Science > Linguistics
The Hungarian Language: One of the true wonder of the Earth since ancient times
Athanasius:
ABOUT THE HUNGARIAN LANGUAGE
[Excerpt]
by János Kalmár
1480 - MARCIO GALOTTI, a humanist in the court of King Mátyás Corvinus stated with amazement: “The Hungarians may be aristocrats or peasants but they all use the same language.”
1609 - POLANUS AMANDUS, the humanist writer who lived in Basle, when Albert Molnár’s “Hungarian Grammar” was published, wrote: “There were some who doubted that the unbridled Hungarian language had any rules but you, in your outstanding work, have really disproved them.”
1790 - JOHANN GOTTFRIED HERDER acknowledged that the Hungarian language is a great treasure: „Is there anything more dear to the people than their own language? Their whole way of thinking lies in their language, their past and their history, their beliefs, and the basis of their whole life, their whole heart and soul.”
1817 - CARDINAL GIUSEPPE MEZZOFANTI, who understood 58 languages and spoke, among many of them, four dialects of Hungarian, greeted the Hungarian bailiff, József, in Bologna with a very spirited Hungarian speech. It was he who said to the Czech linguist, ÁGOSTON FRANKL: “Do you know which language is equal to Latin and Greek in its structure and rhythmic harmony? It is the Hungarian language. I am familiar with the new Hungarian poets, whose verses are completely mesmerizing. Let us watch the future, for the poetic genius will have a sudden upswing, which will prove my statement to be true. It seem as if the Hungarians themselves do not realize what a treasure is hidden in their language.” Cardinal Mezzofanti was made an honorary member of the Hungarian Academy of Science in 1832.
1820 - JAKOB GRIMM established the rules for sound progression and was the first to write a German Grammar. He stated that the Hungarian language is logical, has a perfect structure and surpasses every other language.
1830 - SIR JOHN BOWRING, English traveler and writer, visited Hungary and published an anthology in English of the work of Hungarian writers and poets. „The Hungarian language goes far back. It developed in a very peculiar manner and its structure reaches back to times when most of the now spoken European languages did not even exist. It is a language which developed steadily and firmly in itself, and in which there are logic and mathematics with the adaptability and malleability of strength and chords. The Englishman should be proud that his language indicates an epic of human history. One can show forth its origin; and all layers can be distinguished in it, which gathered together during contacts with different nations. Whereas the Hungarian language is like a rubble-stone, consisting of only one piece, on which the storms of time left not a scratch. It's not a calendar that adjusts to the changes of the ages. It needs no one, it doesn't borrow, does no huckstering, and doesn't give or take from anyone. This language is the oldest and most glorious monument of national sovereignty and mental independence. What scholars cannot solve, they ignore. In philology it's the same way as in archeology. The floors of the old Egyptian temples, which were made out of only one rock, can't be explained. No one knows where they came from, or from which mountain the wondrous mass was taken. How they were transported and lifted to the top of the temples. The genuineness of the Hungarian language is a phenomenon much more wondrous than this.”
1840 - WILHELM SCHOTT, an outstanding German scientist: “ In the Hungarian language there is a fresh, childish, natural view and it cannot but be suspected that there is the possibility of development hidden in it like a bud. It contains many beautiful soft consonants and its vowels are more clearly pronounced than in German. It can be used for short statements and also for powerful oratory, in short, every type of prose. It is built on matching vowel sounds, pleasing rhymes, and its richness and resounding tones are well suited for poetry. This is demonstrated in every branch of poetry.”
1840 - N. ERBESBERG, a world famous professor from Vienna: “The structure of the Hungarian language is such that it appears that linguists could have created it with the purpose of incorporating in it every rule, conciseness, melody and clarity and besides all this it avoided any commonness, difficulty in pronunciation and irregularities.”
1848 - N. SIMPSON: “Letters from the Banks of the Danube.” In this series of articles, he wrote about the Hungarian language in the exciting days of March, (during the 1848 Hungarian Freedom Fight against the Hapsburgs). “The Hungarian language is very poetic, rich and spirited, . . . it is full of enthusiasm and strength and is suited to all kinds of poetical work. It is strong and yet gentle and very pleasing in sound. It is melodic and its expression is clear.”
1857 - MÁTYÁS FLÓRIÁN, linguist and a member of the Hungarian Academy of Science, who was in correspondence with OPPERT, stated: “I gained from Oppert the treasure of the words (Sumerian) and called his attention to the fact that they resembled the words of the ancient Hungarian language.”
1860 - JULES OPPERT emphasized the relationship of the Sumerian and Hungarian languages.
1860 - The German linguists and professors at the Congress of Kiel announced that the only correct name for Mesopotamia’s Turanian ancient populace was “Sumerian”.
1870 - ARCHIBALD SAYCE, Professor of Oriental Studies in Oxford, deciphered the first Sumerian one language text and gave a linguistic analysis of the language. He used comparative linguistics to study different branches of the language. In the course of his research, he examined the relationship of the languages of the entire Turanian language family with the Sumerian language. He found the closest relationship to Sumerian in the Hungarian and Basque languages. He went to Hungary to learn the Hungarian language and also found Hungarian to be the most useful language to read the Sumerian language.
1870 - FRANÇOIS C. LENORMAND, the amazingly talented French linguist, stated: “The Sumerian language, not only in its vocabulary but also in its structure, is a Turanian language.” It is obvious that his work was very thorough because he studied the Hungarian historical phonetic linguistics and he studied the Halotti Beszéd, the Legend of St. Margaret and the Bible of the Hungarian Hussites.
1873 - LENORMAND formulated the first Sumerian Grammar and also made a thorough comparative study of the grammar and vocabulary of the Ural-Altaic languages. By so doing, he proved the relationship between the Ural-Altaic languages and Sumerian.
1873 - EDOUARD SAYOUS, a French historian proved the linguistic comparisons of Lenormand. In 1869 and 1896, he was in Hungary and he learned Hungarian. In acknowledgement of his work, he was made a member of the Hungarian Kisfaludy Literary Guild.
1875 - FRANÇOIS C. LENORMAND strongly advocated that the language that discovered writing was most closely related to Hungarian. Therefore he traveled again to Hungary to learn the language more thoroughly. In his book “The Ancient Language of the Chaldeans and the Turanian Languages” from phonetics to the noun suffixes, almost entirely relying on the logic and pronunciation of the Hungarian language, he continued his research into the comparison between the Sumerian and the Turanian languages. He found that the Sumerian phonetic rules were based on the Hungarian.
1875 - HEINRICH GELZER, a Swiss linguist, in an article entitled: Das Ausland, stated that the Sumerian noun and verb suffixes were identical to those of the Turanian languages.
1875 - OSCAR PESCHEL, a German ethnographer, professor at the University of Leipzig, wrote: “The most ancient cuneiform writing was developed in the city of Ur, the so-called Sumerian-Akkadian writing. This ancient people was called Turanian.”
1876 - DOPHUS RUGE, a German scholar, in his work: Die Turanien in Chaldäe, stated: “Now, among the Turanian peoples, a people of first-class culture has appeared – the Sumerians.”
1879 - ZSÓFIA TORMA, archeologist and researcher, on the encouragement of Floris Rómer, in 1875, began archeological excavations on the banks of the Maros River in Tordos and its vicinity and found 10,387 artifacts with Sumerian characters. Among the 4,500 year-old ceramic shards, she found four with Szekler runic script. She suggested the possibility that the writings on the Tordos finds were connected to the Assyrian and Babylonian writings. She came to the conclusion that the ancient people of Babylon belonged to the Sumerian-Akkadian people who were a Turanian people.
1881 - ERNEST DE SARZEC, a French researcher, discovered LAGAS, the first Sumerian city. In his excavations he discovered 40,000 clay tablets with cuneiform characters.
1883 - Dr. ÁGOSTON HALÁSZ, Bishop of Kassa, in his study: Legújabb ősnyelv (The Newest Ancient Language) clearly follows the spread of human civilization from Sumer to Assyria, to the Hittite Empire and then to Greece. His conclusion was that the first pioneers in city dwelling were the Sumerians, who were identical to the Hungarians.
1887 - Dr. SÁNDOR GIESSWEIN, a canon and linguist, to prove the Sumerian-Hungarian relationship, used anthropological examples and a thorough comparative study of the grammar of the two languages.
1. He demonstrated the similarity between the flexional endings of the Sumerian personal pronouns and the Hungarian objective conjugation.
2. Both languages are agglutinative.
3. The prepositional endings and affixes, in Sumerian and in the Ural-Altaic languages are eroded nouns.
4. The connection between the Sumerian and Ural-Altaic languages is that the simple suffix can express the noun-relationship.
5. A common characteristic of these languages is the use of the possessive suffix, to which additional connected suffixes can be added.
6. Obviously, the close relationship of more possessive suffixes in the Sumerian and Hungarian languages can be observed.
1896 - Dr. K. A. HERMANN, Estonian researcher in the Russian Oriental Archeology Congress, in Riga, stated: “On the basis of linguistic conformity to rules and identity, my opinion is that the Sumerian language is related to the Ural-Altaic languages.”
1900 - Dr. GYULA FERENCZY, University professor, in his work: A szumirok nemzetiségi és nyelvi hovatartozása (Where the Sumerian People and Language Belong), he stated the following: “From the facts that we already know, there is no doubt that the Sumerians are an ancient branch of the Turanian people.”
1913 - JÁNOS GALGÓCZY, linguist, pointed out that both Hungarian and Sumerian possess the special subjective and objective conjugation.
1916 - Dr. ZSIGMOND VARGA spoke fourteen languages. In 1920, on the basis of his book Ötezer év távlatából (From a Distance of Five Thousand Years), the Hungarian Academy of Science acknowledged the relationship between the Sumerian and the Ural-Altaic languages.
1926 - JÓZSEF ACZÉL, linguist, in his book Szittya-görög eredetünk (Our Scythian-Greek Origins), stated:
1.
“The Hungarian Grammar and three thousand root words are identical to the Hellenic Greek.”
2.
“The Szekler and Scythian and ancient Hellenic scripts are identical.”
3.
“Some of the words, when they are written, are surprisingly similar (read from right to left).”
It is a unique linguistic phenomenon that, in the whole world, apart from the classical Latin and Ancient Greek languages, only in Hungarian can poems be written in classical hexameter.
“In some of the Hungarian folk songs, the melody is so old that the Scythians may even have sung them accompanied by their ‘musikos.’”
1927 - JULES ROMAINS, one of the greatest poets of modern France, when he visited Hungary, stated: “Because I did not understand the Hungarian language, I tried with all my strength to feel it. I felt that it was full of power; I know no other language that appears so masculine. It is a passionate masculine language.”
1932 - EDGAR CLEMENT, German linguist, was so impressed by the musicality of the language that he learned Hungarian. According to him, the Hungarian language had a magical strength, which reflected a deep spirituality and only the highest ranking languages, especially the old classical languages could match up to it.
1939 - GÉZA BÁRCZY, member of the Hungarian Academy of Science, discovered the 5000 year-old Sumerian suffixes and proved that they were identical to the Hungarian suffixes.
1940 - Sir LEONARD WOOLLEY, English archeologist and linguist, excavated the Sumerian city, Ur of the Chaldees. He found 400,000 clay tablets, which were covered with linguistic material. He made a glossary and deciphered a large number of texts for the Institutum Biblicum in Rome, among them a six volume Sumerisches Lexicon, in which he deciphered 4,000 words.
1943 - BÁLINT HÓMAN, historian: “According to our present knowledge, the Sumerian language belongs to the Caucasian Japhet language family. In the future, when we analyze the ancient Hungarian words of Caucasian and unknown origin, we should not disregard the Sumerian and Huttite-Hurrite language remains.
1948 - RENÉ LABAT, Director of Studies at the École des Hautes-Études in Paris, developed a dictionary of Cuneiform signs that were numbered, for the use of his students.
1953 - ANTON DEIMEL S. J., Principal of the Institutum Biblicum in Rome and editor of the Sumerisches Lexicon, in the letter which he wrote to Dr. Ida Bobula, stated: “I have not the slightest qualm about accepting the Hungarian-Sumerian relationship.”
1962 - ÁRPÁD ORBÁN, researcher who followed the theory of probability introduced by Jószef Aczél, and developed the rules for the dating of the word relationships.
1963 - VIKTOR PADÁNYI, historian, in his book entitled Dentumagyaria, examined the Sumerian-Hungarian vocabulary and, on the basis of phonetics and meaning, stated: “The spirit of the Sumerian and Hungarian languages, their structure and grammar are almost identical and, by this same measure, they differ from other languages.”
1966 - JÁNOS HARMATTA, historian and academician, stated that, in 1961, N. Vlassa, an archeologist from Kolozsvár, discovered in Tatarlaka one round and one rectangular clay tablet, on which the signs could be easily deciphered with the help of Sumerian pictograms which they resembled.
1968 - ANDRÁS ZAKAR, linguist and researcher in cultural history, demonstrated the language development on the basis of dating methods, and showed that in the Hungarian language, after 5000 years, out of one hundred words, 63 words were Sumerian and 12 Akkadian. This shows not only relationship but also direct descent. The newest scientific methods prove that the Sumerian-Hungarian linguistic analyses are based on certain historical and archeological evidence.
1970 - IDA BOBULA, philosopher and historian, a researcher who spoke seven languages fluently, in her books Sumir rokonság (Sumerian Relationship) and A magyar nemzet eredete (The origin of the Hungarian People), and also in A 2000 magyar név sumir eredete (The Sumerian Origin of 2000 Hungarian Names) demonstrated that a majority of Hungarian names can be understood with the help of the Sumerian dictionary. In her analyses, she states that the returning Magyars brought with them a Scythian language, developed in Sumer.
1976 - ADORJÁN MAGYAR: “The majority of the European peoples learned to read and write only after they were converted to Christianity, while the Magyars lost their own runic script after their conversion because the Church regarded it as pagan.”
1976 - ELEMÉR NOVOTNY, linguistic researcher, in his book Sumir nyelv = Magyar nyelv, (Sumerian Language = Hungarian Language) published in Switzerland in 1976, convincingly proved that that a large part of the Sumerian vocabulary was identical to Hungarian. He presented the cuneiform tables of RENÉ LABAT, in which 13 Sumerian cuneiform signs could be understood and were identical to the Szekler runic script.
1976 - DÉNES OSETZKY, researcher and engineer, came to the conclusion that: “Inasmuch as the Sumerian language elements in the Hungarian language are the result of the connections between the two peoples, the initial influence could be only such a group which anthropologically belonged to the ethnic type of the Homecoming Magyars.
1976 - FERENC BADINY-JÓS, university professor, stated that the total number of cuneiform signs was approximately 4,800, but this did not include the words created from the cuneiform signs. He proved the Sumerian-Hungarian language identity with help of the 6000 year-old cuneiform tablets. He explained that the name of the Hungarians, HUN-GAR, just as the Asian name HUN, has been known for 5000 years and the name of the MAH-GAR people is now known as Sumerian.
1977 - SÁNDOR CSŐKE, linguist, according to his final conclusions about the Hungarian language:
a) It is an original ancient language.
b) Its structure is entirely Hungarian.
c) Its vocabulary is 95% Hungarian.
1977 - KÁLMÁN GOSZTONYI, professor at the St. Michael’s College in Paris, with the financial support of the French government, published his book: Összehasonlító szumir nyelvtan, (Comparative Sumerian Grammar) and stated that from 53 Sumerian grammatical characteristics, 51 are identical to the Hungarian, for example:
a) The adjective is singular, the noun is plural e.g. jó emberek
b) The interrogative pronouns and numerals can have a possessive suffix. E.g. Mi-d van? Az én tíz-em.
c) Nouns may be in singular or plural. E.g. kéz, kezek. Juh, juhok.
d) The same word can indicate both genders. E.g. ember, gyermek, testvér
e) An independent verb can create a sentence by itself. E.g. Fáj.
Besides the grammar, he presented, from the collection of cuneiform signs of Labat, Árpád Orbán’s new methods of dating and, with this, he examined 93 Sumerian words.
1980 - BÉLA OLÁH, an independent researcher, in his book: Édes magyar nyelvünk szumir eredete,(The Sumerian Origin of our Sweet Hungarian Language) states the following identities:
1.
The Hungarian vowels and consonants are completely identical to the Sumerian.
2.
Vowel harmony is present in both languages.
3.
Words may not begin with two consonants.
4.
Both languages are agglutinative.
5.
They do not distinguish gender.
6.
The Hungarian verbal suffixes are more developed than the Sumerian.
1988 - SÁNDOR FORRAI, professor and expert in scripts, in the collection of ceramic shards in the Museum of Kolozsvár, in which Zsófia Torma recognized four Szekler runic characters, found eight more and stated that, in Tatarlaka, N. Vlassa in 1961, excavated a round clay amulet, on which there were four segments containing script. Among the 10 characters, six of them were clearly recognizable as Magyar runic script and two more show a close resemblance. He traces the origin of the Magyar runic script to the writings found in Mesopotamia, which are 3,500 years old. It is not accidental that the linear script, developed from the pictographs, remained in the Hungarian script as runic script and has survived to the present, in spite of the fact that, in the course of a thousand years, from the 34 runic letters, the Hungarians had to adapt to the 24 Latin letters, which made it very difficult to express the double consonants.
1989 - ISTVÁN ERDÉLYI, archeologist, in his book, Sumir rokonság (Sumerian Relationship), writes: “Among the Faculties of the Hungarian Universities, there should be a chair for Assyriology, which should also encompass Sumerology.”
1990 - JÁNOS MAKKAY, archeologist, in his study, A tartariai leletek (The Tartarian Finds) states that the attempts to understand and decipher the Sumerian words themselves verify the Jamdet Nasr connections.
Bibliography:
1.
Aczél József: Szittya-görög eredetünk, 1927
2.
Badiny-Jós Ferenc: Mah-gar a magyar, 1976
3.
Berzseny Dániel: A magyar nyelv eredetiségéről, 1825
4.
Bobula Ida: A sumir-magyar rokonság kérdése, 1961
5.
Bobula Ida: Kétezer magyar név sumir eredete, 1970
6.
Csobánczi Elemér: Magyar nyelv és ősmagyar írás
7.
Erdélyi István: Sumir rokonság? 1989
8.
Érdy Miklós: A sumir-ural-altai-magyar rokonság kutatásának története, 1974
9.
Forrai Sándor: Az írás bölcsője és a magyar rovásírás, 1988
10.
Gosztonyi Kálmán: Összehasonlító szumir nyelvtan, 1977
11.
Hajdú Péter: Finn-ugor népek és nyelvek, 1962
12.
Komoróczy Géza: Sumir a magyar? 1979
13.
Lotz János: Mit mondanak nyelvünkről a külföldiek? 1931
14.
Labat, René: A Sumér és Akkad ékjelekról, 1976
15.
Magyar Adorján: A magyar nyelv
16.
Makkay János: A tartariai leletek, 1990
17.
Molnár Erik: A magyar népőstörténete, 1953
18.
Novotny Elemér: Szumir nyelv=magyar nyelv, 1976
19.
Oláh Béla: Édes magyar nyelvünk szumir eredete,1980
20.
Osetzky Dénes: A szumir-magyar származású elmélet esélyei, 1976
21.
Padányi Viktor: Dentumagyaria, 1963
22.
Radics Géza: Eredetünk és őshazánk, 1988
23.
Szili István: A finn-ugor őstörténetírás hiányosságairól, 1977
24.
Zakar András: A sumir nyelvről, 1975
25.
N. Zsufa Sándor: A magyar nyelv nyelvrokonságai, 1942
Athanasius:
Of the 56 particularities of the Sumerian grammar, 53 figure in the Magyar Language. Researchers at Université Paris-Sorbonne have concluded that, of today's world languages, Magyar is the only language that has kept 68% of its ancient etymons, that is, the original elements of humanity's primeval language. For comparison, it should be mentioned that this retention is:
o 4% in the English Language;
o 5% in Latin;
o 12% in Tibetan;
o 26% in Ancient Turkish.
The Magyar Language can be called the primeval language. This is why Magyar words are found in every language of the world. But we did not borrow these words: Rather, since ours is Mankind's most ancient language, it is clear that every other language became an heir to this inheritance.
Laura:
Interesting connection between Sumerian and Hungarian.
The Sumerians, as you must know, sort of "appeared" in Mesopotamia around 4000 BC and no one knows where they came from. They referred to themselves as "the black headed people" and claimed that they were created to be slaves of the gods. Their social structure was organized as city-states which supported a central temple and priesthood. There was a strong class structure: Priests, warriors (whose job it was to protect the priests and temple), craftsmen, peasants. The main activity of the entire social structure seems to have revolved around propitiating the gods so as to prevent calamity.
There are a number of theories of their origins, but no agreement. One expert thinks they came from Tibet, one from central Asia, but most think they came from the South. One "south" theory is that they came from the Indus valley, another from modern Bahrain. There are some similarities between Sumerian and the Tibetan language.
The Sumerian appeared as a fully developed society with a technology and organization that was different from the other societies of the time. Modern, technological, hierarchical civilization seems to have stemmed from this alien and mysterious people. It is said that Communism is not a new and progressive structure of society but rather basically the same sort of society that the Sumerians created with a priesthood controlling the society and its economy five thousand years ago.
The following excerpts from "Physical anthropology and the “Sumerian problem” by Arkadiusz Soltysiak illustrate some of the modern discourse on the problem:
--- Quote ---Beno Landsberger introduced new linguistic arguments to the debate. In his
opinion many names of important Sumerian cities as well as many technical
terms in Sumerian were borrowed from another language or languages, the
languages of Mesopotamia’s original inhabitants, which had been forgotten
before the invention of writing. Landsberger tentatively defined two such
substratum languages, and called them Proto-Euphratean and Proto-Tigridian
(Landsberger 1944; 1945; cf. Gibson 1972:8; Potts 1997:46; Rubio 1999:2).
According to Gelb it is even uncertain that the
Sumerians invented the writing system, because the earliest pictographic tablets
from Uruk may be read also in other languages (1960:263–265).
Landsberger’s theory of pre-Sumerian substratum in Sumerian language
has been recently rejected by G. Rubio who examined the available data and
concluded that all terms interpreted as the evidence of a substratum language
were gradually adopted by the Sumerians together with some technical
innovations in a process of diffusion, and not inherited from any hypothetical
coherent language (Rubio 1999:11). Similar conclusion has been drawn by
G. Gragg on a more general base (1995:2177). This situation of the Sumerian
language may be compared with the present-day adoption of many English
terms concerning computer technologies by other languages: in that case
nobody would claim that such an in‚uence points at English as the substratum
of other languages.
{...}
Another way of reasoning has been presented by Samuel Kramer. This
author has also agreed with Speiser that the Sumerians were not the aboriginal
inhabitants of Mesopotamia and that they had come not long before the Late
Uruk period (1948:156–157). In his opinion the reminiscences of their early
history had been preserved in the tales of Sumerian legendary kings, Gilgamesh,
Enmerkar, and Lugalbanda. Kramer has struck upon the idea that the invasion
of barbarous tribes to more civilised country is often recorded in heroic age epics
– as known from the Greek, Germanic, and Aryan traditions (1948:159). If the
Sumerians produced such kind of literature, it meant for Kramer, that originally
they must have been the barbarians who invaded the Mesopotamia. In Kramer’s
reconstruction Mesopotamia was first settled by immigrants from Iran who
had painted their pottery. Somewhat later they mixed with the Semites who
came from the west. Both ethnic groups created a civilisation, which expanded
and eventually came into contact with early Sumerians, the nomadic tribes
from Transcaucasia or Transcaspia. These Sumerians were initially defeated by
the Mesopotamians, but later they learned the more advanced art of war and
finally conquered Mesopotamia. After the “heroic age”, the time of regress
and perturbations, the Sumerians restored the civilisation, established their
cities, invented the cuneiform script, and eventually were defeated by other
barbarians, the Aryan tribes (1948:160–163).
{...}
Much better grounded in actual archaeological evidence was the
reconstruction proposed by Joan Oates who has noticed the cultural continuity
from the beginning of Ubaid period until the times when the Sumerians
definitely dominated in the southern Mesopotamia (Oates 1960:33–34; cf. Potts
1997:47). There was not only the continuity in the pottery style, but also the
unbroken sequence of temples in Eridu and no traces of any invasion have
been found in any excavated sites from the Ubaid and Uruk periods. It is likely
that the Late Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic Mesopotamian population was
not homogenous – as in later times when many ethnic groups shared the same
way of life – but there is not a single piece of evidence that any migration had
occured in that period and also no proof that the Mesopotamian civilisation
had been created by a population of Iranian origins (Oates 1960:34–37). Joan
Oates’ scepticism gradually prevailed and the “Sumerian problem” started
to be recognised as insoluble (cf. Rubio 1999:1).
{...}
In the story of the “Sumerian problem” the linguistic arguments were
most intensively discussed and sometimes the filologists ignored in their
speculations the archaeological and historical background. However, also
physical anthropology contributed to the debate, especially to the idea of alleged
round-headed “Sumerian race”, and to the theory about the Sumerians’ Indian
origins. It is quite evident that this first motif originated in the misunderstanding
between some physical anthropologists who treated conventional iconography
as comparable with the osteological data, and philologists who
enthousiastically accepted the discrepancy between skulls and art representations
as “scientific” proof of the small contribution of the “Sumerian race” to the
Mesopotamian population. The hypothesis of Indian origins was relatively
better grounded, although no author tested it in proper way and it still remains
only a speculation.
--- End quote ---
Despite the fact that some scholars have tried to distinguish between Semites and Sumerians, it is possible that it is not so clear-cut an issue. Many things in the Hebrew Bible were taken over almost word for word, from the Sumerians so one might even conjecture that the Sumerians (or some of them?) "turned into" Hebrews at some point.
Athanasius:
I start my answer with the repeat of the first part of the mentioned quote:
"Beno Landsberger introduced new linguistic arguments to the debate. In his opinion many names of important Sumerian cities as well as many technical
terms in Sumerian were borrowed from another language or languages, the languages of Mesopotamia’s original inhabitants, which had been forgotten
before the invention of writing. Landsberger tentatively defined two such substratum languages, and called them Proto-Euphratean and Proto-Tigridian
(Landsberger 1944; 1945; cf. Gibson 1972:8; Potts 1997:46; Rubio 1999:2).
According to Gelb it is even uncertain that the Sumerians invented the writing system, because the earliest pictographic tablets
from Uruk may be read also in other languages (1960:263–265)."
And I follow - as a first half of my answer - with another quote (copied out from another freshly started thread in the History part of the Forum):
"The Székely-Magyar runic writing is nearly identical to the ancient sumerian writing of Mesopotamia. Despite all efforts to "Finn-ugor-ize" or "Turk-ize" us, the fact remains that the official position of the science of linguistics is that the origin of 60% of the Magyar language is unknown. Ours is the only language that describes its environment in subsistence, in experience. The English Language does not "anglicize," the French Language does not "francisize" [to explain]. Only the Magyar Language "Magyar-izes," that is, "Magyaráz" [explains](!). For example, the two meanings of the word "hegy" [hill, point] refer to the same shape. This descriptive language-imagery does not exist in other languages. Our complete vocabulary consists of more than two million words(!).
The abundance of archaeological finds proves that, of the linguistic evidence found so far, artifacts bearing Magyar inscriptions are the oldest. For example, the Tatárlakai troves, the 7,000 year old tablets written in runic writing–which are 1,500 years older than the oldest clay tablets found so far in Mesopotamia–can be deciphered with Magyar runic reading skills. Based on this fact, the French Académie des Sciences declares that the cradle of Mankind, and human aptness for writing and culture, originated not in Mesopotamia, but rather in Erdély, [Southeast Carpathian Basin], Europe. Later, the Paris International Oriental Congress adopted this stance, generating a true world sensation. Sadly, though typically the (in name only) Hungarian media, in a massive, united and truly spirited fashion, has shunned this world sensation with its hysterical, Earth-shattering silence.
During excavations conducted in the Tigris and Euphrates valleys, statuettes of animals literally came to light. These statuettes bear witness to the names of the sumerian people's animals–"racka" sheep, "puli" dogs, "kuvasz," "komondor" [canine breeds], "rideg" cattle [bovine breed]. All these words are hauntingly identical to the names of the Magyars' animals. Aside from us, Magyars, no one else in the world has such animals. Based on evidence from grave excavations, the Scythians have been proven to be the most ancient people on Earth, more ancient than the Egyptians. And our chronicles originate the Magyars from the Scythians.
* The pyramids discovered in today's Bosnia are 35,000 years old, and contain Székely runic inscriptions(!).
* Computerized comparative research supports the thesis that the basis of all of Eurasia's folk music can be found in Magyar folk music. "
My point is: the language we are speaking about - I mean the hungarian aka the magyar - is the remain of the original language what the sumerian slave-
race have learned after they had arrived into Mesopotamia. Again a repeat from your quoted article: "...terms in Sumerian were borrowed from another language
or languages, the languages of Mesopotamia’s original inhabitants, which had been forgotten before the invention of writing" In the time of Beno Landsberger the
above-mentioned tatárlaki finds and others hasnt been founded (e.g.: tatárlaki finds dated to the years of 1960s). So, we can add to Beno's claims our owns: the
invention of the writing before the sumerians traced back to the Carpathian Basin before the time of the sumerians. The writing what has adopted by the sumerians.
/And a note: the mentioned found within the bosnian pyramids isnt a fake: Nobody has been any idea about the nature of the founded runic scripts until some
hungarian linguistics has seen the scripts - by chance - and the suddently has been realised that the scripts are the same as the so-called szekely-kind-of runic
scripts what has been dated back as 7000+ years old in Transylvania. Linguistic experts has travelled to Bosnia to further studies, hungarian newspapers reported./
I myself has been surprised when I have read your book (The Secret History of the World) and I found the theory about the race before the sumerians (who
served stoically their gods) and about the theory (similar to Beno's or connected to it) that the sumerians only had learned the language of a previous human
population there. I surprised because many people in Hungary are writing about the ages when ancient hungarians/magyars from the Carpathian Basin has gone
to east-south east and there spent much time until another race pressed them out from there (the sumerians helped by their strange new gods) and after that
the magyars - very slowly - has came back to the Carpathian basin (the old birthplace). I even tought before that those ancient people - my ancestors - could be a kind of late cro-magnonians (they invented the original magyar/szekely runic script what later adopted and modified the race of people we know today as sumerians) and have been lived in Mesopotamia until the arrive to there the stoic sumer slave-race.
Ancient (predates the sumerian runes) magyar/szekely runic script hasnt a nice legend but reality.
Let me quote from the Book Presentation of Selected Studies in Hungarian History by László Botos (note: the book, edited by the Institute of Hungarian Studies, the result of the voluntary efforts of the editors, contributors and translators, appeared in August, 2008, in Budapest, published by the HUN-Idea Publishers, with the support of the World Federation of Hungarians) and I advice to you especially the last paragraph:
"We are not anyone’s inferior and, in fact, recognizing this, we can look anyone in the eyes with the knowledge that we are the descendants of the Scythian-Hun people, who at one time ruled all of Asia and we gave to the Indo-European peoples our many root-words, from which developed those languages which are much less sophisticated than the Hungarian language.
In 1849, the Finno-Ugric hypothesis was imposed upon us. This has never been proven, and, along with the rest of the world, we were encouraged to forget that we were Huns. In this way, we were taught to deny our origins and we were deprived of hope in the future. This was done in order to subjugate us once and for all. Unfortunately, if we consider what our people and country have to look forward to, we can see that this tactic almost succeeded. We also know that this country, whose history was written by its enemies, the Habsburgs and the other surrounding states, will disappear and the people and nation will become slaves.
History can be falsified in the interest of certain groups but we must not forget that this is the worst sin and there will be no mercy for those who have purposely altered the facts. The God of the Hungarians will not forget. Let us follow and trust in the tenets of our ancient faith. Let us live with love for one another, according to the ancient truths and then we will raise a Hungarian nation in which the people live and think as Hungarians and do not just speak the Hungarian language. Our ancestors dared to be Hungarians. What are we afraid of? Széchenyi said: „The Hungarian should love and search for his brother Hungarian.”
Let us forget the demeaning Finno-Ugric hypothesis, which states that we originate from a primitive people of the Tundra, and which has not yet been proven. In order to do this as a nation, we first have to be prepared individually to recognize and accept this huge change. It is not easy to give up what we learned in school and exchange it for new, unknown studies. This is why our task is so difficult. I have noticed many times that a well-educated lecturer, at the beginning of his lecture speaks of a change, a new awakening, but during his lecture he reverts to the old theories propagated by our enemies. The afore-mentioned primitive origins are not demeaning just because they are primitive (indeed, everything has a beginning) but because this theory of our primitive origins is advocated to the entire world, when it is definitively stated and propagated that the majority of our everyday words are borrowed from other peoples, and when no other theory is allowed to be researched.
There had to be some linguistic somersaults to make the idea accepted that these words were borrowed from the Slavic, Latin or German languages. Dr. Tibor Baráth writes: „In the Western World, in the last one-hundred years, there has been an enormous amount of slanderous propaganda. The first to propose and advertise this propaganda were the French and the Czechs, who were later joined by the Rumanians, Serbs and the English. All of them want to establish the conviction and strengthen it in the public opinion of the West, that the Hungarian people are late occupants of the Danube Basin, surrounded by the Carpathian Mountains, that they are a ’foreign body’ in the family of European nations, and for a thousand years, they have just caused trouble. Therefore they came up with the solution that it would be best to erase this nation, and if this is not possible, then to reduce its power to the lowest level . . . only then would there be peace in this part of the continent.” (Montreal, 1975)
The hypothesis of the Finno-Ugric origin, its history and linguistics, served this plan well, in the truncated state of Hungary and in the West. The actions of Hungarians in this area are excusable, for understandable reasons, but the actions of the Western Finno-Ugric scholars are incomprehensible: Who „forced” them to be the executioners of the Hungarian people?
Louis the Child, the King of the Franks, in 907, left instructions for his successors that „ The Hungarians must be annihilated:” We Hungarians should not be involved in our own annihilation.
Huge numbers of struggling Hungarians at home (in Hungary), influenced by the media and led astray by their studies in school, are still unaware of the results of the newest research in the true history of Hungary. Without this knowledge, they are not able to change the regime and thereby persuade the Hungarian Academy of Sciences to discard the Finno-Ugric hypothesis and teach in the interest of the Hungarians. Therefore it is our responsibility as Hungarians living outside the country to make the results of historical and genetic research known abroad and to influence the education of Hungarians at home.
This book, which we now present to you, with your help will complete this task. It is the result of the unselfish efforts of 29 Hungarian scholars, many of them researching abroad, and the generous support of the World Federation of Hungarians. The World Federation is itself struggling with financial difficulties because, on the suggestion of Sándor Csoóri, former Prime Minister Viktor Orban withdrew from this organization, the largest civil organization in the World, which binds together the Hungarian communities all over the world, the governmental financial support that it had enjoyed for many years.
This book leads the reader through many different eras, acquaints him with the connections between the Sumerian, Scythian, Hun, White Hun, Parthian, Avar and Magyar peoples and also presents the decipherment of the Egyptian hieroglyphs, with the aid of Hungarian. It also demonstrates the antiquity of the Magyar Runic Script, used by the first civilized people in the ages preceding the Greco-Roman civilization. It outlines the role of Hungarians as defenders of Europe against the Tartars and the Turks, proves the connections with the Huns and suggests that the Magyar-Huns were the original people of the Carpathian Basin who migrated out of that area thousands of years ago and returned to their ancient home as Magyars. "
And to close this current answer of mine I write here - mostlz from my memory, so sorry about the minor linguistic incompetencies - some additional words by famous internationally known people regarding the magyar/hungarian language:
- Grover S. Kranz american scientist: "The dating of the ancient hungarian/magyar language is very surprising. I personally think that this is the original language
from the stone age and it has predates even the start of the neolitis age languages... clearly, from all of the presently known languages the hungarian is the most ancient. "
- Ove Berglund swediss doctor and translator: "Today when I have knowledges about the structures of the language of humankind my opinion is this: the magyar
- the hungarian - language is the top-product of the logic/creativity of humanity"
- Ede Teller (the famous atomic scientist, born in Hungary) said the following in Paks near before his death (documented): " Let say, my new discovery is: There is only one true language and that is the hungarian".
- George Bernard Shaw (the writer of dramas) told in an interview (made with him by the CBC): "I can say with confidence - after I have studied the hungarian
language trough many years - that I could have created a far more precious and worthy literary work of my life If I had been the possibility to do it by hungarian.
I claim this simply because this strange, powerfull language is the most capable to write about the differences and details of the minor, secret human emotional nuances."
Jerry:
Very interesting thread Athanasius. Just curious - was this:
--- Quote ---The God of the Hungarians will not forget.
--- End quote ---
a trope?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version