Vita:Gesta Hungarorum

message: A Gesta Hungarorumról szóló cikk előző verziója indokolatlanul elítélő volt a magyarok történetének e hitelt érdemlő forrásával szemben. Anonymus gestájából fennmaradt a megírás századából származó változat, így az eredeti tartalmú. Tudni kell, hogy IV. Béla királyon kétszeri kérésére írta P. mester a művet ősi hiteles iratok alapján. Árpád-házi királyunkat nem téveszthette meg saját vérszerinti őseit illetően, mindenképpen hiteles forrás úgy hogy az ellenkezőjét bemutató finnugor elmélet csak néhány szkíta területen felvett szóval bizonyítja rokonságunkat a magyar nyelv több milliós szókincséből, miközben a szanszkrit nyelvben több közös szavunk van ennél.
Mindenképpen azt kérem, hogy bízzuk az olvasóra a gesták hitelességének megítélését, és tartózkodjunk a tartalmuk érdemi említése nélküli kritikától.
replies: text: Egy forrás hitelességének megítélését inkább a történészekre kellene bízni. -- Ulrich von Lichtenstein vita 2016. május 6., 07:47 (CEST)
"Mindenképpen azt kérem, hogy bízzuk az olvasóra a gesták hitelességének megítélését, és tartózkodjunk a tartalmuk érdemi említése nélküli kritikától."
Egyetértek. A szakértelem önmagában nem alap a bizalomra. 
154.50.197.178 (vita) 2016. szeptember 29., 14:30 (CEST)

text: Az olvasó nem szakember, nem rendelkezik mélyebb tudással a témáról. Egyébként a román nacionalistákon és történészeken kivül, csak azok tartják hiteles műnek, akik soha nem olvasták azt. Tele van anakronisztikus népekkel, eseményekkel, kitalált személyekkel, és gyerekes etimologizálásokkal. Pl hogy a magyarok Ungvárról katák a nevüket, mert ott megáltak megpihenni! Napjainkban a magyarellenes román propaganda alapművének számít, mivel a "krónika" szerint, a románoktól vettük el Erdélyt (24-27. fejezetek). Szóval de, hitelességének megítélését bízzuk inkább a szakemberekre, nem pedig a hozzá nem értő, túlfűtött nemzeti érzelmű amatőrökre! Enlightenment1685 vita 2022. május 8., 16:50 (CEST)

message: "A történelmi leírás kezdetének része, hogy tájékoztat minket Béla király kérésére a magyar nép szcítiai népektől való ősi eredetéről"
A mû nem az N nevû barát kérésére készült? Idézem:
"Mesternek mondott P, a néhai jó emlékű, dicsőséges Bélának, Magyarország királyának jegyzője, N-nek, az ő legkedvesebb barátjának, a tisztelendő és az írástudás művészetében avatott férfiúnak üdvözletét meg kérése teljesedését jelenti."
Félreértek valamit?
"A magyar történészek viszont kezdetektől bírálták a mű hitelességét."
Mikortól értjük a kezdeteket? Az ôsrobbanás/teremtés/(?)? A Gesta megírása? A forráskritika kialakulása? A finnugor elmélet kitalálása?
És: az összes magyar történész bírálta és bírálja?
"Ez azzal magyarázható, hogy Anonymus művét kb. 300 évvel a honfoglalás után írta."
Tehát a gesztában szerepeltetett helyi vezérek és államok nevei megegyeznek a 300 évvel késôbbi bizánci és német forrásokkal? Ha lehet, szeretnék erre adatokat kérni, mert ez a mondat így önmagában eléggé a levegôben lóg. Hány százaléka a neveknek különbözik a bizánci és német nevektôl a két korban, mennyire látványos a fejlôdés, ha ezt a magyarázatot ennyire nagy bizalommal elfogadjuk.
154.50.197.178 (vita) 2016. szeptember 29., 14:24 (CEST)
thread_title:  Kérdések 

message: ===Sources===
Minstrels and folk-singers reciting heroic songs were well-known figures of the age of Anonymus. He explicitly referred to "the gabbling rhymes of mistrels and the spurious tales of peasants who have not forgotten the brave deeds and wars of the Hungarians"Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 42.), p. 91. even to his time. However, he did not conceal his scorn for oral tradition, stating that it "would be most unworthy and completely unfitting for the so most noble people of Hungary to hear as if in sleep of the beginning of their kind and of their bravery and deeds from the false stories of peasants and the gabbling song of minstrels".Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (Prologue), p. 5. All the same, stylistic elements (including formulaic repetitions which can be found in his text) imply that he occasionally used heroic songs. According to Kristó, the legend of Emese's dream of the "falcon that seemed to come to her and impregnate her"Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 3.), p. 13. was one of the motifs that Anonymus borrowed from oral tradition.
Anonymus, as Macartney says, claimed to "rely solely on written sources, as alone trustworthy" when writing his work. Among his sources, Anonymus explicitly mentioned the Bible and Dares Phrygius's Trojan History. He borrowed texts from the latter work and adopted its "overall structure of short but informative accounts naming important protagonists and main events", according to historians Martyn Rady and László Veszprémy. Anonymus also referred to "historians writing of the deeds of the Romans"Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 1.), p. 9. when narrating the history of the Scythians. According to Kristó, Györffy and Thoroczkay, Anonymus obviously read the so-called Exordia Scythica ("Scythian Genesis"), a 7th-century abridgement of a work of the 2nd-century historian, Justin.
Anonymus used Regino of Prüm's Chronicon, that he mentioned as "the annals of chronicles"Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 7.), p. 21. in his Gesta. He accepted Regino of Prüm's view when identifying the Scythians as the Hungarians' ancestors. Sometimes, he misinterpreted his sources. For instance, he wrote of "the boundaries of the Caranthians of the Mura" (Carinthinorum Moroanensium fines)Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 50.), pp. 106-107. instead of the "lands of the Carinthians, Moravians" (Carantenorum, Marahensium ... fines)The Chronicle of Regino of Prüm (year 889), p. 205. of which he read in Regino of Prüm's Chronicon, which shows that Anonymus did not understand Regino of Prüm's reference to the Moravians.
Direct borrowings from Isidore of Seville's Etymologiae, Hugh of Bologna's Rationes dictani prosaice, and medieval romances about Alexander the Great prove that Anonymus also used these works. According to Macartney, textual coincidences show that Anonymus adopted parts of late 12th-century chronicles narrating Frederick Barbarossa's crusade. For instance, Anonymus' descriptions of tournaments seem to have been taken from Arnold of Lübeck's Chronicle of the Slavs.
Anonymus also used the ancient "Hungarian Chronicle" or its sources. However, there are differences between Anonymus' narration of the Hungarian Conquest and other works preserving texts from the ancient chronicle. For instance, the Illuminated Chronicle wrote of the Hungarians' arrival in Transylvania across the Carpathian Mountains from the east at the beginning of the Conquest, but according to Anonymus the Hungarians invaded Transylvania across the valleys of the Meseş Mountains from the west at a later stage.
Sources from the turn of the 9th and 10th centuries mentioned more than a dozen persons who played an important role in the history of the Carpathian Basin at the time of the Hungarian Conquest. Anonymus did not mention any of them; he did not refer, for instance, to Arnulf of Carinthia, Boris I of Bulgaria, and Svatopluk I of Moravia. On the other hand, none of the persons whom Anonymus listed among the opponents of the conquering Hungarians—for instance, the Bulgarian Salan, the Khazar Menumorut and the Vlach Gelouwere mentioned in other sources. According to Györffy, Engel, and other historians, Anonymus either invented these personalities or listed them anachronistically among the conquering Hungarians' opponents. Martyn Rady and László Veszprémy explicitly describe the Gesta Hungarorum as a "'toponymic romance'that seeks to explain place-names by reference to imagined events or persons, and vice versa." For instance, Györffy writes that Gelou's story was based on the conquest of Gyula of Transylvania's realm by Stephen I of Hungary in the early 11th century and Gelou was named after the town Gilău where he was killed in battle, according to Anonymus. Anonymus likewise wrote that the Bulgarian Laborec had died at the River Laborec and the Czech Zubur on the Mount Zobor near Nitra.
Anonymus did not allude to the Hungarians' decisive victory over the united Bavarian forces in the Battle of Pressburg in 907, but he narrated battles unknown from other works. Anonymus seems to have applied place names when creating these battles, according to Győrffy. For instance, the Gesta Hungarorum wrote of a battle between the Greeks and the Hungarians at a ford by the River Tisza which was named after this event as "Ford of the Greeks",Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 39.), p. 85. according to Anonymus, although it received this name after its revenues were granted to the Greek Orthodox monastery of Sremska Mitrovica in the 12th century.
Late 9th-century sources mentioned the Avars, the Bavarians, the Bulgarians, the Danubian Slavs, the Gepids and the Moravians among the peoples inhabiting the Carpathian Basin. Anonymus did not mention the Avars, the Bavarians, the Gepids and the Moravians.
Györffy says that the Vlachs, Cumans, Czechs and other peoples whose presence in the late-9th-century Carpathian Basin cannot be proven based on sources from the same period reflects the situation of the late 13th century. -
thread_title: Korábbi görög-római, Nyugat-európai művek és a Biblia történeteinek gátlástalan lenyúlása és másolása Anonymus sajátossága volt

message: Minstrels and folk-singers reciting heroic songs were well-known figures of the age of Anonymus. He explicitly referred to "the gabbling rhymes of mistrels and the spurious tales of peasants who have not forgotten the brave deeds and wars of the Hungarians"Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 42.), p. 91. even to his time. However, he did not conceal his scorn for oral tradition, stating that it "would be most unworthy and completely unfitting for the so most noble people of Hungary to hear as if in sleep of the beginning of their kind and of their bravery and deeds from the false stories of peasants and the gabbling song of minstrels".Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (Prologue), p. 5. All the same, stylistic elements (including formulaic repetitions which can be found in his text) imply that he occasionally used heroic songs. According to Kristó, the legend of Emese's dream of the "falcon that seemed to come to her and impregnate her"Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 3.), p. 13. was one of the motifs that Anonymus borrowed from oral tradition.
Anonymus, as Macartney says, claimed to "rely solely on written sources, as alone trustworthy" when writing his work. Among his sources, Anonymus explicitly mentioned the Bible and Dares Phrygius's Trojan History. He borrowed texts from the latter work and adopted its "overall structure of short but informative accounts naming important protagonists and main events", according to historians Martyn Rady and László Veszprémy. Anonymus also referred to "historians writing of the deeds of the Romans"Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 1.), p. 9. when narrating the history of the Scythians. According to Kristó, Györffy and Thoroczkay, Anonymus obviously read the so-called Exordia Scythica ("Scythian Genesis"), a 7th-century abridgement of a work of the 2nd-century historian, Justin.
Anonymus used Regino of Prüm's Chronicon, that he mentioned as "the annals of chronicles"Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 7.), p. 21. in his Gesta. He accepted Regino of Prüm's view when identifying the Scythians as the Hungarians' ancestors. Sometimes, he misinterpreted his sources. For instance, he wrote of "the boundaries of the Caranthians of the Mura" (Carinthinorum Moroanensium fines)Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 50.), pp. 106-107. instead of the "lands of the Carinthians, Moravians" (Carantenorum, Marahensium ... fines)The Chronicle of Regino of Prüm (year 889), p. 205. of which he read in Regino of Prüm's Chronicon, which shows that Anonymus did not understand Regino of Prüm's reference to the Moravians.
Direct borrowings from Isidore of Seville's Etymologiae, Hugh of Bologna's Rationes dictani prosaice, and medieval romances about Alexander the Great prove that Anonymus also used these works. According to Macartney, textual coincidences show that Anonymus adopted parts of late 12th-century chronicles narrating Frederick Barbarossa's crusade. For instance, Anonymus' descriptions of tournaments seem to have been taken from Arnold of Lübeck's Chronicle of the Slavs.
Anonymus also used the ancient "Hungarian Chronicle" or its sources. However, there are differences between Anonymus' narration of the Hungarian Conquest and other works preserving texts from the ancient chronicle. For instance, the Illuminated Chronicle wrote of the Hungarians' arrival in Transylvania across the Carpathian Mountains from the east at the beginning of the Conquest, but according to Anonymus the Hungarians invaded Transylvania across the valleys of the Meseş Mountains from the west at a later stage.
Sources from the turn of the 9th and 10th centuries mentioned more than a dozen persons who played an important role in the history of the Carpathian Basin at the time of the Hungarian Conquest. Anonymus did not mention any of them; he did not refer, for instance, to Arnulf of Carinthia, Boris I of Bulgaria, and Svatopluk I of Moravia. On the other hand, none of the persons whom Anonymus listed among the opponents of the conquering Hungarians—for instance, the Bulgarian Salan, the Khazar Menumorut and the Vlach Gelouwere mentioned in other sources. According to Györffy, Engel, and other historians, Anonymus either invented these personalities or listed them anachronistically among the conquering Hungarians' opponents. Martyn Rady and László Veszprémy explicitly describe the Gesta Hungarorum as a "'toponymic romance'that seeks to explain place-names by reference to imagined events or persons, and vice versa." For instance, Györffy writes that Gelou's story was based on the conquest of Gyula of Transylvania's realm by Stephen I of Hungary in the early 11th century and Gelou was named after the town Gilău where he was killed in battle, according to Anonymus. Anonymus likewise wrote that the Bulgarian Laborec had died at the River Laborec and the Czech Zubur on the Mount Zobor near Nitra.
Anonymus did not allude to the Hungarians' decisive victory over the united Bavarian forces in the Battle of Pressburg in 907, but he narrated battles unknown from other works. Anonymus seems to have applied place names when creating these battles, according to Győrffy. For instance, the Gesta Hungarorum wrote of a battle between the Greeks and the Hungarians at a ford by the River Tisza which was named after this event as "Ford of the Greeks",Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 39.), p. 85. according to Anonymus, although it received this name after its revenues were granted to the Greek Orthodox monastery of Sremska Mitrovica in the 12th century.
Late 9th-century sources mentioned the Avars, the Bavarians, the Bulgarians, the Danubian Slavs, the Gepids and the Moravians among the peoples inhabiting the Carpathian Basin. Anonymus did not mention the Avars, the Bavarians, the Gepids and the Moravians.
Györffy says that the Vlachs, Cumans, Czechs and other peoples whose presence in the late-9th-century Carpathian Basin cannot be proven based on sources from the same period reflects the situation of the late 13th century. -
thread_title: Sources