«Journal of the Gábor Bálint de Szentkatolna Society Founded: 2009. Internet: _ Volume IV., Issue 4. / October — ...»
Journal of the Gábor Bálint de Szentkatolna Society
Volume IV., Issue 4. / October — December 2012
ISSN 1877-4199 October-December 2012 Volume IV., Issue 4.
JOURNAL OF EURASIAN STUDIES_____________________________________________________________________________________
Publisher Foundation 'Stichting MIKES INTERNATIONAL', established in The Hague, Holland.
Account: Postbank rek.nr. 7528240 Registered: Stichtingenregister: S 41158447 Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken Den Haag Distribution
The periodical can be downloaded from the following Internet-address:
http://www.federatio.org/joes.html If you wish to subscribe to the email mailing list, you can do it by sending an email to the
email@example.com The publisher has no financial sources. It is supported by many in the form of voluntary work and gifts. We kindly appreciate your gifts.
The Editors and the Publisher can be contacted at the following addresses:
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Postal address: P.O. Box 10249, 2501 HE, Den Haag, Holland Individual authors are responsible for facts included and views expressed in their articles.
ISSN 1877-4199 © Mikes International, 2001-2012, All Rights Reserved _____________________________________________________________________________________
© Copyright Mikes International 2001-2012 2 October-December 2012 Volume IV., Issue 4.
JOURNAL OF EURASIAN STUDIES_____________________________________________________________________________________
CALL FOR PAPERSWe encourage everybody to submit to the Editorial Board (email@example.com) papers in the fields covered by the Journal. The papers will be assessed solely on their
academic merits, and these are the prerequisites author(s) must adhere to:
1. An analytical article should have at least 5,000 words including notes,
2. The author(s) must elaborate the theme of the article logically,
3. References must be uniform and clear (the author(s) should follow consistently a particular pattern, like Chicago style, or Harvard style),
4. Author(s) must take all care to develop their ideas on their own; there should be no cases of plagiarism,
5. Wikipedia is not a scientifically authoritative source; referencing it must be avoided, unless Wikipedia or its usage/influence is the topic of the paper,
6. The article can be written in any language. In case it is written in a language other than English, an English summary of at least A4 length is required,
7. A brief (max. 10 sentences long) professional CV in English.
SZABÓ, Christopher The Magyar Raids: Fact and Fable
CZEGLÉDI, Katalin The Nature of the Relationship between the Hungarian and Turkish Languages..............23 MOLNÁR, Zsolt Cognitive Science — The Science of Cognition and Action
ТАМБОВЦЕВ, Юрий Алексеевич Насколько русские близки другим народам по их антропологическим характеристикам?
TAMBOVTSEV, Yuri: How Much Are the Russians Close to Other Peoples by Their Anthropological Characteristics?
DAR, Firdous Ahmad & WANI, Mohd Younus NGOs in Central Asia: a Case Study of Aga Khan in Tajikistan
STEINBACH, Sandro Soviet Heritage and post-Soviet Economic Integration — Ukrainian Export Trade Patterns Reviewed —
LITERATURE & ARTS
MIRABILE, Paul Figures méthodologiques dans la Réalisation de la Koiné Eurasiatique Médiévale.........115 MIRABILE, Paul: Methodological Figures in the Making of the Mediaeval Eurasian Koine
MURAKEÖZY, Éva Patrícia The Road to Van Eyck
PLÁJÁS, Ildikó Zonga Curved Reflexion — a Five-Day Experience of Cinematic Art from India —
TÓTH-UBBENS, Magdi Een vorstelijke jachtpartij in Frankrijk
TÓTH-UBBENS, Magdi: A Royal Hunting Party in France
Report of the International Czuczor-Fogarasi Conference
TWO WINNERS OF THE NOBEL PRIZE IN LITERATURE 2012Professor Peter Englund, Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy, on 11 October 2012 announced that the Nobel Prize in Literature for 2012 was awarded to the Chinese writer Mo Yan (pen name for Guan Moye). Every reader of Mr. Guan’s books, both Chinese and foreign, rejoices in this great award because his very unique way of writing and the power which emanates from his books makes his work unforgettable. Next to his books, his influence in popular culture through film adaptations has also been immense. The movie Red Sorghum, based on parts of his novel of the same title, marked the directorial debut of internationally acclaimed filmmaker Zhang Yimou in 1987; the movie catapulted Mr. Zhang to the front-rank of Chinese directors. Red Sorghum also marked the debut of actress Gong Li. It is also worth mentioning another adaptation of Mr. Guan’s writing, the movie Happy Times, directed again by Zhang Yimou and based on the short story Shifu: You'll Do Anything for a Laugh.
The other winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature for 2012, though unofficial, is the classical Chinese novel. Undoubtedly, the Nobel Prize in Literature has a tremendous impact on bringing writers to the attention of readers. It is highly probable that the world-wide readership of Mo Yan will increase substantially and more and more people will not only enjoy his books but will come to the realization that his œuvre is very deeply rooted in the traditions of the classical Chinese novel. Hopefully more and more people will discover the jewels of the classical Chinese novel like Three Kingdoms and Outlaws of the Marsh by Luo Guanzhong, or Journey to the West or Dream of the Red Chamber, which are frequently mentioned by Mo Yan as formative influences. Indeed, if this discovery takes place, then the Nobel Prize for Mo Yan served his purpose manifold.
*** Approaching the end of the year I wish to thank in the name of the Board of Editors all our authors who submitted valuable writing and made the Journal of Eurasian Studies possible. I also wish to thank the attention of our readers. And finally I wish you all a Happy New Year!
Flórián Farkas Editor-in-Chief The Hague, December 28, 2012 Background There is no consensus on the exact starting date of the military campaigns undertaken by the Hetumoger (“Seven Magyar”) tribal confederation in the ninth and tenth centuries. Some historians begin in 862, when the first Hungarian or Magyar troops appear in the East Frank Kingdom (later Germany) as allies of the Moravians.
However, as this campaign was part of the movement of the Magyar people from their former homeland of “Atelkuzu” (“Between the Rivers”) in today’s Ukraine, Moldova and Romania, into the Carpathian Basin, which would form their land for the next 1,100 years, the campaigns leading up to the so-called “Conquest” will not be dealt with here.
What is important is that the movement of some 200,000 men, women and children, and maybe more, with their herds of horses; cows; camels, sheep and goats and even pigs was done in an orderly, organized fashion that needs further research. It is quite possibly the major event in Continental Europe at the end of the Ninth Century.
To cover this vast movement (and how big it was can be seen by comparing it with the relatively puny American “Wagon Trains” into the West or the Boer Great Treks of South Africa) it was necessary to obtain alliances with the “Great Powers” of the day as well as smaller polities. Thus the Seven Magyars moved into Transylvania, Upper Hungary (northern Hungary, Ukraine and Slovakia) and the Great Hungarian Plain in alliance with the Byzantine Empire and the Holy Roman Empire, which at this time included the East Frankish Kingdom (East Francia) and what are now Austria, Switzerland and northern Italy.
It is interesting to note that the Magyars, often described as “barbarians”, kept their side of the alliances, but the Byzantines betrayed them in 895, likely causing serious losses among the Magyar army on the Balkans. But up until 900, the alliance with the East Franks stayed firm.
The Problem The general “narrative” or storyline, about the “Magyar raids”, in most sources available to the general reader, whether “serious historical works” or ahistorical commentaries and do-it-yourself websites including blogs, goes something like this. (It must sadly be mentioned that certain Hungarian historians,
due to a sense of inferiority, also represent the events this way):
“The Magyars had begun their predatory incursions into Germany, in which they destroyed everything, wherever they penetrated. When, in the year 907, they again advanced against Bavaria in larger numbers than ever, the Margrave Luitpold summoned the entire fighting force of his people for the defence of the country. The Bavarians, however, were completely defeated, 5 July, 907, in a battle in which Luitpold himself, nearly all the Bavarian nobles, and a number of bishops, were killed. The land then became an easy prey to the barbarians and was ruthlessly devastated.”1 This version of events is ahistorical. It is merely a surface reading of secondary sources and fails to seek causes and effects. It also leaves out a number of contemporary statements in the sources and simply omits key facts. It also reverses the order of who attacked whom. In reality, the Bavarians and the troops of the Holy Roman Emperor Louis the Child attacked the Magyars.
And it is at this point that the narrative must be changed. Usually, readers are given the impression that the Magyars, for some reason of their own (such as “barbarism,” as in the quotation above) attacked the Holy Roman Empire and generally wreaked havoc until Otto the Great taught them a lesson in 955 and they slowly turned towards civilization, a process that was completed, depending on whom you believe, either in around 1000 A.D., or is still ongoing.
In this version of events, no military or political reasons are sought, therefore none are found. The weakness of the argument is the concept of the “barbarian”, which is brought in to explain the apparent actions of the Magyars. Additional biased ideas, such as their “paganism” and general supposed “primitiveness” are all that are needed to explain their raids into “civilised” Europe and Byzantium.
Some Answers An in-depth look shows this view to be inadequate, to say the least. The present article addresses this problem. I will endeavour to show that the necessary information is available to all who are interested in what happened. It is hoped that a revision of widely-held views will result.
Failure to comprehend the Magyar horse culture During the research for this paper, which lasted well over a year, the author realised that most historians did not comprehend the Magyar social system. It can safely be stated that there is huge ignorance of the extremely strong cultural system which lasted from well before the 10th Century to post WWII times in rural Hungary. This was the system of the family-extended family-tribe-tribal confederation which was more lasting than any Western monarchical system and more lasting than most Chinese dynasties.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01751b.htm The Catholic Encyclopedia, Arnulf of Bavaria, lines 1-8. Accessed 14 October, 1
The basic element of Old Magyar society – and indeed, of many other Steppe societies – was the extended family, called a “had”/ hɑd/. The word today is a reference to military organisation, but it originally just meant the extended family which included not only a father, mother, children; but also uncles, aunts, in-laws and grandparents all living in an organised unit.
The had, which numbered about a hundred people, was also called “falu” /’fɑlʊ/ and which today means “village”, was part of a “nemzetség” /’nɛmznɛtse:g/ or clan. Hungarian chronicles say there were 108 such clans, which would comprise a number of villages as well as the territory of the clan leader, his military retinue and a number of tradesmen as well as herdsmen. A clan would be numbered in the thousands.
On the next level was the “törzs” /’tørʒ/ or “tribe”. The Magyars are recorded as having seven such tribes but three “Kabar” tribes also joined them and then when they settled in Hungary between 890 (or so) and 900 they no doubt added the Avars, who were a majority at the time, as well as the few Slavs and other ethnic groups, to their numbers and organisation.
Finally, based on material given to him by Bulcsú /bultʃu:/ and other Árpád family members, Constantine VI “Porphyrogenitos” (“Born in Purple”) in his De Administrando Imperio describes three supra-tribal offices, that of the Kende, the Gyula and the Horka.
Scholars argue as to who were the Kende and who the Gyula, but for a long time Bulcsú was the Horka.
The Kende, according to both Constantine and Arab sources was a kind of sacral king, the military commander was the Gyula and the Horka was a kind of judge.
It should be noted that during the 10th Century, Volga Bulgars as well as Petcheneg groups settled in Hungary and were placed on the borders as border guards, along with others.
It is therefore a mistake to say that the Hungarian state only came into being with the rule of Saint Stephen (Grand Duke from 997), King from 1000 to 1038. In actual fact, the Grand Duchy (for lack of a better expression) of Hungary came into being around 890 and lasted until King Saint Stephen “upgraded” it. However, it has been shown that the Magyars were settling into a relatively permanent state right from 895 onwards.