Magyar Megmaradásért

Nem adjuk fel

 

Sze2019Dec11

The Early Hungarians - THE HUN HUNGARIANS

THE HUN HUNGARIANS

1. The Roman and Germanic influence upon the ethnographic conditions in the Carpatho-Danubian basin

1. The peaceful penetration of Magyar-speaking Oriental tribes into the Carpatho-Danubian region was interrupted after the Scythian and Celtic periods and was replaced by armed interventions from the West. First came the Romans, an imperialist people. After having created a solid basis on the Apennine peninsula, they gradually extended their domination over the entire Mediterranean area during the second and first centuries B.C. Thereafter, for growing security and economic reasons, they extended the frontiers of their Empire up to the Danube, which meant, for Hungary, the occupation of her western province, Transdanubia. After a difficult and long war (from 12 B.C. to 9 A.D.) they besieged it and about fifty years later converted the conquered land into a Roman province, under the name of Pannónia. They ruled this province for about four hundred years, and then gradually handed it over to the Huns, between 409 and 433.

What interests us, regarding the Roman rule of Pannónia, is to ascertain what had happened to the large Magyar-speaking population there. In that respect, we must first recall that the Roman conquest was prompted by strategic considerations and its military character was predominant up to the very end. Above all, the Romans wanted to build a strong military barrier along the Danube. Secondly, the province's Roman governors were not as blood-thirsty and ruthless as was Julius Caesar in Gaul. Thanks to these circumstances, the Roman conquest was neither followed by wholesale massacres of the inhabitants, nor by the extermination of the upper classes, nor by the colonization of the land by a Latin-speaking population. The former tribal structure of the society was maintained, including local administration (P 087 pp. 112, 117). The legions which were keeping watch on the Danube, and the various auxiliary personnel employed for guarding the military roads were mostly manned by a local population, including their commanders. Moreover, what was no less important: the Romans did not suppress the native beliefs. Thus, once the war was over, life, on the whole, followed its ancestral course. Taking all that into account, our scholars evaluated the effect of Roman rule in Pannónia, from an ethnographic point of view, as harmless.

Those who studied Hungarian life in Pannónia under Roman rule more closely, have pointed out certain linguistic facts which evidence the survival of the Hungarian language. The very name of the land Pannónia, for example, is a Hungarian compound with Pan and Hon (=H.: Fenn-Hon) meaning 'Upper Land'. The most important city was Savaria, so named after the Sungod (cf. Savi-tra, Savarna, P 044). In that city, God was worshipped in a great temple, which had an immense Sundisc above its altar. The present-day village of Szabar, near ancient Savaria, probably retains the ancient city's names.

For the survival of the Hungarian language under the Roman rule, it is highly significant that the Roman emperors, coming from Pannónia, used Hungarian throne-names, as did Had-Ri-Anus (117-138), Aur-Eli-Anus (270-275), Val-Eri-Anus (253-260), and Sev-Erus (193-211). In these names the Hungarian component -Anus (= Honős) often appears, meaning 'Country Ancestor', or the word -Erus (Urős) 'Divine Ancestor'. It is not surprising to find so many Hungarian traces in Pannónia, since the political and military centre of the Roman Empire was, in the third and fourth centuries A.D., no longer in Rome, but in Pannónia and Illyria instead. During this time, these provinces, or rather their inhabitants, supplied the best soldiers, governors, and emperors, and also 'Roman' virtue.

After the conquest of Pannónia, the Romans conquered the eastern part of Hungary as well and emperor Trajan converted it to another Roman province named Dacia. The emperor personally conducted the military operations (101-105). The occupation of this land was actually prompted by economic reasons: the Romans wanted to lay their hands upon the abundant supply of gold, silver, copper and salt which was mined there. Dacia's occupation was, however, short lived, lasting about a century and a half. Indeed, the province had to be abandoned in 271, when Roman personnel was evacuated and withdrawn to the southern shore of the Danube. The three most important Dacian cities, Sar-Mizegeth-Usa, Napo-Ca, and A-Pu-Lum have clear Hungarian meanings. The first name would be in present spelling Sár-Mezőket-Ásó (city) 'Where gold fields are dug', the second Nap-Kő 'Sun City', and the third A Fő Ló (városa) '(City) of the Principal Horse', also a Sun city.

The Roman never subjected the mountainous northern section of Hungary, nor the great Central Plain, between Pannónia and Dacia, to their rule. The tribes living in that part of the land maintained their independence. So, Roman domination passed without vital harm in Dacia as well. But, by dismembering the Carpatho-Danubian land into three parts, they retarded the unification of the diverse social groups into a single nation, a process which had been going on since Scythian times. Thus it happened that the territorial re-unification of the entire Carpathia area and the building of a nation befall the next generation of great leaders: King Attila and Prince Arpad.

2. Shortly after the Roman Empire's entry into the Carpathian basin, Germanic tribes also began their penetration into the land. They started from their northwestern homeland Scandia (Scandinavia) pushing eastwards on the East-European table-land until they had reached the River Don in the third century A.D. They were called Goths, and formed two separate groups, the Ostro-Goths and the Visi-Goths. A third Germanic tribal federation, the Gepids, was formed inside the Carpathians, in Transylvania, above the Maros river, as far as the Tisza.

The appearance of Germanic tribes in Eastern and Central Europe filled the Romans with fear, so they encouraged the Huns, who were also threatened, into action. The tense situation provoked the armed intervention of the Huns in 375. After this, Germanic rule crumbled away and the Huns gained control over all eastern and central Europe. This is all well known in history, so that we do not need to discuss it. But less known is the ethnic build-up of the Germanic tribes in question. It is, indeed, a false assumption that the Germanic tribes were as fully Germanic in Eastern and Central Europe as they were when invading continental Europe from Scandinavia around Christ's birth. The explanation is obvious: when the Germanic tribes started for the distant adventure, they usually travelled without women folk and therefore strongly mixed with local population during their wanderings. That had the effect, that within three or four generations, they were a completely different people from the one that set out. The following short analysis will show how the Germanic tribes mixed with Hungarians when they reached the domain of the Magyar ethnic body.

The name Gepida was given to the confederation of Germanic tribes which occupied northeastern Hungary. It has no accepted etymology in the Germanic language, but has in Hungarian, where Gyep-i Ta means '(Men) of the Grass-Land', where the Gepids actually lived. And in the case of the Visi-Goths, which name is supposed to signify 'West Goths' in the Germanic language, the Hungarian gives again a more plausible explanation. In it Visi (in to-day's Hungarian Vizi) means 'Those who live near water courses', which was again true of the Goths. The Germanic ethnic identification symbols were also taken over from the local population, particularly the eagle, typical symbol of the steppe population, and also birds in general. We should also not forget that Gothic script, the so-called Runen, was a simplified Magyar carved script. Its German name originated from the Hungarian word róni 'to carve'. Thus, we should agree with the statement of Gyula László, according to which "the scant upper class of the Goths, the conquering layer, underwent an almost complete transformation under the impact of local traditions and customs" (P 087 pp. 161-164). The modified social structure of the Goths and Gepids was one of the main reasons why they accepted to stay in the Carpathian land so readily even after the Hun conquest, faithfully serving their new king Attila. All that considerably modifies the image we had of the migration of the Germanic peoples, at least in the sector of southeastern Europe. It altogether confirms that the aboriginal Hungarians could keep their own ethnic identity unchanged. And that was the most important feature of the Middle Danube basin on the eve of the coming of the Huns.

2. The coming of the Huns

The Huns emerged in history as an Oriental people living on the pastures of the Oxus river valley, to the south of the Aral Sea. However, in the second century A.D., most of them had already skirted the southern end of the Caspian Sea and were in possession of the land above the Caucasus mountains up to the mouth of the Don river, the steppeland of former Scythia. Their westward move was prompted by fatal climatic changes which transformed their cradle-land (Touran) into a semi-desert. Increasing temperatures resulted in a considerable reduction of the water supply and the grass of the fields vanished. Thus the Huns, living from animal husbandry, had to move and look for new grazing land. At the same time, as just mentioned, Germanic tribes were advancing eastwards on the great European Plain, by occupying more and more pasture, until they too had reached the river Don and came in direct contact with the Huns.

Alarmed by their double misfortune, the Huns felt that their very existence was being threatened and that provoked their violent reaction. Under their first great king Balamber, they attacked the Ostro-Goths, their nearest adversaries, and swiftly broke their power. The Ostrogothic ruling class took refuge in Pannónia and proceeded to Italy a little later. The bulk of the Gothic population, however, submitted to the Huns and was incorporated into their politico-military system as a separate entity under its own leaders. The next Germanic tribal federation, the Visi-Goths, located on the northern bank of the Lower Danube, seeing the defeat of their brethren, offered no resistance, but gave up their land, crossed the Danube and entered into the Roman Empire. Thus, the Huns, with a single sweeping action, arrived at the foothills of the Carpathian mountains in 375 A.D.

Immediately thereafter, the Huns began planning the occupation of the last western segment of the great Eurasian steppeland, the Carpathian Lowland, inside the mountainous arc, by concluding pacts and alliances with their kindred tribes: the Yazigues in the Danube-Tisza quadrangle, the Skirs (= Sikeli) in the western half of the country, the Carpodari in Upper Hungary, as well as with the Romans themselves, whose famous general Aetius became their most important ally. By virtue of these multiple alliances, the Huns gained control of the whole basin inside the Carpathians, without employing military force. Since the land was given over to Hun sovereignty peacefully, without war, and with the blessings of Rome, the local population had no particular reason to expeet hardship. It remained intact and offered its services to the Hun king, a friend of Rome. The Huns set up their permanent head-quarters in the heart of the land, at the confluence of the rivers Tisza and Maros, wherefrom King Oktar ( + 430), King Ruga ( + 434) and thereafter King Attila (+453) governed their extensive empire. Thus, with the coming of the Huns, Roman and Germanic dominions in Central Europe were liquidated and the aborigines liberated.

Aetius continued to court the Huns, even after their installation in Hungary, encouraging them in their westward advance, in order to ease the Germanic pressure on the northern borders of the Roman Empire. For the Huns, the prospect of a possible extension of their sway upon the whole of Europe was an alluring offer, but, as it turned out, a miscalculation. King Attila was unable to win a clear victory in the great battle at Mauriacum, near Troyes, France, in 451. The immense efforts this war required in men and material, and the authoritarian manner Attila handled his subalterns, overstrained the socio-political structure of his realm. So, when Attila suddenly passed away in 453, his empire crumbled, in large part because of the intrigues and rebellion of the Germanic tribes. Attila's sons were defeated in the struggle for the succession (455) and returned with their clans and kinsmen to Scythia, the tract of land above the Black Sea, beyond the Carpathian ranges. They did not, however, forget their ancient grandeur and Prince Csaba, the youngest son of Attila, as soon as he was back in the old country, began to spread the idea of an armed return to Pannónia (= Hungary), to take revenge upon the Germans, whom they considered as the main artisans of their defeat. On his death-bed, he bound his people by oath, to return to Hungary, as soon as they had gathered enough strength, to rebuild a Hun state. Thus, the Huns did not disappear as it was sometimes surmised in certain historical books. They stayed in the immediate neighbourhood, waiting until the clock would strike the hour of their return. This moment arrived in 568.

At that time, a strong federation had come into being with the fusion of two great tribes: the A vari and Chunni consisting mostly of white Huns. The name Avari (< H.: A vár-i) means 'He who comes from an embanked stronghold', and Chunni (< H.: Hun-i, i.e. Hon-i), Huns. J. Thury, a Hungarian historian, established that 37 different sources identify the Avars ethnically as Huns (P 059 pp. 113,128). In the Carpathian basin, they mainly occupied the Great Central Plain and Transdanubia and also considerable parts of present-day Austria and Dalmatia. The Avars kept their empire and their independence until 796, when they were defeated by the Franks under Charlemagne, who destroyed their State, whereby the pendulum swing, once again, westward.

3. The ethnic identity of the Huns

The true identity of the Huns has not yet been clearly established: "We know nearly nothing about their early history" and "the history of Attila is still to be written" (P 061 p. 127). Our evidence on the anthropological build-up of this nation is scanty, because the Huns cremated their dead, thereby leaving no direct anthropological traces of them. Hence, what we know about them comes mostly from second-hand records. In contemporary and later accounts, the Huns are said to be of mixed origins, like all nations with an Oriental background. A major proof of this, as is usually pointed out, was their skin colour which was generally brownish, although there were typical white Huns as well. Their colour difference subsisted even in the fourth and fifth centuries, which indicates that the fusion of the two racial elements of this people had not yet been achieved at that time. This state of their ethnic evolution explains why they were not only called by their common name Huni, but also by other names which emphasize their racial origin. They were called Kush when their darkish colouring was more evident (P 092 pp. 14 f., 19-22), and Aryans (< H.: Uri, Ari), when the white complexion predominated. King Attila is described in the chronicles as a short-statured, darkish complexioned man, of haughty walking.(50)

The various appellations of the Huns all have some significance in the Hungarian language. Their most frequent Huni (< H.: Hon-i) name, often written without H as Unni, Uni, means 'He who lives in the same land', i.e. who is a native of the country, a compatriot. It is a geographic and political term, irrespective of racial origin, as were also the previously analysed names of Magyar, Hungar, Siculi and Kelti. Thus, the main connecting link amongst all these peoples was their common Hungarian language and their identical Oriental origin. Therefore, they mixed easily, once they were placed under a same sovereignty. And there can be no mistake if Attila is referred to as the King of Hungary (rex Hungáriáé), since the Huni were considered as Hungarians (Huni sive Hungari).

In addition to their general names (Huns, Kush, Hungarians) the various factions of this people also came under local denominations.(51) These secondary names were mainly noticed after the collapse of the Hun Empire, when several smaller political entities came into being. These names usually included the distinctive word -Ág- Ur 'Ruler of the branch so and so'. Examples: Kutzi-Ág-Űr, Hun-Ág-Ur, Sár-Ág-Ur. The ethnic identity of the Huns is nevertheless best evidenced by their own written records, which we discovered and which we are now going to analyse in more detail.

4. Hun-symbols and written records

It is often assumed that the Huns were an illiterate, barbaric people who left no written records. This opinion actually stems from the inability of scholars to identify and decipher their script. In fact, as shown below, the Huns bequeathed us with a considerable amount of written records, most of which turned up in Hungary, the one-time centre of their vast empire. Apart from sources of archaeological provenance, diplomatic records also mention their ability to write and to read. We have, in this respect, the rare testimony of Priscos Rhetor, one of the most credible observers of the Huns, who led an embassy to the court of King Attila. He mentions in his report that the King requested the extradition of certain fugitive Huns, whose names he read out in his presence from small wooden sticks, from the Byzantine emperor. Another proof of the Huns' writing ability is the fact that the incised or carved script was always called a "Hun writing", "Hun letters" and "Alphabet of the Huns" in Hungary. The legend about illiterate Huns must be abandoned.

Most existing Hun inscriptions have gold as supporting material and as such display a solemn character. But the daily records which Priscos Rhetor himself had mentioned were made on wood or on other perishable material, which deteriorated and are now lost for ever. Another preliminary question to be answered is whether the existing Hun inscriptions, especially those engraved upon expensive materials, could have really belonged to them at all. We have no reason to doubt this, since our historical sources are positive in stating that the Hun kings were, in general, fond of gold, like all Oriental rulers. We read in these records that Attila's dining table was made of solid gold, and his cooking dishes were also of gold.(52) The same sources mention the existence of a huge Hun golden treasure, which later on became the property of the Hungarian kings by law of succession and was always kept in Hungary, at the royal court. The treasure included the legendary sword of Attila, the so-called Sword of God, implying Attila's divine origin. Moreover, Hungarian medieval charters certify that Ottokár II of Bohemia was asked to restitute all the gold to the King of Hungary, which his grandmother, Ann of Masovia, unlawfully carried away from Hungary to Bohemia. Amongst these precious jewels "was an expensive gold dish, adorned with the finest and most beautiful precious stones, as well as many other famous jewels, which were kept in Hungary from the time of Attila, king of Hungary, and his successors until now."(53) The listed data dispel even the slightest doubt one may have that Attila had been the owner of gold dishes and other precious jewels, which were inscribed.

On the following pages we will show a few Hun symbols, to begin with, which were used for the purpose of identifying the ruler by means of homo-phony, i.e. the pictorial method of writing which was common to all Oriental rulers during Antiquity. Attila's best known such symbol was the Ast-Ur bird, whose image he wore on his shield. This word sounds like Est-Ura, 'Ruler of the West'. This title may have originated from the time when he was only ruling the western half of the Hun Empire, his brother Bleda having been in charge of the eastern part. Furthermore, Attila was also called God's Whip, which is another play on sound for the same title, whip being Ostor in Hungarian, homophonic with Est-Ur. Finally, a widely used Hun badge was the stylized insect having the outlines of a bee (H.: Méh), which identified its bearer (Ur, Ar), as Méh-Ar, i.e. Mahar or Magyar.(54)

Another group of Hun-identifying objects consisted of quadrupeds: mostly dogs, foxes, and wolves. They were used as totems, designating the clan from which they had originated. On the basis of such assumed names, certains Huns could have considered themselves as "Sons of the Dog" or "Sons of the Fox". King Ruga was probably 'Fox' (H.: Róka), while King Oktar may have been 'Mr. Dog' (H.: A kutya ur). The speech of the Huns, especially their battle-cry, was said to resemble "the roaring of lions" (P 099 pp. 64, 147, 178).(55)

The author has deciphered several of the Hun inscriptions which are engraved upon gold dishes, found at Nagy-Szent-Miklós, to the south of the river Maros, which was the central district of the Hun Empire. The cache was discovered in 1791 and yielded 23 pieces (dishes, juges, goblets, etc.), all made of solid gold, weighing altogether 9,925 gr. The commodities were probably not for everyday use, because they are conserved in almost perfect condition, without any trace of wear or tear. It is likely that the purpose of these jewels was rather to preserve important historical messages for the progeny, like royal records. In addition to the individual inscriptions, five richly adorned vessels (numbered 9, 10, 17, 22 and 23) bear an identical short script. It always reads from right to left and was written in memory of the goldsmith who made the decorations: pictures and interwoven figures. The script (Fig. 32) reads in Hungarian thus: áR-U Ké-Pé.T 1 T.eR.éK U.N CSi-Ná.Ta, in present Hungarian orthography: Árú képét egy derék hun csinálta, in English: 'The adornment of this article was made by a skilled Hun.'

bt_teh30

bt_teh31

Fig. 33. Hungarian language message engraved upon a Hunnic gold tray. Treasure of Nagy-Szent-Miklós, Hungary.

A longer inscription appears on a gold tray (Fig. 33), marvellously adorned with a Tree of Life (genealogical tree), flanked on both sides by two stylized attendant animals. In the higher ranking position there are two dog-like creatures with pointed ears, and on the second one are two quadripeds with birds' beaks. The picture may point out the two major Magyar-speaking peoples of Hungary at that time: Huns and Magyars. The one line inscription below the picture reads from right to left and is transliterated thus: aD-iSZ.eN iR-T eR.aN-O.Ni Ro.Ko.N-oK E.L-aT-Ne-Fe-Ke E.L-T-eK J-U Fó-T, in present Hungarian spelling it would be thus: A díszen irt Irán-honi rokonok állatnevekkel éltek; jó volt. Its meaning: 'The Iranian relatives represented on the ornament, used to live under assumed animal names; that was an advantage.'

The longest inscription shown here is engraved upon a golden dish of which there are two identical ones (Fig. 34). Its distinctive feature is an equilateral cross-sign, placed in the middle of the dish, and is surrounded by a circular inscription. It was executed with great care, no doubt because it was King Oktar's royal seal, bearing his full title. We shall not enter into discussing the complicated meaning of the cross-sign, but only of the script itself, which reads counter-clockwise, starting at the 12 o'clock position. The transliteration of the signs is thus: Ne.Te.T.I-K uN Ki.Rá O.K.T.áR O.R-SZ-E-EGe A.Ra-K Jo.K-oN Ve-Te P-A.Ra-To.K-T-O(l) Po.N-T.I-aK I.SZ.T(er) Vi-Té.Ki-E-K O.Ra-Li-aK Tó.T-oK U-RA. In full Hungarian: Negyedik hun király Oktár országa. Örök jogon vette barátoktól. Pontiak, Ister vidékiek, Uraliak, Tótok ura. In English: 'Realm of the fourth Hun king Oktar. He bought it from friends by hereditary right. He is the ruler of those living above the Pontus (= the Black Sea), in the Ister (= Danubian) region, in the Ural area and of the Slavonic peoples.'

bt_teh32

Fig. 34. The great seal of King Oktár the Hun with legend in Hungarian.

The last Hunnic inscription we will be discussing was found outside Hungary. It is incised on the pendant of a necklace found in Wolfheim, Rhein-land. The name of the village where it was found, signifies the 'Dwelling Place of Wolves', a typical Hun designation. The relic comes, in all probability, from a group of Huns who found refuge there after the collapse of their Empire. The message on it was prepared with philological precision (Fig. 35) and is transliterated thus: E.N-G-aR N.E-N-eT.oL EL-O.N-A.N-aK Na.T.A-P.A Ungár nénitől Ilonának, Nagyapa 'From Aunt Ungar to Helen, Grandfather.'

The contemporary written documents of the Huns constitute the decisive evidence that these people were literate, having strong cultural relations with ancient Egypt, and spoke Hungarian. Their records repeatedly say that they originated from the Ancient Near East (Iran), and had acquired their Carpathian land peacefully, by virtue of diplomatic accords.

bt_teh33

Fig. 35. Dedication incised upon the pendent of a Hun necklace in Hungarian. Wolfheim, Germany.

5. The bad image of the Huns in Western Europe

After all we have said about the Huns, the question that comes to mind is how could they have had such bad press in western Europe to this day. This hatred is focussed mainly upon King Attila, the most brilliant figure of his race, secondly, upon the Hun people themselves.

As is disclosed from the analysis regarding this subject (P 099 and P 072), chronicler Jordanes, a man of Gothic descent, started the defamation. It was he who invented the tale that Attila was not a human being, but rather a monster, born from the love of a dog and a witch and had a doglike appearance (canis aspersus), with pointed ears. This monster image has come into circulation, in all probability, through misinterpretation of the Hun custom of using animal symbols to indicate their tribal or national appurtenance. So, when the Huns said that they originated from a wolf or a dog, the naive western priests and chronicle-writers took these expressions literally, and justified their abhorrent image with the Huns' own words.

The Huns' monster image was confirmed by a second feature, namely that God had selected the Hun king to fulfill the ungrateful mission to be God's whip (flagellum Dei), a kind of Anti-Christ, to punish, especially the Latin peoples, for their wickedness and crimes. This second gossip originated obviously from the misinterpretation of the Huns' original symbol, the whip, which in their symbolism, meant simply that Attila was the ruler of West, as explained above. Thus the whip in the hand of Attila had as little to do with a punishing mission as the one in the hands of Egyptian Pharaohs. If Jordanes, this first western propagandist, could have had the opportunity to travel throughout the Hun Empire, he probably would have avoided spreading so much inconsistency amongst his countrymen. Herodotus, almost a thousand years earlier, did his reportage on the Scythians more conscientiously. He spared no trouble and travelled to Olbia, on the Black Sea shore, to gather firsthand information. The description of Priscos Rhetor is similarly much more accurate because he had met Attila personally.

Ordinary Huns were also heaped with slander. It was asserted that they were subhuman beings, the descendants of Scythian witches and of unspecified devils, and that their way of life consisted only of looting, perpetrating robberies and killings. And their speech? Oh, they did not have any, their mouth could only give out short and inarticulate sounds like fleeing animals.(56) This latest Hun-feature also originated from the miscomprehension of the metaphor, according to which the Hun battle-cry was likened to the roaring of lions, as the ancient Egyptian kings have done when in battle. To sum up, all the interpretations the Westerners invented reflect their naivety, lack of experience and a great deal of bad faith.

The Hun armies never sacked Rome, the holy city of Christendom, although they could have done so in 452, having arrived at the gates of the City. In the western interpretation this was not due to Attila's orders, but to a miracle: the apostles Peter and Paul appeared with shining sabres above Attila's head, and this sight frightened the would-be robber who fled. Thereafter, the lucky city was, however, repeatedly robbed and burned by Germanic tribes. First by the Visi-Goths of Alaric in 410 A.D., and then by the Vandals of Gaiseric in 455, when the two saintly apostles failed to pull out their sabres to chase away the real robbers. But such arguments would carry no weight with the makers of myths who persisted in their belief that with the Huns, the scum of Earth had inundated Europe.

The traditional Hun-phobia of medieval western writers clouded the clairvoyance of the modern historians as well who were unable to reason otherwise and saw in Attila the prototype of the Barbar: the uncut, savage man who built nothing and destroyed everything for the sake of destruction. They forget that the mass-murderer Julius

Caesar was the true scourge of God in Antiquity, and that the words Vandal and Vandalism, were not a Hunnic, but of western origin. Fortunately, Hungarian historians have never accepted the Hun-image elaborated by their western colleagues. For them, King Attila was the first great Magyar ruler in Europe, who liberated their forefathers from the western yoke, stopped both Roman and Germanic penetration, and rolled back the invaders of the Carpatho-Danubian basin thus preserving the precious ethnic and political equilibrium in central Europe. Hungarian historians, also, did not ignore the military genius of Attila, and stated emphatically, that the Huns had not only a highly developed culture, but that they had doubtlessly surpassed western civilization which was at that time, in its darkest "dark age" (decadence of the Roman and Byzantine empires). Even Charlemagne, the great Frankish ruler, could not sign his name.

We have to admit, however, that the western historians of today are making efforts to form a more truthful view of the Huns, bringing it more into harmony with our modern scholarly standards. After this cleansing operation, all the incredible features of the Hun-portrait have been discarded, notably those concerning the Huns' monstruous origin, their animal language and their so-called earthly mission. But it will be some time until past conventional wisdom is replaced by the results of modern research. As an illustration of this process, we read, in a recent publication, the admission that "the threat which they (the Huns) had posed to western civilization has probably been exaggerated" (P 104 p. 69). German authors recognize that the Huns, as body-guards, were more reliable than their own fellow countrymen.(57) It shall also be noted that, after all, the central figure of the German sagas was precisely Attila (cf. Nibelungenlied). Germans even want to claim that Attila was one of their kinsmen, his name being a Germanic word, meaning something like "Daddy".(58) It is really high time that the distorted image of the Huns, this dark blot on western historiography, make way for some more serious consideration, wherein the great-power status of the Huns and their world-empire are acknowledged and appreciated at their proper value.

Hozzászólások  

 
Danial
#4 The Early HungariansDanial 2019-10-29 12:46
I like what you guys are up too. Such clever work
and reporting! Keep up the good works guys I've added you guys to my personal blogroll.


Look at my web-site /in-english/our-history/1667-the-early-hungarians
Idézet
 
 
Zoli
#3 Hungarian versionZoli 2016-10-28 08:04
Idézet - Jenő:
Do you have it in Hungarian version?


Magyarul itt található Baráth Tibor művei eme angol témával kapcsolatban: magyarmegmaradasert.hu/.../...

Szeretettel: >Zoli<
Idézet
 
 
Jenő
#2 Plato116@gmail.comJenő 2016-10-28 07:51
Do you have it in Hungarian version?
Idézet
 
 
#1 The Early Hungarians - 1. The Old Hungarian scriptGuest 2016-01-14 17:11
Az adminisztrátor törölte a hozzászólást
 

Szóljon hozzá!

Biztonsági kód
Frissítés

Latest comments

New Articles

Further reading on: Our history

Látogatók

Hungary 68.8%Austria 1.2%
Romania 5.5%Canada 1.1%
United States 3.9%Norway 0.9%
Ukraine 2.8%Switzerland 0.3%
Russian Federation 2.7%France 0.3%
United Kingdom 2.2%Kuwait 0.3%
Slovakia 2.1%Netherlands 0.3%
Germany 1.9%Australia 0.3%
Sweden 1.6%Italy 0.2%
Serbia 1.5%Spain 0.1%

Today: 279
This Week: 1606
Last Week: 5029
This Month: 7533
Last Month: 17858
Total: 2200154