THE SCYTHIAN HUNGARIANS
1. Their origin and civilization
The history of the Scythians is so complicated and forms such a tangled skein of varied problems — says A. L. Mongait — that, in spite of abundant sources for its study, "the Scythian problem remains an intransigent subject, that is still far from settled" (P 097 bis p. 153). At one time the Scythians are said to be Indo-Europeans, on the basis of the similitude of their language; at another, they are considered Huns, with whom they shared their cultural features. Elsewhere, it is maintained that they belonged to the Hungarian-speaking group of peoples (Uralo-Altaians), with whom they were closely linked throughout their history, both in the Orient and the Occident. All these opinions circulate freely, since nobody has, as yet, correctly analysed the Scythian tongue, nor deciphered any of their written messages. What is definitely known about the Scythians, however, is that they did not all live in a single political structure, but were broken up into several political entities, with as many individual ethnic denominations. The lack of political unity of the Scythians could not, however, conceal their close affinities: they all spoke the same language, had the same solar cult, the same civilization and "were linked by some sort of racial tie" (P 123 p. 42).
Their original homeland, or more precisely, the geographic area where history first detected them, was the northern hinterland of Mesopotamia and Syria. From these regions they were gradually squeezed out by the continuous razzias of the Assyrians, a Semitic population swarming out from the nearby deserts. They subjected the whole Scythian Old Fatherland to their iron rule during the VIIIth century B.C. The destruction of the Kingdom of Arpad, on the great bend of the Euphrates, in 743 B.C. and the capture of the City7State of Karkemish in 717 B.C. were the final stage of Semitic expansion to the North. The Sythian tribes, driven out of their old homes, first concentrated along the Araxes and Kura rivers, in the swampy region of thousands of islands. Thereafter they gradually occupied the higher-lying Terek and Kuban regions, and finally took possession of the large tract of land above the Caucasus, up to the elbow of the Volga.
When they were at the zenith of their history, in the first millenium B.C., Scythian kings ruled over the immense natural grassland stretching from the Carpathians and the Lower Danube eastward, above the Black sea, to the Caucasian mountains (European Scythia) and the Caspian sea, including the Touranian Plain and the Oxus valley (Asiatic Scythia). In addition, detachments of Scythians occupied other farflung regions, such as northwest India and the eastern Asian section of the steppe, extending up to the Chinese borders.
Ruling over such an extensive territory was only possible thanks to the large scale use of the riding horse, which allowed rapid communication between widely separated areas. This innovation explains why the Scythians became the first political organizers in the history of the entire Eurasian steppe. Prior to the use of riding horses, greater political units could be established in large river valleys only, where boats fulfilled the same role, as in the Nile valley and also in the Euphrates and Indus valleys.
It was between 750 B.C. and 500 B.C. that the individuality of the Scythians emerged. They had then a mixed economy: some agriculture, large scale stock-raising, (in which horse-breeding was predominant) and also mining and metal working. They lived under kings and princes whose principal identifying emblem was the golden stag medal. They always moved around on horseback and wore close-fitting pantalons. Their most important arm was a longrange bow, having arrows fitted with triangular metal heads. Under the impact of the new equestrial armies, the Scythians evolved a peculiar defense system, consisting of earthworks. Its purpose was to render any sudden mounted attack against human settlements impossible. The system included a fortified rampart or dike with a deep and wide ditch, filled with water on its outside. The rampart was then planted with thorny hedges, shrubs and trees. These fences extended for hundreds of miles and surrounded thousands of acres of soil as well, to keep the livestock protected against predators. This Scythian military strategy set the pattern for the entire steppe-population and was to remain unchanged for centuries to come.
2. Scythians in Hungary
Owing to the growing pressure of the Sarmatians, another mounted steppe people, the European Scythians slowly drifted westward. They percolated through the Carpathians, and gradually brought the Great Hungarian Lowland, the westernmost fringe of the great Eurasian natural grassland, under their control. They soon transported hereto their royal seat and thus Hungary became the center of Scythian rule. The first Scythian group reached Hungary around 550 B.C. They were called Agathyrsi and have established campsites in the Upper Maros region. They were followed by other groups, occupying many places on the Great Plain, the Transylvanian plateau and in the Bükk and Mátra area. The Scythians were the first Danubian people to establish effective rule over the entire population of Hungary. Thus, the Carpatho-Danubian basin was first unified politically by them. During their rule in Hungary (c. 500 B.C. - 350 B.C.), the Scythians came into contact with the aboriginal Magyar population on a large scale, through intermarriage. Following this historical process, all the Magyar speaking population of the Danube basin began to call themselves "Scythians", an appellation that strongly influenced the view of the medieval chroniclers, who considered the Magyars as a Gens Scythica. The long stay in Hungary of the Scythian ruling clan is evidenced by the most beautiful Scythian treasure ever found, consisting of two gold stags, discovered at Tápió-Szent-Márton and at Zöld-Halom-Puszta respectively (Fig. 30-31).
Fig. 31. Scythian gold-stag from Zöld-Halom-Puszta in an unusual posture. Hungary, Vth century B.C.
The last major detachment of Scythians entered the land under the general name of Sarmati (Sarmatians). They are, however, most frequently mentioned by their clan-names, as Alani, Yazigues and Roxolani. The Yazigues settled in Hungary in A.D. 20, and occupied the pasture-land between the Danube and the Tisza rivers, where they erected strong fortifications. Thanks to their inaccessible territory, they could preserve their autonomous rule during the Roman occupation of Pannónia and Dacia. They lost their ethnic identity during the Hun period, but a large district and a county still retain their name.
The presence of Scythians in Hungary is superbly documented by the archaeological remains of their civilization: grave-mounds and colossal defence installations. The grave-mounds or barrows resulted from the earth they heaped up upon the tombs of their defunct leaders, kings or princes. Grave-mound in Hungarian is Sir-Halom or simply Halom. This term forms part of several dozens of old place-names all over the country, such as Herceg-Halom, 'Prince's Mound'; Zöld-Halom-Puszta 'Green Mound on the Steppe' (there are four such names), in one of them a precious gold stag-medal was found, proving that the mound is really a princely one; Sas-Halom 'Eagle's Mound'; Hegyes-Halom 'Pointed Mound' (two such names); Száz-Halom 'Hundred Mounds' (where the victims of a huge battle have been buried in the Hunnic times). Until 1939, 85 Scythian burial sites were excavated in Hungary, a testimony of the numerous Scythians who were living there.
The innumerable remains of the former Scythian defense system allowed the archaeologists to reconstruct its whole extension. The main line, often in triple rows, started at the Danube elbow at Vác and proceeded eastwards along the northern edge of the Great Plain through Eger and Tokaj to Nyíregyháza. At that point it turned southwards, by-passed Szatmár, Nagyvárad, Gyula and Versec, and at that level, it reached the Danube again. At certain strategically important points, such as at Sopron on the west, and the region of Diósgyőr in the northeast, more elaborate embankments were constructed. Secondary or disconnected ditches existed near rivers at crossings and fords (Garam, Vág, Maros, Temes, Olt), and in mountain passes as well. The rectangular rich land between the Danube and the Tisza to the south was protected by triple lines on its open northern side. The total length of the embankments and ditches in Hungary exceeded 1700 km, while the enclosed and protected area measured 62,000 km2. The building of these defence lines required the removal of 20,000,000 m3 of earth (P 084 and P 102). The technical terms for the various parts of the defence installations were the following: the general name of earthen stronghold was Föld-Vár, the ditch was Árok', the rampart or embankment was Gát; the fence or hedge on top of the embankment Sövény, the enclosure or area surrounded with entrenchment was Sánc or Udvar. These technical terms occur by the dozens in Old Hungarian place-names; one has only to open the Directory of Hungary's place-names to be convinced about this. We have such names as Duna-Földvár, Árok Szállás, Gát-Falva, Sövény-Háza, Sánc, Sánci-Puszta, Sánc-Pataka, Udvar-Hely, etc.
When was this system built and who were its builders? It is obvious that the whole system was not erected at one time. Certain sections were, in all probability, completed during the last centuries of the first millenium B.C., toward the end of Scythian domination, when their rule was threatened. Other parts were built by the Sarmatians, the successors of the Scythians proper, between 250 and 300 A.D. Furthermore, the work was continued during the Hun period as well. Sometimes the ditches' names may give a clue to this question, which are in English: 'Ditch of the Giants', 'Ditch of the Devil', 'Ditch of the Dark Men' (i.e. Csörsz Árka, Csörsz meaning 'Dark' in the local parlance). Other names point to a younger period, such as 'Ditch of the Huns', 'Road of Attila', 'Ditch of the Avars' and 'Roman Embankments'.
To erect so many mounds, and build such gigantic earthen strongholds, it was necessary to have a strong central authority, unified planning, constant maintenance work and, above all, a great number of people for manual work. It follows that not a "few" Scythians had come to live in Hungary, as was earlier erroneously supposed, but "many": ordinary people, as well as kings and princes.
3. The language of the European Scythians
Ancient authors, such as Herodotus, Strabo, Plinius, Jordanes and others agree that all Scythian people spoke the same language, and modern scythologists have also accepted this view almost unanimously. The controversy begins with the next question, viz. what was this language and with which language group was it affiliated? In trying to solve this mystery, we will examine, in turn, common Scythian words recorded by foreign authors, then Scythian ethnic and personal names, and finally Scythian symbols and other written evidence.
One of our principal sources is, of course, Herodotus who had such a keen interest in the Scythian way of life that he undertook the tiresome journey to Olbia on the Black Sea shore to find out more about it. He noted that every Scythian carried an inward curving sharp knife strapped to his boot, and called "A Cina Kesh". In present graphic form, this expression would be A csizma kés (The Boot Knife), whose most important element Kesh, 'Knife' is Kés in Hungarian as well. Herodotus also relates that one of the Scythian names for Sungod was Oetos-Ur-Us, which is also a Hungarian name
Ötös Ur-Ös 'Number 5 Divinity', five being the sacred number of the Sungod, as already mentioned. The Master also noticed that Upper Scythia is often snow-covered in winter, for which reason the soil is concealed from view for months. And he adds that the Scythians call the snow-flakes 'feathers'. Similarly, in Hungarian the same word Pihe is used for both the fine feathers and the light snow-flakes.
The father of historiography was charmed with all that he had learned about the principal Scythian river, the Dnieper, then called Danaber, something like Tanya Bor 'River of the Field' in Hungarian. It was also called Bor Ysthenes, which is again a Hungarian name, meaning 'Divine Water' or 'Fine Water'. Then Herodotus lists a series of arguments why the river is so fine. This river "has upon its banks the loveliest and most excellent pastures for catties; it abounds in the most delicious fish; its water is most pleasant to the taste; its stream is limpid." All these added expressions bolster the Hungarian etymology of the word Ysthenes. And the other part of the river's name, 'Bor', signifies in the local Sekeli-Hungarian dialect of Transylvania, 'drinking water', most often of thermal origin.
Turning now to the Scythian ethnic and personal names, we again refer to Herodotus who says that the name by which the Scythians above the Black Sea called themselves, was Scoloti, whereas the Assyrians called them Ishkusai or Ashguzai and the Greeks simply Skytoi. When these names are placed back into their original spelling, according to the phonetical evolution of the Hungarian, they prove to have been taken from the Hungarian vocabulary. All the names in question terminate with the adjectival suffix -i, which gives the name the meaning of 'originating from', 'coming from' or 'native of'. It follows that the preceding word must indicate the specific geographic area where the Scythians formerly lived. In the case of Scoloti (< H.: Ös-Kelet-i) this original homeland is 'Ancient Orient' (the same as Chaldi, Khaldi), by which name Babylon was also called. The meaning of Ish-Kuza-i and Ash-Guza-i presents no difficulty, when remembering the easy interchangeabi-lity of the kindred consonants K, G and H. It means in Hungarian Ös-haza-i 'Originating from the Old Fatherland', —again Mesopotamia, the same geographic area. At first sight, less evident is the etymology of Skytoi, which may be the Grecized form of the original Hungarian Szigeti 'Coming from the Isles', a reference to their sojourn in the thousand islands of the rivers Kur and Araxes in the southern Caucasus.
All the names analyzed were first given to the Scythians while they were still living in the Caucasian region, busy reconstructing their political set-up with various 'blood-contracts'. They retained these names even later, when another of their group settled in a similar region, around the other side of the Caspian Sea (in Touran). Because of the multitude of isles in that area as well, Ptolemy called it Insulae nationum, 'Isles of Nations'. From the third century B.C. onward, when the Scythians had already lived for generations in their acquired 'Scythia', they were no longer considered as newcomers, but as 'natives' in their own country. Accordingly, they began to be called Hon-i, or in ancient Hungarian spelling: Huni 'Natives', 'Country-Men', again in plain Hungarian. The first Scythian detachments posted on Hungarian soil were the Agathyrsi, in the Upper Maros valley, Transylvania. They were assigned to frontier-guard duties, as their name clearly implies: A Gath Yrsi < A Gát Őrző 'Guardians of Embankments'. The last Scythian confederation of tribes to settle in Hungary were the Yazigues: they settled between the Danube and the Tisza rivers, in the southern central part of Hungary in A.D. 20. By trade, they were cattle keepers and shepherds, as is proven by their name: Yazigue < Jószág (őr) being 'Cattle (keepers).
The list of Scythian ethnic denominations can be completed by a few royal names with a clear meaning. These are mainly the ones which include the distinguishing word 'Aryan', Ur, Ar in Hungarian, as Aria-Peita <Arja Fajta 'King who is of Aryan origin'; Ari-Antus <Arja Honős 'Aryan Land Ancestor'; Scyl-Urus < Urös 'Székely Ancestor'. All the foregoing details are sufficient to convince the reader that the Scythians were misjudged until now as far as their ethnic and linguistic identity is concerned. It seems absolutely certain to-day that they were Magyar tongued and belonged to the once widely diffused Hungarian race.
The written documents the Scythians left behind them bring fresh and decisive evidence to the above conclusion. Amongst such documents, the oldest one is written by the pictorial method which conveys abstract ideas by images of similar-sound-ing concrete objects, as has been indicated several times. In Scythian practice, and also elsewhere, the pictorial writing was mainly used to express royal titles, such as Ancestor, Divine Ancestor. For the former title, the image of an eagle was used, whereas for the latter, that of a stag. The names of these animals in Hungarian, Sas and Szarvas, sounded, indeed, like Az ős and Az Urős respectively. This method of identifying rulers by that way was very widespread, especially in the first millenium B.C., so that a golden stag found in a Scythian mound was considered by archaeologists as the supreme evidence of being connected with a royal tomb.
Because of inherent difficulties, pictorial writing was rarely used for communication of messages of any length; we know of only two such examples, both recorded by Herodotus. The first message narrates how the newly acquired Scythian Kingdom was inherited by Colaxis, the youngest of the three sons of Targitaus, the conqueror (P 067 Book VII cap. 64). God had strewn upon the earth, from the sky, four golden implements: a plough, a yoke, a battle axe (sagaris) and a drinking cup. The Kingdom should be inherited by the one of the three brothers who could pick them up. The two elder brothers failed to do so because the gold took fire as they approached it. But when the youngest born neared the treasure, the flames suddenly vanished, and he picked up the gold. What was the divine message written with these golden objects? We can find out by writing down, one after another, the names of the four items in the Hungarian language: EKE.IGA. SAGARIS.KUPA, which gives the following similar sounding sentence: E7KEIG/AS/AGARIS/ KEPE: E kölyök az Égurös képe 'This child is the deputy for the Heavenly Lord'. That meant, in contemporary language, the Colaxis (the Child) must assume the title 'God on Earth', i.e. the royal dignity. The children had understood the message and they agreed to bequeath the kingdom to the youngest born —says Herodotus.
The second known pictorial message of the Scythians, also in the Hungarian language, was sent to King Darius in 512 B.C., when the latter invaded Scythia to avenge the destruction of Assyria, a hundred years earlier. As the Persian armies bogged down, following the scorched earth policy of the Scythians, Darius, to save face, declared that he would be satisfied with a symbolic submission by receiving the usual water and earth gift from the Scythian king. But, instead of the required gift, the Scythian king sent Darius a bird, a mouse, a frog and five arrows. The Persian king thereupon consulted his chief advisors to find out the meaning of the message. There was, indeed, no doubt that this was a written document. The advisors were divided in their interpretation: some deciphered it as a peace-offer, the Scythian king would be willing to make to the Persians. Others thought that the message contains a serious threat, viz. that all the Persians will be killed with arrows. Darius agreed with the second reading and, panic stricken, left Scythia on one of the following nights. To find out the meaning of the strange message, we again write down the corresponding Hungarian words: MADÁR. EGÉR.BÉKA. ÖT. NYIL and we find the similar sounding, sentence: Magyari kér békét őnála, 'Magyar asks for peace with him', exactly as the first group of advisors had deciphered the message. A second interpretation is possible, when the word for mouse (egér) is replaced by another one for the same animal, Sir, used by the kindred Komi (P 060 p. 19). In that case the message reads thus: Magyar sírba küld nyíllal 'Magyar will kill thee with arrows'. And that was the way Darius himself interpreted the intention of the Scythians.
Besides the pictorial writing, the Scythians were also acquainted with the carved script and bequeathed us a unique message written in that way. It is engraved upon a silver dish 14 inches wide found near the town of Sakiz to the south of Lake
Urmia. It is decorated with animal figures in a row between two concentric circles. Its featured decor was a golden horse, set in the centre. The treasure was meant for a wedding present offered by a Scythian prince on the occasion of the marriage of King Bartatua or King Madyes, to an Assyrian princess in the second half of the VIIth century B.C. (P 054 p. 106; P 123 p. 22 f.). The script (reproduced in P 054 p. 109 and explained in P 007 II p. 63 f.) reads thus in Hungarian: E kis tálcát valaki bőkezűen neki adja; as éke ló 'This small tray is generously given to him by somebody; its adornment is a horse'. After that follows the value of the ware, in conformity to ancient uses and customs. Now, the expression 'its adorment is a horse' conceals the identity of the donor as Sekeli, 'a Siculi'.
Finally, we must mention that the Scythians probably had studied and used Greek letters as well, proof of which are two coins of the Indian Saka-dynasty (first century B.C.). On one of the coins the following Magyar words appear: TURANNO UNTOS 'ERAOY and on the other side: SAKA KOGGANOI. On the second coin: YRKODOY MAKAROY, and on the back: SK'WR (i.e. SAKA UR), (transliteration in P 059 p. 133). According to the present Hungarian orthography, the inscriptions would read thus: 1. Turáni Honös, Király — Székely kagán 'Touranian land -ancestor, — Siculi kaghan' and 2. Uralkodója Magyar — Székely úr' 'Its ruler is a Magyar, a Siculi Prince'.
The three kinds of writing illustrated — pictorial, carved and alphabetical — definitely prove our previous statement: that the Scythians were a Hungarian-speaking people, literate and skillful in writing.
4. Who were the Kelti or Celts?
History books tell us, that around 300 B.C. the name 'Scythian' abruptly vanished from circulation, and that per contra, the Kelti name made its appearance at about the same time. Is there any connection between the two phenomena? Nobody knows with any certainty, in spite of ample available material for the study of Celtic problems. In Hungary alone, for example, over 590 Celtic sites were discovered until 1976, — says Miklós Szabó, author of a book on the Celts in Hungary (P 119 pp. 36 and 16). The basic two volume publication of Henri Hubert (P 070) gives a great deal of factual information about the general history of the Celts, but is already somewhat antiquated. Two smaller recent works, the comprehensive study of Venceslav Kruta (P 083) and Jan Filip (P 049) respectively are far from able to fill the gap. None of the authors mentioned took full advantage of the invaluable help toponymy offers to scrutinize the Celtic place-, ethnic and personal names, although such names are copiously recorded even in J. Caesar's De bello Gallico. Furthermore, Celtic inscriptions engraved upon coins and other archaeological finds were also not taken into due consideration. We even ignore the meaning of the very name: Kelti.
As regards the ethnic identity of the Celts, it was thought, two generations ago, that they were an individual, original human species, i.e. men of high stature and fair complexion. To-day our scholars are inclined to see in these 'first Europeans' rather small-statured, lightly brownish complexioned 'Mediterraneans'. Again others are of the opinion that the Celti were only a ruling class over the previously immigrated, predominantly pre-Indo-European population. Still others think that the Celts were Indo-Europeans who strongly mixed with the aborigines. We do not lack hypotheses, but the truth is, as V. Kruta puts it: "For the time being, there exists no indisputable evidence for the ethnic appurtenance of those who have been called the 'Princes of the first Iron Age" (P 083 p. 64).
In the present state of our researches, 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 (P 132 p. 139). 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, P 049 pp. 16 and 20), and also the Turoni, who migrated from Central Europe to the banks of the Loire (P 089 p. 11), as well as the Secani, who went from Hungary to France, etc. There were also peoples called Kelto-Scythians, Kelto-Ligurians, Kelt-Iberi. Thus, it is evident, 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.(47)
The huge and kindred Celtic mass of B.C. Europe was linked together by a common language as well, in addition to the above-mentioned identical elements of their civilization. According to the estimate of Camille Julien (Paris) "a hundred million" Europeans spoke the Kelti language in the second half of the first millenium B.C. Consequently, there was no linguistic barrier in ancient Europe.(48) 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 B.C., and (2) that it contains the rootword Kel (Quel in French graphic form), "implying the idea to rise" (P 070 I p. 27). He mentions this meaning as the most probable one, amongst many other conjectures listed in a footnote. He could, however, not go any farther in his explanations, thus the question remained unsolved.(49)
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', i.e. from the Orient. In ancient times, this word was spelt in various ways, such as Chaldi, Chaldean and Scoloti. Like most ancient Hungarian ethnic names, it indicates no ethnic particularity, but is merely a geographic appellation recalling their previous fatherland. As such, it was a fitting comprehensive name, because all the pre-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 New Stone Age.
The Kelti were a very cultured human mass, to whom Europe owes a great deal. They were the one 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. As is known, the Romans, "who have become the enemy of the race which founded it", literally destroyed this nation during its gestation. The holocust of the Celts in Gallia was perpetrated by Julius Caesar and his legions, in the first century B.C., between 59 and 51. They systematically massacred all the political leaders of that nation, their soldiers and priests, killing altogether three millions and setting fire to eight hundred towns and villages. After that, the people were economically ruined, terrorized, assimilated and Romanized. The history of Europe does not know of any other similar killings. Yet, Caesar had been whitewashed by historians of all his crimes and stands before us as a "Great European". Only the Kelti in Hungary were capable to outlive the century of hell in Europe.