Proof on film, made in
1976, showing Ecuadorian archaeologist and journalist
Presley Norton naming Andres Fernández Salvador as the person
who first informed
Juan Moricz about the Tayos Caves treasure [in the mid-1960s].
Thanks
to the initiative of scholar/translator Dr. Gyorgy Sipos, Hungarian
speakers can now read Stan
Hall's co-ordinated information on the matchless role the Magyar
language and Magyar scholars must play - however daunting the task
- in revising, facilitating, and correcting the translation of Egyptian,
Sumerian, and other ancient inscriptions, thus bringing to scholars,
and to the public in general, a fuller and truer understanding of
world history.
Juan
Moricz believed that history lacks global vision; that, after the
Deluge, the so-called New World of the Americas became the mother
of civilization and that its culture was ancient Magyar: that European
and Middle-Eastern cultures had appeared suddenly, without the indispensible
logic of evolutionary development: that these cultures were transported
from the Americas, where their evolutionary antecedents are simple
to identify: that some groups survived the Deluge, but those on
the crests of the Andes were primarily responsible for the post-diluvian
dispersion of knowledge and culture: that between 8000 and 7000
BC they arrived in Lower Mesopotamia in boats made from balsa wood
found only in South America: that, in Ecuador, place names like
Shumir, Zumir, Shammar, Mosul and an infinity of others found mainly
in the province of Azuay, identify this region of South America
as the motherland of the ancient Sumerians, or Zumirs, whose language
is a derivation of proto-Magyar.
"The
Neolithic settlement in Mehgarh, located within the physiographic
region of upper Sindth, has revealed that human settlement in the
Indus region dates back to the 6th millennium BC." Prof. Mohammed Rafique Mughal, Boston University (March 2007)
The Magyars
of the Carpathian Mountains of Europe are of American origin, said
Moricz: upon leaving the Andes they brought across the Atlantic
idiomatic elements of the Magyar language, together with an accumulation
of legends, traditions and beliefs: that, in Ecuador -- as elsewhere
in the Americas -- the Cayapos, Jibaro-Shuar, Tschachis, Saragurus,
Salasakas and others speak versions of the old Magyar tongue: that
place-names and dialects of Ecuador, although many have been eroded
by acculturalisation, or eliminated by force, are numerous.
The similarity
between the old Magyar and Sumerian tongues, declared Moricz, cannot
be attributed to coincidence: apart from philological similarities
- such as nap for 'light of the Sun', Ur for 'lord' and Isten for
'god' - there are ethnographic, religious, artistic and folkloric
connections. At the end of the 8th Century AD, a Magyar people,
the Karas (royal Scythians or White Huns), emigrated from India
across the great eastern sea {the Sinus Magnus of Ptolemy} to their
solar Motherland in South America; these being the same Caras who,
according to late 18th Century father of Ecuadorian prehistory,
Padre Juan de Velasco, arrived that same century in what has since
been called the Bahia de Caraquez, in the province of Manabi.
Too little
is known of this amazing man, Juan Moricz, born Janos Moricz Opos,
in Hungary, in 1923; and, because he wrote so little, that is probably
how it will remain. There are explorers who organize expeditions
of a lifetime to experience what he lived daily. He was a brilliant,
charming, but difficult and stubborn man. Before armchair critics
identify him as a mere adventurer, here follows a list of specialists
- apparently invisible to western scholars - who responded to an
enquiry concerning possible Magyar-Quechua connections, sent by
the Ecuadorian Ministry of Foreign Relations at the request of Moricz.
Their collective response is no less astounding than the silent
neglect presently accorded to their work.
Magyar
Specialists
Dr
Barna Kósa -- Melbourne, Australia: Specialised in the
cultures of Mesopotamia, Palestine, and Anatolia [Turkey]. Has verified
and ratified the hypotheses of Juan Moricz with respect to cultural
diffusion from America and the American origin of the Magyars. Has
issued publications for half-a-century including a paper concerning
the discoveries of Juan Morícz.
Dr.
Lázló Rimanóczy -- NSW, Australia: Member
of Scientific Societies in Belguim. Sumerologist specialised in
the cultural exchange between America and Mesopotamia. Has realized
studies on dynasties that ruled the ancient Kingdom of the Kitus
{Quito}. Confirms the studies of Juan Morícz.
Gyula
Szentirmay -- NSW, Australia: Friend of renowned investigator
Pataky Kálmán: Scientific intermediary between Kálmán
and Juan Morícz. Compiling 50 years of work on the American
origin of the Magyars into a book.
Lázló
Turmezei -- Investigator: ex-member of the Academy of Sciences
of Hungary. A leading authority on Malaysia, Polynesia, etc. After
revising the studies of Morícz he confirmed that his discovery
open the doors for a complete revision of the history of the American
Continent.
Alexander
Csóke -- Schlossberg 2, Austria: Philologist specialising
in the languages of the Caucasus, the Urals, Altai etc. Since the
discoveries of Juan Moricz has been dedicated to the pre-colombian
tongues of Ecuador and has confirmed Moricz's American origin and
cultural diffusion of the Magyars.
Dr.
Tibor Baráth -- Montreal, Canada: Many years professor
of History and Geography at the Sorbonne, Paris. Leading investigator
of Sumerian and Egyptian cultures. His publication on Mesopotamian
cultures mentions the discoveries of Juan Morícz as an important
clarification of prehistory.
Dr.
Dénes Gergely -- Ontario, Canada: Eminent linguist who
spent many years in Central and South America investigating the
origin of the Magyars. Has confirmed the hypothesis of Juan Morícz,
having arrived at similar conclusions after comparative studies
between Magyar and the pre-colombian languages of the Republic of
Colombia.
Dr.
Szólloósy S. Said -- Germany: Investigator specialised
in the cultures of Central and South America and analyser of the
connections of the latter with Europe and the Near East. In a publication
has ratified the discoveries of Juan Morícz regarding cultural
diffusion from the Americas.
Elemér
Homonnay -- Cleveland, Ohio, USA: professor of History and Geography.
Specialist in pre-colombian cultures and their Magyar relationships.
Others
with whom Morícz corresponded were -- Dr. Gosztony, the Sorbonne,
Paris -- Dr. Alfredo Tagliabue, professor of History and Geography
at the Universidad de la Plata, Argentina -- historian Dr. Alfredo
Kolliker Freers -- President of the Universidad Argentina de Ciencias
Sociales.
***
Many
of the above scholars are of Magyar background, which may be advantageous
or not, but seldom are reputations risked lightly. All are evidently
versed in Magyar history and language and offer a unique opportunity
for western scholars to study their work.
The
Hungar - Magyar Key to the Sumerian and Egyptian Cultures
(after Dr. Tibor
Baráth and Dr. László Marácz)
Something
important in the investigation of early civilization and language
is presently at a standstill because principal factions debating
the origin of the Magyar-Hungarian language, that is, the Finno-Ugrian
and/or Turkish faction and the Sumerian faction – which include,
on all sides, Hungarian-speaking scholars, cannot agree. Well, if
they cannot agree…. And the Finno-Ugrian would appear to carry
prevailing opinion, maybe there is room for my synthesis of the
work of a few scholars championing the Magyar-Sumerian cause.
On May
the 22nd, 1997, a linguistic conference was held in the grounds
of Gödöllõ Agricultural University, participation
by invitation only. The organizer was Dr. Sándor Gyõri
Nagy, who invited the following scholars: János Péntek
(Kolozsvár), György Papp (Ujvidék), Jenõ
Kiss and Géza Balázs (ELTE), Gábor Pap (Gödöllõ/Miskolc),
József P. Pesti (Kalocsa), László Marácz
(Amsterdam). The goal was to discuss the present state of linguistics
in Hungary, which has heretofore been forced to adhere to either
the Finno-Ugrian or the Turkish line of linguistic theory, totally
neglecting the Magyar line of word origins. The participants agreed
on the following:
1. The
origin of the Magyar language cannot be fully and successfully researched
within the constraints of the currently prevailing Finno-Ugrian
theory, which is untenable from a linguistic and scientific point
of view.
2. The
main aim of Magyar linguistics is to fully research and bring to
light the internal structure of the language.
3. Only
then can it be compared to other Eurasian languages, its relationships
with which will be then thoroughly researched.
4. The
evaluation will be done very systematically and with great care.
The Editorial
Staff of the Journal of Hungarian Studies print a news item which
covered the following issues. The Magyar language was banned in
schools during the Habsburg regime (15th – 20th Century).
In 1826, Count István Széchenyi formed and funded
the Hungarian Academy of Sciences to uphold the Magyar language
and culture. Following his death in 1860, the Habsburgs effectively
took control of the Academy… The Gödöllõ
conference will be the first step in re-establishing Count Széchenyi’s
ideals.
***
Sándor
Csomo de Koros reports:
The linguist
and diplomat Sir John Bowring wrote the following about the Magyar
language in 1830:
“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 alien layers can be distinguished in it, which gathered
together during the 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 is not
a calendar that adjusts to the changes of the ages. It needs no-one,
it doesn’t borrow, does no buckstering, 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 archaeology. 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. He who will solve that will analyze
a divine secret, the first thesis of which is: In the beginning
was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
and continuing...
The often-quoted
Bowring opinion brings up a few new questions. First of all what
is he talking about in this quotation? Second, where did he receive
his knowledge of the Magyar language and the courage to declare
these about the Magyar language. Thirdly, what is the divine secret
of which he speaks. Let us try to answer these questions. Bowring,
when he talks about language thinks of the vocabulary, according
to the practice of his day. He knows, that the lexical elements
of the Magyar language are very old, and developed according to
their inner order. The origin of the lexical order is rooted in
the spiritual realm. We may suppose that Bowring who spoke the Magyar
language himself first of all knew this secret, otherwise he would
not have composed his statement in such a mystical yet secure way.
What he could not do was to research the secret of the Magyar language
since there was no writing on this subject in his time and it is
not very likely that he would have discovered it. This could have
come only from a man, whose mother tongue was Magyar, who was a
linguist, who knew the basis of the theoretical Indian linguistics,
the grammatics of Panini about the Sanskrit language, who was well
versed in the ancient culture languages, like the Sumerian, the
Sanskrit, etc. which he could compare with the Magyar, and knew
the ancient cultures and their spiritual wisdom. All these attributes
could have been present in 1830 in only one person, named Sándor
Csoma de Körös. This supposition is strengthened by the
fact that Bowring knew and even supported him. So we may well suppose
that Bowring was introduced into the divine secrets of the Magyar
language by Csoma de Körös.
Begin
at the Beginning!
Two languages
flourished in the Ancient East. One, Sumerian, originated north
of the Tigris and Euphrates basin, coming to full bloom in Szemúr
(Sumer, Sumir), spreading southward, then westward to the Mediterranean.
The other was Ancient Egyptian. Both are believed to be the world's
oldest languages.
These
languages matched exactly the territories where Hungar-Magyar peoples
represented the culture-bearing population.… There is no historical
evidence that the languages were actually called Sumerian or Egyptian
by the indigenous cultures or record-keepers of the time. These
names were adopted by scholars of the 19th century AD, not as names
for the people or their languages, but only as geographical markers.
Sumerian:
The texts
we call Sumerian were written in pictographs for older texts and
cuneiform writing for younger texts. Scholars have hardly touched
the pictographs. Few, if any, have been read. The reason for this
is that they can only yield their meaning and sound values in accordance
with the real Sumerian language, namely Magyar (Hungarian).
Current
views on the Sumerian language are based on the cuneiform texts.
Cuneiform signs usually mark only the consonants, which may be read
without knowing the real Sumerian language, but neither exposes
the nouns nor how to break the text into words.
“According
to the results of independent archaeology, history and philology,
the Scythians entered the Carpathian basin from 130 BC, the Huns
from 361 AD, and the Avars from 586 AD. According to their common
myths all three people originate from Mesopotamia, thus from the
Sumerians who started to flee their homeland since the 19th century
BC, when the Babylonians, Kassites, Assyrians and other people attacked
the Euphrates-Tigris area. According to archaeological research
from the second part of the 19th century, the Transylvanian Tordos
culture shows striking parallels to the Sumerian Uruk Warka IV and
Jemdet Nasr cultures and dates from the 6th millennium BC, hence
about 2 millennia before the Sumerian cultures. We thus have to
conclude first that the founders of the first high culture on earth,
the Sumerians, originated in Transylvania and second that Sumerians
emigrated in several waves back to the Carpathian basin. From these
facts (and not from nationalistic reasons), the Hungarian Continuity
Theory (HCT) can be formulated as follows:
'The
origins of the Hungarians can be traced back to Ancient Mesopotamia
through the Sumerian-Scythian-Hun-Avar-Magyar ethno-linguistic continuity,
which, together with the evidence of the archaeological artifacts
of Sumerian origin found in the Carpathian Basin, indicates that
the ancestors of the Hungarians were the first permanent settlers
of the Carpathian Basin.' (Károly Dombi)
The continuity
of the Hungarians and their ancestors in the Carpathian basin was
also proved anthropologically by the late Professor Grover S. Krantz
(1988), yet without recurring to the Sumerian origin of the people
concerned.” (Hunnic-Hungarian Etymological Word List, based
on the editions of the Isfahan codex by Dr. Csaba Detre and Imre
Pet, by Professor Dr Alfréd Tóth, Mikes International,
The Hague, Holland, 2007)
Egyptian:
Egyptian
texts, also, used simplified pictures, developing later a simplified
form of lettering called hieroglyphs made from the pictures. These,
too, marked only the consonants. Vowels have to be added according
to the spirit of the language. Egyptologists read only the newer
hieroglyphic texts but they are unable to deduce with certainty
the nature of the accompanying vowels or how the text should be
broken into words. Hard and soft consonants were frequently represented
with the same sign (T=D, P=B, S=SZ, K=G, R=L) so there are considerable
possibilities for errors in transcribing the texts into modern alphabets.
Either
scholars never think of employing the Hungarian alphabet or the
Habsburg factor is still prevalent. Yet, basing transliteration
on the English spelling-system, how can they mark the Hungarian
GY, TY, LY sounds which have a firmly established spelling system
in Hungarian? The same word or name is translated according to the
nationality of the translator, as in the case of the Muger ruins
in the city of Ur, or in other Hungar and Magyar names. A scholar
can believe he knows the pronunciation but cannot find in his alphabet
the symbol for the perceived sound, so he may use a symbol of {say}
the Italian alphabet. What might ensue from this same text if, say,
a German scholar transliterates according to the German alphabet?
The foremost
prerequisite for attaining the proper sounds and transliteration
of ancient scripts is familiarity with the language and its rules
of pronunciation. Non-Hungarian speaking researchers lack the magic
language {Magyar} key to unlock the secret. They resort to replacement
keys. Mesopotamian Sumerian is translated with the help of Persian,
Assyrian and, most of all, Hebrew. Egyptian is translated with the
help of the Coptic and Greek languages. Consequently, words transliterated
from Sumerian and Egyptian may lack vowels at critical points or
have vowels introduced unnecessarily. The resulting transcription
is a distortion of the original, in Sumerian and in Egyptian. The
errors in the transliteration-translation process understandably
evolve a language that does not resemble any known language - truly
a language without relatives!
The uncertain
sound-values of the Sumerian and Egyptian languages and incorrect
transliteration of original characteristics were noted by Orientalists.
{Prof. Lawrence Austine} Waddell reproached linguists for basing
the transcriptions of Mesopotamian Sumerian texts on the Assyrian
language. These scholars, says Waddell, "begin their work laden
with false racial and religious theories and do not have a key to
the sound-values of personal names, which we inherited with Sumerian
signs that had several sound-values.” (Lloyd Seton: Foundations
in the Dust, Bristol 1955, p.121). “The destruction of the
Sumerian language took on such proportions that the first translations
proved useless and had to be laid aside”. (Samuel Noah Kramer,
Sumerian Mythology, New York 1961 p.22.) Samuel Kramer, an American
Sumerologist, himself took extensive liberties in translating Sumerian
texts into English, resulting in something completely different
from what is written. He faced seemingly insurmountable problems
(Sumerian Mythology pg. 65, 68, 69, 73, 75-77) because so often
he only feels the meaning of the words based on the text surrounding
it (S.N.Kramer: Twenty-Five Firsts in Man's Recorded History; From
the Tablets of Sumer, Indian Hills, 1956).
We fare
no better with the Egyptian hieroglyphs. Sir Wallis Budge affirms
that the pronunciation of a great number of words, mostly verbs,
cannot be ascertained. (Budge, E.A.W. Egyptian Language. Easy lessons
in Egyptian hieroglyphics with sign list. London, 1958, p.146 and
passim). The great French Egyptologist, Maspero, laments: "It
is our endeavour that we attempt the pronunciation of the Egyptian
words, but it may lead only to marginal results because we never
know with sufficient certainty how they sounded. Our only recourse
is that we establish what sound-values some of the words had in
Greek times, as far as this is possible." (Maspero G.: History
of Egypt, Chaldea, Syria, Babilonia and Assyria. 6.vol. London,
s.d. I, VI) "The general pronunciation of the Egyptian names
in our days is not so much Egyptian, but ‘Egyptologian’;
in other words, pronunciation according to Egyptologists."
(Ceram C.W. A Hettiták Regénye, Hungarian translation
by Márton Hegyi Budapest, 1964, p.26).
***
In the
orthography of names, complete confusion reigns throughout the scholarly
literature. (Ceram C.W. The Secret of the Hittites, V; New York,
1956.) It is hardly necessary to say that differences of opinion
exist among scholars as to the method in which hieroglyphic characters
should be transcribed into Roman letters, Budge E. Wallis Egyptian
language; Easy lessons in Egyptian hieroglyphics with sign list.
London, 1958 - p.32). Since in hieroglyphic writing only the consonants
and not the vowels are indicated our reading of Egyptian names is
only a compromise and we do not pretend that our form of transcription
renders the names as they were pronounced. (Tutankhamun Treasures.
Trésors de Toutankhamon. Montreal, 1964 - p. 4)
In certain
instances it is difficult to read the written text well and find
its true meaning, even with knowledge of the rules of this writing
and reading, and use of the only good key, the Hungarian language,
in establishing the sound values. We are dealing with the spiritual
heritage of a world of 4-5000 years ago. The working of minds then
was different, a difficulty that can only be bridged if we become
familiar with the belief systems of the ages BC.
Egyptian
and Sumerian texts frequently use the following names for Sungod:
Égúr, Székúr, Kerek Úr, Napúr,
Õsúr, Magúr, Útúr, Honúr,
Szemúr, Égetõ Úr, Vörös Szemû,
and at least twenty more expressions. Western scholars unfamiliar
with the key-Magyar language understand only the Úr suffix,
which they translate as God. They believe that, since many names
end with Úr, many gods were worshipped. For these scholars
there is a God An, God Utu, God Sek and so on.
Anyone
familiar with the key language will recognize the above as names
for the same Sungod; the ancients stressed each characteristic of
the Sungod by a given name. We can compare this with the Roman Catholic
Church calling God the ‘Father’ in his creative capacity,
the ‘Son’ in his redemptive capacity and the ‘Holy
Spirit’ in his sanctifying capacity. The Sun, a heavenly body,
is God's visible picture. Since the picture is round, he is Kerek
Úr (Round Lord). Since the Sun brightens and sees everything
like a giant eye another name is Szemúr (Occulate Lord).
Since his eye is single, they call him Egyszemû (One Eyed)
and, according to the Sun's color, Vörös Szemû (Red
Eyed) and, since the Sun resides in the sky they also called him
Égi Szem or Égszem (Eye of Heavens). Given its immense
heat they called him Égetõ Úr (Scorching Lord)
and Sütõ Úr (Shining Lord).
They
also believed that he is the only Lord in this world, so they called
him Honúr (Lord of his Home) and Égi Király
(King of Heavens). His motion-name at sunrise is Ra-Kel (Ra rises);
his rising on the eastern borders Kel-Út (The Road of Rising/East);
where he sits down onto his chair, Szék-Úr (Lord of
the Chair or the Seated/Settled Lord); later, he sits in his chariot
to travel the shiny roads of the skies as Útúr (Lord
of the Road); and when he finishes his daily journey in the west,
Nyug-Út (Resting/Western Road); and, finally, as he sinks
below the horizon, Esút, Este (The Falling/Evening Road,
Evening). All becomes clear when we realize that ancients whose
religion was connected with the Sun were never polytheistic but
worshipped one solar God!
The ancient
theologians substituted the names of their God with symbols, pictures
that had no apparent relationship with their God but were useful
as symbols that convey sounds. The sentences and prayers they created
appear incomprehensible today. For example, when they write God's
name as Ég-Úr (Lord of Heaven) they draw a mouse (Egér);
Székúr (The Seated/Settled Lord) is conveyed by a
wagon (szekér); Kerek-Úr (Round Lord) is represented
by a wagon-wheel (kerék); Úri-Õs (Ancestral
Lord) with a giant (óriás) and so on.
How could
anyone unfamiliar with Hungarian find his way among the symbols?
When is it proper to talk about the Lord of Heaven (Égúr)
and when the animal (egér) that represents his name on Earth?
(For similar reasons the Babylonians worshipped a mouse). We are
not idol-worshippers when we pray before statues in the churches,
rather worshipping the essence of what they symbolize. We often
find in the late Stone and Bronze Ages a tiny bronze-wagon on the
altar. This did not signify worship of the wagon but the meaning
the artifact conveyed as one of the names of the Sungod Székúr
or Az-Ég-Ur (The Seated/Settled God or The Lord of Heaven).
It is
surely vitally important - especially for Hungarians - to understand
the true form of the Sumerian and Egyptian languages. The word-plays
egér - Égúr (mouse - Lord of Heaven), szekér
- Székúr (wagon road) are perfectly clear in the Hungarian
language, as it is in case of Szemúr when his name is written
with the image of a donkey (szamár). These ancients never
worshipped crocodiles, snakes, frogs and insects. Historians should
know this is as a figment of the imagination, just as much as the
supposed relativeless Sumerian and Egyptian languages.
Since
it is difficult to transcribe the ancient Eastern texts into today's
alphabets few are willing to try. Study of the near one-hundred-thousand
known Sumerian and Egyptian literary texts known to scholars has
hardly progressed (S.N. Kramer Sumerian Mythology New York, 1961,
VIII). Present transcribed texts are unsuitable for linguistic studies,
a problem appreciated by A. Nehring, a German scholar, who remarked
as early as 1936: "Thus far there was no attempt to make use
of the grammar, study of sound and structure and sentences in connection
with the problems of the history of the ancients."
Something
is seriously wrong with the old languages presently baptized Sumerian
and Egyptian. The first examiners of the Mesopotamian language called
it a Scythian language. Today they relate it clearly with the Magyar,
Finno-Ugrian or Ural-Altaic languages but still call this language
Sumerian. The name Sumerian was coined in 1869 by Oppert, a French
linguist, and was picked up in the scientific journals of the day
…. But Oppert never understood the meaning of Sumer (Szemúr=Occulate
Lord) and Agade (Égetõ=the Scorching Lord), two different
names for the Sungod. The above- mentioned names can be substituted
by other names of the Sungod, in territory marking names such as
Hon, Kõ, Ma, and Ta. There existed a Napotthon (Home of the
Sun), a Szemhon (Home of the Occulate Being), Makor-Ta, Hét-Ta,
Ég-Ta, Szem-Ta, etc ... (The lands of Makar, Hét,
Ég, Szem, are all names of the same Sungod).
***
Hungarians
and Celts
by Dr.
Tibor E. Baráth
(Excerpt)
“In
the present state of our research, we must make use of circumstantial
evidences to learn more about the ethnic identity of the Celts.
A closer look at the manifestations of Celtic civilization convinces
us that they contained no new feature; all their most striking characteristics
having already been evident in the previous, Scythian civilization
These included the fortified place protected by embankments, ditches
and hedges, the multitude of animal images which pervaded their
arts, the use of horses and sunworship, a heritage from the New
Stone Age. There was only one new addition to Celtic culture: the
extensive use of iron. It follows that the ’Celts’ must
have been an amalgam of the previous non-Indo-European inhabitants
of Europe. This is exactly what scholars have discovered during
the course of their comparative studies. It was found, indeed, that
the Picti of northern Scotland were already Celts — “early
Celts” — who called themselves by that word in the form
of Khaldes or Chaltis, which is the Kelti in ancient graphic form.
J. Hawkes also places the makers of the bell-shaped vessels into
the category of the Celts. There too, the peoples of the barrow-graves
can be found (i.e. the Scythians), and also the Turoni, who migrated
from Central Europe to the banks of the Loire, 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
that the Celts were not a new race in Europe and the Celt or Kelti
name was used as a comprehensive designation of the entire pre-Christian
population of Europe.
The huge
and kindred Celtic mass of BC Europe was linked together by a common
language as well, in addition to the identical elements of their
civilization mentioned above. According to the estimate of Camille
Julien (Paris) “a hundred million” Europeans spoke the
Kelti language in the second half of the first millennium BC; consequently,
there was no linguistic barrier in ancient Europe. In spite of these
categorical statements, nobody has, alas, identified the Celtic
language, nor proved its affiliation with any other. In that 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 meaning of the fundamental
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) that it reached its widest diffusion
during the sixth and fifth centuries BC, and (2) that it contains
the root-word Kel (Quel in French graphic form), “implying
the idea to rise”. He mentions this meaning as the most probable
one, among many 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 Kel signifies ’to rise’ and Kelet the cardinal
point where the Sun rises, i.e. ’Orient, East’. And
the same word, when the -i suffix is added as Kelt-i, Kelet-i means
’He who has come from the direction of the rising Sun’,
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-Indo-European ethnic groups originated
from the same region: from the ancient Orient. Thus the name Kelti
or Keleti was the general term designating all the Hungarian speaking
ethnic groups which had migrated to Central and Western Europe from
the ancient Orient since the Stone Age.
The Kelti
were a very cultured human mass to which Europe owes a great deal.
They were the ones who christened all the great rivers and mountains
of that continent, who designated the places of the future great
cities, and planned the first network of communication. They were
the ’first Europeans’. Had History given them another
hundred years they would have formed a great unitary nation centered
around Gallia and Hungary. But this century had not been granted
to them. The holocaust of the Celts in Gallia was perpetrated by
Julius Caesar and his legions in the first century BC.
Short
Biographies
Professor
László Marácz was born in Utrecht in 1960.
His parents left Hungary at the time of the 1956 Hungarian revolution.
He completed his studies at the University of Groningen in Hungarian
and general linguistics. In 1980 he translated Ferenc Sánta’s
novel The Fifth Seal into Dutch. He attained his qualifications
in general linguistics in 1984. He worked as scientific assistant
at the University of Groningen’s at the department general
linguistic from 1984 to 1990. He defended a thesis concerning the
Magyar language structure under the title “Asymmetries in
Hungarian” doctoral dissertation in 1989. The study centered
on the generative-structuralist analysis of the syntax of the Magyar
language. He engaged in free research from 1991-1992 within the
framework of the Niels Stensen Foundation. He was a guest-researcher
at the MIT in Boston. He held lectures at eight American universities
concerning his doctoral dissertation. He is working at the Amsterdam
University’s Institute of Eastern-Europe from 1992 as Associate
Professor of the program of Magyar studies. His book Hungarian Revival,
Political Reflections on Central Europe raises several important
questions concerning problems of Hungarian survival. He received
a permanent post at the University of Amsterdam.
Professor
Tibor E. Baráth was born in Alsólendva Hungary
in 1906. He received his Ph.D. in History in Budapest, and continued
his postgraduate studies in Vienna, Paris and Montreal. He was professor
of history at the University of Kolozsvár, Hungary (1940-45).
He was Secretary of the Hungarian Institute in Paris (1932-39) and
fulfilled the role of Assistant-Secretary of the International Committee
of Historical Sciences at the same time. He moved to Paris with
his family in 1945 where he founded a Hungarian newspaper. He left
Paris for Montreal, Canada in 1952. He continued his research on
ancient Hungarian history and was author of over one hundred historical
essays and several books.
***
Atl Antis,
in the Amerindian language, means 'Old Andes' - namely, the Andes
before they were elevated - by interplanetary cataclysms - "on
the night of the falling stars!"
The most
ancient register of Hungarian-Magyar origins begins with Nimrud,
King of Zmr (Sumeria) and his two sons, Hunor and Magor, who married
an Eskitus (Scythian) princess called Dul.
The secret
of who built the Stonehenge megalithic stone circle is found in
its Magyar name Isten Henger, meaning Circle, or Cylinder, of God.
The Magyar tribe involved was the Kazi, or Cassi, the same that
centuries later sent the veteran roman legions fleeing back across
the English Channel after their first invasion of the British Isles
(Albion) in 55 BC.
***
For readers
and students of Magyar the following table was kindly contributed
by Zsombor Kaali Nagy: