy-king, all the avail­able blacksmiths were summoned to makehundreds of thousands of horseshoes, arrows, cart­
wheels, swords and the like, which were all kept
in storage. Three hundred lumber jacks were also

engaged to clear a passage through the thickforest. A pincer movement was planned, ac­cording to which the bulk of the invaders would
penetrate into Hungary under the leadership of
Arpad through the Verecke-pass, which had neverbeen used before (841 m above s.-l.), and thesecond army, under the command of Arpad’s fa­
ther Almus or his elder son Levente, was supposed
to check the Bulgarian forces and penetrate into
Transylvania through its passes and gorges. The
invasion started in the spring of 895 and, except
for the unexpected attack of the Bisseni and
Bulgarians, the H ungarian armies met inside theC arpathian arc during the summer of the same
year, as planned. B y 900, the entire territory wasin their hands, including Transdanubia.
The incoming Arpadians were greeted as Hberators and most of the native populations surren­dered spontaneously to the new m aster of the landand even helped with the unification. Those few
princes and dukes who failed to change their
allegiance in time, paid dearly for their mistake.
Laborci, Gelu and Zubur who resisted, were killedin action. Two others, Salan and Glad, fled with
their followers. The case of the sixth prince, Menm arut, was a particular one, insofar as he had
wanted to resist at first, but, a t the sight of Arpad’s
armed men, had asked for a compromise, offering
his daughter in marriage to Arpad’s youngest son
Zsolt, while he himself swore obedience to Arpad.
In exchange, he was perm itted to keep his strong-liold of Bihar as a fief for life. H istory knows ofn /y few conquests as clean as A rp a d ’s, which was(tccomplished practically without bloodshed.
As soon as the territorial unification of the land
was achieved, Arpad summoned the leaders to his
fortress of Csongrad and hammered out the princi­
ples (‘C onstitution’), according to which the re­unified country was to be governed. The next step
consisted of setting up nation-wide institutions,lo bind all the inhabitants of Hungary together
into indissoluble unity. These institutions were

Fig. 36. D ecorated silver satch el-cover o f a H ungari­an arm y com m ander. H ungary, IXth century.

almost exclusively, the creation of the native, andnot of the half-way Turkized Hungarians. In otherwords, the newcomers were culturally absorbed
into the Magyar-speaking local population which
formed the overwhelming m ajority in the land.
This process is well illustrated by the following
remarks. The unified country became a “kingdom”(and not a khanat according to the Turkish p a t­tern), with a “king” as its ruler (and not a khanor kende). The highest officials were the Maior
Domus N ddor and the Chief Justice, Orszdg-biro(and not Horka and Kddar). The king was repre­
sented as someone seated upon a throne (and not
in a saddle on horseback). The symbolic animal
identifying the king was a lion (and not a hyena,
ram or dog). One of the most im portant institu­
tions, which welded and kept the various elementsof the society together, resulted from the adoptionof Christianity. The new faith imposed, indeed,
a common and uniform ideology, and replaced thepagan Sun-, Fire-, and Baal-cults, which had earli­
er kept the nation divided into several parts. Thus,
the merging o f all H ungarians of diverse origins,
creeds a n d political traditions into a single nation
was achieved within a relatively short lapse o ftime.
2.
Prince Arpad (-1-907) was not only a m ilitary
genius but a successful organizer as well. He clear­ly perceived the geographic unity and the strategic
position of the C arpathian arena, welded between
two powerful empires. Accordingly, he did notdivide the country amongst the seven princes who
were his deputies. On the contrary, he considered
the m ountainous periphery of the united land as
its natural defense line and the whole country as
an im portant element of the European equilibrium,
as set forth by the treaty of Verdun in 843. He
was, therefore, anxious to put an end to theencroachm ents of the little Moravian S tate andincorporated its borderland into Hungary in 902.
More fighting was needed before A rp a d ’s stra ­tegic-political conception was recognized and ac­
cepted by the Holy R om an Empire, H ungary’s
dynamic western neighbour. This empire was n a t­urally inclined to expand eastward along the D an­
ube valley. The most opportune time for therealization of its ambitions seemed to arrive withthe death of Arpad, when huge armies weredispatched on both sides of the Danube toward
Hungary. They were, however, defeated right at
the border, in the m arshy region of Pozsony (Presburg). As a result of this decisive H ungarian victo­
ry, the D anubian provinces of present-day Austria
were annexed by Hungary as far as the river Enns.
The whole area remained under Hungarian rule
until 933, when one of their armies was defeatednear Merseburg, and again in 955, near Augsburg.
After these events, H ungary’s western borders
were gradually withdrawn to the line of the L ajta
and Fischa rivers, where they were stabilized fora thousand years and m utually recognized. Afterth at, there was no obstacle for the participation

of Hungary under Prince Geza at the meeting ofQuedlinburg (973), called in by the German em ­peror O tto the Great, to discuss the common
security problems of Central Europe.^*’ T he mem­ory of H ungarian rule in Moravia has been kept
alive until our days by num erous village-names,
built upon the H ungarian vocable, such as
Uhersky and Uhr-Sitz (7 such names), or withother Hungarian words, such as Sallash (=Szallas), the H ungarian for ‘summer dwelling’.
Similarly, m any Hungarian village-names sur­
vived in the Ostmark, out of which 25 include theword ‘H ungarian’, such as Ungar-Bach, UngarStein, Ungar-Berg, M arca Hungarica; 103 others
are compounded wirh Warte-, Schutze and 196 arebuilt upon Ode, meaning uninhabited land, all ofthem being situated within the former defense line,
as explained by Sandor Torok (P 129 p. 22f).
The relations between Hungary and the Holy
See o f Rome were always cordial, as soon as the
Hungarians had put their heads under the baptis­
mal water, thereby irrevocably becoming loyal
members of the new European community. Pope
Sylvestre H together with the German emperor
Otto HI, recognized Hungary as a sovereign State.
As a token, he sent a golden royal crown to the

61. Originally, the eastern border lands of Germany (thefuture Austria) were a creation of Frankish rulers. They
were re-established later, as duchies of Carinthia (976),
Carniola (1040), Styria (1055) and Ostmark (1156).

ruler, who was solemnly proclamed ‘King of H un­gary” on Christm as Day of the year 1001. The
Pope’s gesture was repeated later by the emperorof Byzantium , who also recognized the sovereign
statu s of Hungary. The two crowns were welded
together hito one and symbolized the great powers’
alliance with Hungary.
The Holy See of Rome also entrusted the kingsof Hungary with the mission to defend, spread andpropagate Christianity in the neighbouring pagancountries, especially in the Balkan Peninsula,which was full of schismatics at th a t time. This
resulted in H ungary’s expansion toward the
Adriatic Sea by including Croatia (1097), Dalm atia
(1105) and Bosnia (1210). Thus, a t the end o f theX lth century and the beginning o f the X llth , notonly was Hungary's sovereign status universally
recognized, but the country had become a powerful
kingdom, ranking third in importance, right after
the Holy Rom an and the Byzantine Empires. So,after a successful start, Christian Hungary washeading toward the finest hour of its history.
Thus, the period o f A ncient History o f the H u n ­garians came to a close.

5. Epilogue: The fate of the lost HungariantribesAfter the bulk of Hungarian-speaking peoples-Scythians, Huns, Avars and Magyars- moved outof E astern Europe and settled in Hungary, thisrace ceased to play a significant political role in
the oriental p art of the continent. Ethnographically, however, it continued to be present, since
numerous large factions, which were separated
from the main body, stayed behind. The reason
for such detachm ents were varied. First it was thegeneral custom th a t migrating steppe peoples m ust
leave an adequate num ber of warriors and woman
folk behind to stand guard over the ancient land,
upon which they could fall back, should the search
for new and better grazing land fail. Then, internal
political tensions may also have caused secessions.
Furtherm ore, and most frequently, they were ex­
posed to enemy attacks which could cut oflF thou­sands of people and sweep them away from themain block. Larger Hungarian break-away tribes
stayed behind in the following areas: 1. in Cauca­
sia, 2. in the Volga region, 3. in Touran and 4.
in Moldavia.
1. In Caucasia, the detached Hungarian tribes
were those living between the Kum a and Terekrivers, on the northwestern side of the CaspianSea, called Kum-M agaria. Bear witness of theirtribulations eight papal edicts (Bulls) granted
between 1245 and 1291. T heir texts have been
published by Laszlo Bendefy (P 010). Among theother contemporary documents relating to the
problem we can mention an inscription carved onstone, found in the Crimean Peninsula and deci­
phered by the author. Finally, tradition also de­serves to be mentioned, preserved by both theD anubian Hungarians and the successors of H un­
garians in the East. Amongst the most im portant
historical studies devoted to this question are theworks of L. Bendefy (P Oil) and Janos Boros (P018). B ut in spite of this apparent richness of
docum entation on this topic, m any questions re­main unanswered, so th a t our account is still
conjectural on several points.
The Caucasian Hungarians were characterized
by the fact th a t they lacked comprehensive pohtical organization for a long time, having lived inchaotic conditions, each of their clans and tribesby themselves, in as m any mini-states. W ith the
emergence of the Mongol threat, however, thefeeling prevailed amongst them, th a t for theirm utual defense and survival, they m ust unite theirforces. Accordingly, they all placed themselves
under the authority of King Yeretany. This kingwanted, above anything else, to give his kingdoma Christian organization. Therefore, he turned forhelp to the Holy See, asking for catholic priests.
These antecedents led to the emission of a firstpapal edict by John X X II, on behalf of the “mostem inent Prince Y eretany.”
We read the following passage in the said edict:“Greetings to our son Yeretany and other Chris­tian H ungarians (in Caucasia)... We have under­stood th a t thou, my son Yeretany, who a rt adescendant from the earliest Catholic kings of
Hungary, wanted to receive, together with other
Christians of the said region... a Catholic mission­ary (doctorem Catholicum desiratis habere)." Thefirst “Catholic D octor” arrived a t Magyar-on-theKum a in the person of Bishop Thaddeus (13311334). He was followed by seven others, the last
one holding office from 1366 to 1377. It is notknown w hat became thereafter of Yeretany, but
his epitaph, found in the Crimea suggests, th a t
he was himself a priest and fled westwards, before
the Mongol invasion. His inscription actuallyreads thus: “Here is kept, by the Armenian monks,
the holy treasure of Yeretany, an Iranian lord andprince of the Don-bank. (This treasure) consistsof two church-cans. G reat holiness was the dis­tinctive m ark of this ‘living God’.” The drea­
ded onslaught of the Mongol armies m aterial­
ized in 1395/96, when the city of M agyar wasdestroyed and the Kum a-Terek plain incorporated
into the K iptchak-Turk empire as a province. The
few surviving Magyars then retreated into them ountains and F. Nansen, the Norvegian explorer,
was the last European who spoke to their descend­ants in 1925.

2. The second and by far the largest H ungarian­speaking ethnic group, th a t of the Volga H ungari­ans was detached from the main body somewhereto the north of the Caspian sea in the V lth century
following the attacks of the Turks, and was pushed
northw ards along the river Volga. They were m etbe the imperial ambassador Zemarchus, whotalked with the “Prince of the Hungarians, whoreigned by the grace of Dizabuli khan” (Ongororum dux qui illic ex auctoritate Dizabuli
imperium habehat" (P 092 p. 93 f.). They werethen lost from sight and had no contact with anyother Hungarian group for about 600 years. They
were rediscovered quasi accidentally in 1236 byzealous Dominicans (Black Friars), who originallywanted to find the Caucasian Hungarians, for theywanted to convert them to the Christian faith.
Four missionaries started on this venture in 1235,
via Constantinople. However, when they arrived
a t the city of M atrica (the present Tam an), at
the entrance of the Maeotis (now Sea of Azov),they altered their itinerary for an unknown reason
and instead of continuing eastwards, they turned
directly to the north, journeying along the westbank of the Volga. Finally, Friar Julian, the only
surviving priest, succeeded in finding a large H un­
garian tribal group “near the G reat River E thyl.”
There is a report on this unique journey, written
in the X H Ith century and subm itted to the Holy
See of Rome, where it is kept in the Record Office.
Its text is published in the collection of medieval

writings edited by Imre Szentpetery and is cur­rently known as the “Richardus-report” (P 120
II pp. 535-542). This report describes the dram atic
encounter thus: “He (Friar Julian) found themnear the great river E thyl ( = Volga). When theylearned th a t he was a Christian Hungarian, they
were greatly pleased about his coming. He wasshown their houses and cottages and was pressedwith questions about the king and the realm of
Christian Hungarians. To everything he told them,
about faith and other things, they listened a tte n ti­vely, because their language was entirely Hungari­an and they understood him and he them (quiaomnino habent Hungaricum idioma et intelligebant eum et ipse eos).” Julianus then promptly
returned to Hungary to im part his im portantdiscovery to his brethren at home. In the next
year (1237), Julianus undertook a second journeyto the Volga, but was unable to reach the Ungariansettlem ent because the Mongolian armies werealready on the way to make new conquests. In
that very year, Hungary at the Volga had been
destroyed, a n d the nation’s ethnic identity abo­lished for ever. The surviving individual Magyars
were scattered all around within a radius of about
200km, on the Volga Heights, around the Pensa
and Sura rivers, with some settlem ents a t Saratov,
Tambov and Riazan. Today, their memory is kept
alive by a great num ber of place-names which
include the M agyar name. The local inhabitants
remember th a t they have H ungarian blood in theirveins, but do not speak Hungarian any more;
Turkish an d /o r Russian being their language (P019 p. 229 f.).
3.
The Touranian H ungarians always lived
somewhat apart from the other Near Eastern
Hungarians, to the east of the Caspian Sea, aroundthe Aral Sea and in the Oxus valley. In Hungarian
chronicles, this is the region which probably ap­
pears under the name of Magoria. This ethnic
group first attracted the attention of our historiansin the last century, when K rist6f Lukacsy devoted
a fine work (P 092) to them in 1870. More recently,
after World W ar II, the same area came once again
into the forefront of research, thanks to the insis­
tence of Erik Molnar, whose example was followedby Tibor Toth, P.-T. Veres and Pal Liptak, who
all underscored the close connections of the Uralian Hungarians with the Touranians. B ut it is
A ntal B artha who deserves the credit for having
discovered the earliest role of the Touranians, whowere responsible for the civilization of the local
population of the Ural region and th a t of W estern
Siberia, in the Ilnd millenium B. C. The surviving
traces of the lost Touranian Hungarians were also
carefully recorded {Kath. M agyarok Vasdrnapja,
January 12,1969; K anadai M agyarsdg, November
23, 1968; Sorsunk, Sidney, February 13, 1960, etc.)
and the villages, with ‘M adiar’ names, noted.
A m ajor faction of T ouranian Hungarians seemto have been swept far away, towards southeastern
Asia, into what is today New-Zealand, where theycontinue to call themselves M aori (<M a-U r-i),i.e. Magyar. Their existence has been discovered
by F. A. Uxbond (alias Wilhelm von Hevesy) in
his sensational book, published in English in 1928
(P 130). This publication lists innum erable evi­
dence to prove th a t the Maori are closely related
to the European Hungarians, both racially andculturally. The Maori of to-day are highly civilized,
but alm ost entirely absorbed into their Englishspeaking surroundings. The mystery of the originof this ethnic faction has not yet been fully eluci­
dated, which is perhaps connected with the expan­
sion of the Kushan Empire.
4.
Our record would not be complete without
mentioning the break-away H ungarian group of
Tchangos, now living in M oldavia, on the otherside of the Carpathians, near the rivers T atros andSereth, numbering altogether 170,000 souls. The
capital city of Moldavia is Yassy, the HungarianJdsz-V dros ‘City of the Yazigues’. Their full story
is related in a recently published 1520-pages m on­um ental sociographic study, by Pdl-Peter Domokos (P 043). The colony started at the beginningof the Christian era, with a faction of Yazigues
th a t did not continue its journey into Hungary
for reasons unknown to us, but stayed behind,breaking all relations with their brethren who hadentered Hungary and settled there. The Yazigue
colony of Moldavia later received additional H un­
garians, when the warlike Cum an-Turks set up
a principality in Moldavia, then Cumania. To

protect Hungary against the harassm ents of thispagan people, King Andras II (1205-1235) placed
border-guards on both sides of the Carpathians,a t several points. As a further step toward theirpacification, the archbishop of Esztergom /Hungary, established missionaries in Cumania, whoconverted the people to Christianity. The firstbishop had been installed at Milko in 1227 andwas followed by a new influx of Magyars. Until
1410, five H ungarian bishoprics were erected. An
official census, carried out in the middle of the
X V th century, found a total population of 47,167
in Moldavia. Out of th a t number, over 20,000 were
Catholic Hungarians. On the eve of World W ar
II, the Tchango-M agyars boasted 60 villages in
the T atros valley and 160 along the Sereth river.
W hen the northern corner of Moldavia, thedistrict called Bukovina, was annexed by the Aus­
tro-Hungarian M onarchy, general A ndris Hadik
transferred some Moldavian H ungarians into th a t
district. Their descendants, numbering 24,000
souls, were rapatriated into m other-land Hungary,during the second World War. All the other
Tchango-M agyars continue to stay in the land,
and are deprived of all cultural facilities in theirown language, not even having elementary in­struction, despite the fact th a t they are the native
people of the land, who settled there well before
the arrival of the first Rum anians in the X lllth
century.

To sum up the sad history of the lost Hungariantribes, we may say th a t ethnographic factions,large or small, which broke away in Eastern
Europe from the m ain body of Hungarians, wereable to retain their identity for several centuries
but m ost o f them disappeared in the great po liti­
co-military upheaval which was brought about by
the M ongol invasion in the X ll l th century.

Bibliography001. ALDASY Antal, Cimertan, Budapest 1923.
(X)2. ALEKSZEJEV, V. P., Az emberi rasszok foldrajza.
Budapest 1977.
003. ANDRASSY KURTA J^nos, Okori eredetii magyareml^kek. Eletunk 1969.
004. ANDRASSY KURTA Jdnos, A magyar nepmiivfezet
6sis4ge. Eletunk 1969.
005. ANONYMUS, Gesta Hungarorum. Bela kirdly jegyz6j6nek konyve. Budapest 1977.
006. BADINY JOS, Ferenc, Kaldedt61 Ister-Gamig, I-II.
Buenos Aires 1971, 1981.
007. BARATH Tibor, A magyar n^pek ostortenete, I-III.
Montreal 1968-1974.
008. BARATH Tibor, Tij6koztat6 az ujabb magyar 6stort^neti kutat^sokrol. Montreal 1973.
009. BARTHA
Antal,
etc.
Magyarostort^neti
tanulmanyok. Budapest 1977.
010. BENDEFY, L., Sources concernant les Hongrois
Orientaux, S.l. s.d.
011. BENDEFY Ldszld, Kum-Magaria. Budapest 1941.
012. BENDEFY Ldtszl6, A magyars^g kaukazusi oshaz^ja.
Budapest 1942.
013. BERTHELOT, Andre, L’Asie ancienne, centrale etsudorientale d’apres Ptolemee. Paris 1930.
014. BOBULA, Ida, Sumerian affiliations. Washington
1951.
015. BOBULA, Ida, The Great Stag. A Sumerian divinity
and its affiliations. Washington s.d.
016. BOBULA Ida, A sumer-magyar rokonsdg k^rd^se.
Buenos Aires 1961.
017. BONA Istvin, A gepid^ es longobardok a Kirp^t-medenceben. Budapest 1974.
018. BOROS J^nos, Kaukazus, —a n^pek hegye. Budapest
1980.

019. BOROS JAnos, RAPCSANYI L., Vend6gs6gben
oseinkn^l. Budapest 1975.
020. BOSNYAK S6ndor, A felkelo Nap koszontese. Ethnographia 1973.
021. BOUILLET, M.N. Dictionnaire classique de I’Antiquit6, I-II. Paris 1941.
022. BRODRICK, M. etc., A concise dictionary of Egyp­tian archaeology. London 1922.
023. BRYANT, Jacob, A new system or analysis of ancient
mythology, IV. London 1807.
024. BRYANT, T. Alton, A new compact Bible dictionary.
Grand Rapids 1973.
025. BUDGE, E.A.W., A history of Egypt, 8 vol. Oesterhout
1968.
026. BUDGE, E.A.W., The gods of the Egyptians, I-II. New
York 1969 (ed. 1904).
027. BUDGE, E.A. Book of the Dead, M IL London 1956.
028. BUDGE, E.A.W., The Book of the Dead. New York1960.
029. BUDGE, E.A.W., The Egyptian Book of the Dead.
New York 1967.
030. CAESAR, La Guerre des Gaules, I-II. Par M. Rat. Paris
1955.
031. CHILDE, Gordon, The Danube in prehistory. Oxford
1929.
032. CLARK, R. etc.. Myth and symbol in ancient Egypt.
London 1959.
033. COLE, Sonia, The history of East Africa. Toronto 1965.
034. CSALLANY Dezso, A nagyszentmiklosi aranykincs
rov^feliarata. Nyiregyhdza 1967.
035. CSALLANY Dezso, A sz^kely-magyar rov^siras eml6kei. Nyiregyhdza 1963.
036. CSOKE S^ndor, Sumer-magyar osszehasonlit6 nyelvtan. Eberstein 1972.
037. DAUZAT, Albert, La toponymie frangaise. Paris 1946.
038. DAVIES, S., Races relations in ancient Egypt. London
1951.
039. DAWSON, Christopher, The age of gods. Boston 1928.
039. bis. Dictionnaire des communes (de France). Paris 1956.

U40. DiOSZEGI Vilmos, A pogdny magyarok hitviiaga.
Budapest 1978.
041. DOBLHOFER, Ernst, Voices in stone. London 1973.
042. DOLGOPOLSKI, A., Boreisch, Ursprache Eurasiens.
Das Bild der Wissenschaft, Stuttgart 1973.
043. DOMOKOS P.-P., (A moldvai csangdk). Extract inM agyar Nyelv6r. Budapest 1980.
044. DOWSON, John, Classical dictionary of Hindu mytho­logy. London 1953.
045. EGYPTIAN mythology. New York 1965.
046. fiRDY, M., The Sumarian, Ural-Altaic, Magyar rela­tionship, I. New York 1974.
047. FEHER M.J., K6pek a magyar samin-inkvizicidk
tortenetebdl. Warren 1967.
048. FERENCZY Endre, A magyar fold n^peinek tort^netea honfoglalasig. Budapest 1958.
049. FILIP Jan, A kelta civilizdci6 es oroksege. Budapest
1966.
050. FODOR Istvin, A magyar ntp bstbrtenete es a honfogla l^ . Budapest 1980.
051. GALGOCZY Jdnos, A szumir k^rd^. New York 1968
(reprint).
052. GARDINER, Alan H., Ancient Egyptian onomastica,
I-III. Oxford 1968.
053. KfiPES kronika, ford. Gereb L. Budapest 1978.
054. GHIRSHMAN, R., Iran from the earliest time to theIslamic conquest. Bungay s.d.
055. GOODMAN, Jeffrey, American genesis. New York1981.
056. GOSTONY, C.-G., Dictionnaire d’etymologie Sumerienne et grammaire compar6e. Paris 1975.
057. GOURVIL, Francis, Langue et litt6rature bretonnes.
Paris 1952.
058. GOTZ Laszld, Az eloazsiai osnyelv fele. S. I. 1981.
059. Gotz Ldszl6, A magyar ostortenetkutat^ m6dszereirbl.
S.l. 1981.
060. HAJDU P6ter, Finnugor n^pek es nyelvek, Budapest
1962,
061. HAMBIS, Louis, Attila et les Huns. Paris 1972.

062. HARY Gy., Egy osi vilagnyelv feltdrasa kiiszoben, A
N ap Fiai. Buenos Aires 1974.
063. HARY Gy., Kiegeszit&ek egy nyelw ita tort6netehez.
Valdsdg. Budapest 1976.
064. HAWKES, J. etc., Prehistory and the beginnings ofcivilisation. New York 1963.
065. HAWKES, Jacquetta, Prehistory. New York 1965.
066. HAWKES, Jacquetta, The first great civiHzations.
London 1977.
067. HERODOTUS, History, M I London 1948.
068. HOOD, M.S.F., The Tartaria tablets. Scientific Am eri­can, 1968.
069. HOPPAL M., a magyar fejfdk jelvilaga. Nepi Kultura-Nepi Tdrsadalom, XI-XII.
070. HUBERT, Henri, Les Celtes et I'expansion celtique,
I-II. Paris 1950.
071. HURE, Jean, Histoire de la Sicilie. Paris 1965.
072. HUSZAR, Louis, Attila dans la numismatique. Buda­
pest 1947.
073. KADAR, L., Reliability of Herodotus’ geographicaldata. Debrecen 1980.
074. KALICZ N., A neolitikum fe rezkor emlekei Magyarorszagon. Budapest 1974.
075. KALICZ, N. etc., A mehteleki agyagistenek. Nyiregyhaza 1974.
076. KALICZ N. etc., Uj-e az uj reg^zet, Valdsdg, Budapest
1977.
077. KALLOS Zoitdn, Mezosegi temetfe. Forrds, Budapest
1978.
078. KEMENY F„ Das Sprechenlernen der Volker. Wien
1975.
079. KOESTLER, A., La Treizifeme Tribe. L’Empire Khazar et son heritage. Paris 1976.
080. KOVACS Tibor, A bronzkor Magyarorsz^gon. Buda­
pest 1977.
081. KOVACS Vilmos, Urali nepek ^ a honfoglalo konglomer^tum. Forrds, Budapest 1978.
082. KROHN Gy., A finnugor n^pek pogany istentisztelete.
Budapest 1908.

(w.t. KRUTA, V., Les Celtes. Paris 1976.
OHI. KUNSZABO F., Toprengfe a jdszok eredet6rol. Eletunk, Szombathely 1979.
bis. LAKO Gy. szerk. A magyar sz6k^szlet finnugor
elemei II. Budapest 1973.
(IH5. LAROUSSE, Atlas general-. Paris 1973.
I)H6. LASZIO Gyula, A kettos honfoglalds. Budapest 1978.
087. LASZLO Gyula, V6rtesszoll6st6l Pusztaszerig. Buda­
pest 1974.
088. LASZLO Gyula, Ostbrtenetiink legkorabbi szakaszai.
Budapest 1961.
089. LEVEEL, Pierre, Histoire de la Touraine. Paris 1956.
090. LIPTAK, p ., Origin and development of the Hungarianpeople. M agyar Mult, 1975.
091. LOMMEL, Herman, Les anciens Aryens. Paris 1943.
092. LUKACSY Kr., A magyarok oselei, hajdankori nevei
es lakhelyei. Kolozsv^r 1870.
093. MAGYAR 6stdrt6net kerddsei, A-. Budapest 1955.
094. MAGYARORSZAG helys6gn6vt6ra 1944. Budapest
1944.
095. MAGYARORSZAGTOL elcsatolt teruletek k6zs6geinek n6vjegyz6ke, A-. Budapest 1944.
096. MEHTELEKI ujkokori leletek, A-. £ le t is Tudomdny,
Budapest 1974.
097. MELICH Jdnos, Dolgozatok II. Budapest 1963.
097. bis. MONGAIT, A.L., Archaeology in the USSR. Lon­don 1961.
098. NAGY, SAndor, The forgotten cradle of the Hungarianculture. Toronto 1973.
099. NEMETH Gyula szerk., Attila 6s hunjai. Budapest
1940.
100. OXFORD dictionary of current English, The —. Oxford
1952.
101. PADANYI Viktor, Dentu Magyaria. Buenos Aires
1965.
102. PATAY Pdl, A szarmata sdncrendszer az Alfoldbn.
M agyar Hirlap, Budapest 19/01/74.
103. PITTARD, Eugfene, Les races et I’histoire. Paris 1953.

104. POUNDS, N.J.G., An historical and political geogra­
phy of Europe. London 1947.
105. POUKKA, Helmi, Hungarian-Finn-Egyptian wordparallels. Sodertalje 1981.
106. PROHLE, Vilmos, The Hungarian language. True
Hungary, New York 1956.
107. RASONYI Laszl6, A regi torok n^pek a Dunanal.
Budapest 1981.
108. REANEY, P.H., The origin of English place-names.
London 1961.
109. RUDNAY Egyed, Attila-trilogia, MIL Bruxelles 19641966.
110. SAKS, Edgar V., Aesti. An analysis of an anc. European
civilization. Montreal 1960.
111. SAKS, Edgar V., Esto-Europa. The Finno-Ugric pri­mary civilization. Montreal 1966.
112. SAYCE, A.H., Archaeology of the cuneiform inscrip­
tions. London 1927.
113. SCHREIBER, H., Die Hunnen. Attila probt den Weltuntergang. Wien 1976.
114. SCHURfi, Edmund, Les grands initios. Paris 1960.
115. SEBESTYEN Gyula, A magyar rovdsiras. Budapest
1915.
116. SEBESTYEN Gy., R ovis es rovdsirds. Ed. Veres F.
New York 1969.
117. SEBESTYEN Laszlo, K6zai Simon v6delmeben.
Budapest 1975.
118. SITCHIN, Zecharia, The 12th Planet. New York 1976.
119. SZABO Mikl6s, A keltak nyomaban Magyarorszdgon.
Budapest 1976.
120. SZENTPETERY Imre szerk., Scriptores rerum Hungaricarum I-II. Budapest 1937/38.
121. SZOCS Istvan, A sz^kely kapu. MUveszet, Budapest
1974.
122. SZOCS Istvan, Selyemsarhajo. Bukarest 1979.
123. TALBOT Tamara Rice, The Scythians. London 1957.
124. THEVENOT, Emile, Histoire des Gaulois. Paris 1971.
125. THOMAS, Edit B. ed. Archaologische Funde in Ungarn. Budapest 1956.

126. THUKYDIDES, The history of the Peloponnesian
war. London 1952.
127. TOMKA Peter, Le probleme de la survivance desAvars. Acta Orientalia XXIV/2.
128. TOTH Tibor. Merre 61tek a honfoglal6 magyarsdg osei?
Kisalfdld, Gy or 1971.
129. TOROK S^ndor, Telepulfetorteneti tanulmanyok.
Astor Park 1973.
130. UXBOND, F.A., Munda-Magyar-Maori. New tracks of
Hungarian origin. London 1928.
131. VARADI I.N., Merlegen. A magyarorszagi nemzetis6gek rovid tortenete. Garfield 1969.
132. WADDELL, L.A., The Phoenician origin of Britons,
Scots and Anglo-Saxons. London 1924.
132. bis. WADDELL, L.A., The Indo-Sumerian seals deci­
phered. London 1925.
133. WADDELL, L.A., The Aryan origin of the alphabet.
Hawthorne 1966.
134. WATERBOLK, H.T., Foodproduction in prehistoric
Europe. Science, 1968.
135. ZENTAI JAnos, Magyar fejfik. £ le t es Tudom&ny,
Budapest 1974.