EurasianStudies_0110..

More documents

Recommendations

Info

January-March 2010 JOURNAL OF EURASIAN STUDIES Volume II., Issue 1. _____________________________________________________________________________________ KÁRPÁTI, Gábor Csaba We, Huns — We, Magyars The Military Culture of Magyars and its Related Peoples Paper originally published in the following book * : Authors: KERTAI Zalán & KÁRPÁTI Gábor Csaba Title: HUNS — MAGYARS The Military Culture of Magyars and its Related Peoples Publisher: HUN-idea, Budapest Year of publishing: 2006 Language: English Number of pages: 149 ISBN: 963 7014 17 9 http://www.hun-idea.com/ “History is written by the victors.” This is true for the history of Hungarians, and also of those people, who do not live in freedom, according to their own culture, tradition and values. Yet one characteristic of societies evolved from equestrian cultures of the past is the love of freedom above all, which unconsciously recalls the infinity of endless plains from the collective memory. The Hungarians’ famous love of freedom is reflected in our (written) history: Since our return to the Carpathian Basin in 895, we have fought numerous battles to keep or regain our independence. We have fought against the Germans, Mongols, Turks, Hapsburgs and, in the last century, in both world wars. The first consequence of World War I. was the peace agreement in Trianon, which resulted in the brutal and inhumane mutilation of our country, the territory of the Carpathian Basin, which represented an organic unity. As a result of this, three-fourths of our territory and two-thirds of our population fell * Private persons can order the book from the publisher: HUN-idea, info@hun-idea.com, Molnár u. 23, Budapest (V. district), Hungary, +36-1-266-9292, http://www.hun-idea.com/. Resellers can order the book from: Pult Nagykereskedés, Csángó u. 8, Budapest (XIII. district), Hungary. _____________________________________________________________________________________ © Copyright Mikes International 2001-2010 160
January-March 2010 JOURNAL OF EURASIAN STUDIES Volume II., Issue 1. _____________________________________________________________________________________ into the hands of our Slavonic neighbours, who fostered definite animosity towards Hungarians. After the Second World War, we suffered at the hands of the Soviet bear, while the shadow of Communism was projected not only on the hearts, but also on the minds. The soul of the Hungarian people could not bear this oppression for long. They gave evidence of their superhuman strength and vitality springing from sacral depths when, in 1956, they revolted against Russian tanks and local servants of the Russians, who were in numerical superiority. Our bloody, but clean revolution – for the umpteenth time – fell, and the slow erosion of souls and memory continued to a greater extent than ever. Just like plants, nations are also damaged fatally if their roots are eaten away by some disease. The Austrians knew Talleyrand’s famous saying well (“If you want a nation to be your servant, take its past.”), and from the end of the 18 th century they methodically set out to erode, then later to transform totally our ancient history. Thus, the pre-conceived Finno-Ugric theory was born, which broke away from all the former traditions of Hungarians, and outlined a totally new theory of origin, which presented the Hungarians as underdeveloped as possible. While our myth of origin, the legend of the Miraculous Deer connects the Hun and Magyar nations to Hunor and Magor (Magyar), King Nimród’s twin-sons; while all our Medieval chronicles consider our Hun origin unequivocal, even obvious; while Great King Atilla is respected as the King of Hungarians and his family-tree is traced back to Hunor in 33 steps, the Saxon, Paul Hunsdorfer and the German, Joseph Budenz, who could not even speak Hungarian in the beginning, as members of the Hungarian (!) Academy of Sciences, after the suppression of the 1848–49 War of Independence, under orders from the Hapsburgs, worked out a theory about a nation which never existed, and unfortunately, since then, this has been taught as Hungarian ancient history, beginning in primary school. While the resemblance between our greatest kings was undeniable – the herma of “Shaman king” Saint László from the 11 th century and the sculptures of the Parthian princes from more than a thousand years ago show startling similarity –; while King Mátyás the Just, in the 16 th century, considered himself Atilla’s reincarnation, the Finno-Ugric theory is still trying to link the ancestors of the Hungarians to such primitive people as the Voguls and the Ostyaks, living far in the North, who are now becoming extinct. Rejecting the settled life-style of the stock-raising Scythians the Finno-Ugric theorists developed an image of a nomadic people of hunter-gatherers, consisting of hordes of tribes, which did not even have its own language; the majority of their words consisting of loan-words picked up during their wanderings. This theory is, even today, exclusively the official theory in the field of Hungarian linguistics, due to the efforts of the enthusiastic followers of Hunsdorfer and Budenz (paid by the government), who – in the interest of their own scientific careers – keep alive this old-fashioned distorted theory, which was obviously born for political reasons. It is thought-provoking, however, that Cardinal Giuseppe Mezzofanti, who spoke 58 languages (among them Hungarian), ranked our language “before all others, on the same level as Greek and Latin”; that, at the beginning of the 19 th century, world-famous researchers, such as Jules Oppert, Francois C. Lenormant, Archibald H. Sayce and Anton Deimel, considered Sumerian to be related to Hungarian and that in the 1950’s the Finnish Ministry of Education officially rejected the theory of Finnish–Hungarian relationship. In the last decade, several scientific studies have been published (by non-Hungarians), _____________________________________________________________________________________ © Copyright Mikes International 2001-2010 161
Page 1 and 2:
JOURNAL OF EURASIAN STUDIES _______
Page 3 and 4:
January-March 2010 JOURNAL OF EURAS
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110: January-March 2010 JOURNAL OF EURAS
Page 159: January-March 2010 JOURNAL OF EURAS
show all

EurasianStudies_0110..

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?