Disney:"Huns are evil";what would Hungarian think about this?
hancult...@hotmail.com
"Mulan" will be the Disney feature cartoon of the year,
the villian in the movie is "evil band of Huns" (direct
quote from Mulan official home page at mulan.com), which
tried to invade China's great wall, Mulan, the heroine
of the movie, confront the evil Huns and save China.
The movie start on June 19 in US and Canada.
Do Hungarian today still have any emotional ties to the
historical Huns tribes? My guess is not, others wise
Disney won't dare to use the word "EVIL" to describe Huns.
Disney learned, are they?
As I know, some Hungarian are descendent of the Huns and
some are not, what would the reaction of the Huns
descendents to this movie?
Finally, why are there so many Westerners thought Atilla
the Hun, Genghis Khaan and Turks in far-ancient time looks
Caucasian, altough they were not? What do Hungarian think
about this? Do Hungarian today sweep their Asian origin
under the carpet? Are they proud of Attila the Hun?
How Hungarian text books describe the ancient Huns?
Thank you.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
eeb...@spice.cc.utexas.edu
The relation between "Huns" and "Xiong-Nu"
is not settled academically.
The Turkish like to trace their origin to
"Xiong-Nu", some of them think they can lay claim
on Inner Mongolia, Outer Mongolia, and Xing-Jiang
by this reason. Some Turkish also claim they are related
to Hungarians, apparently, this claim is not
received with any warmth.
Thomas L. Billings
> "Mulan" will be the Disney feature cartoon of the year,
> the villian in the movie is "evil band of Huns" (direct
> quote from Mulan official home page at mulan.com), which
> tried to invade China's great wall, Mulan, the heroine
> of the movie, confront the evil Huns and save China.
> The movie start on June 19 in US and Canada.
> Do Hungarian today still have any emotional ties to the
> historical Huns tribes? My guess is not, others wise
> Disney won't dare to use the word "EVIL" to describe Huns.
> Disney learned, are they?
The Hungarian people today do have a strong Magyar
component in language and other factors. The Magyars
arrived in Hungary a couple of centuries after Atilla died,
and his empire broke up. They were horse-mounted steppe
nomads like the Huns. Their descendants probably won't
have too much real objection.
> As I know, some Hungarian are descendent of the Huns and
> some are not, what would the reaction of the Huns
> descendents to this movie?
I doubt if many, or any, can tell whether they are descended
from a particular group that far back. We're talking about
an event over 1000 years ago when the Magyars came to
Hungary, much less the Huns
> Finally, why are there so many Westerners thought Atilla
> the Hun, Genghis Khaan and Turks in far-ancient time looks
> Caucasian, altough they were not?
They were Central Asian nomads. That means that
though many had an exterior similar to today's east
asians, it is recorded, even by Chinese scholars, that
some had red hair, and other features descended mostly
from what is now thought of as european stock. This
may simply show that so-called caucasian groups were
more widespread and intermixed, through trade, conquest,
slavery, and migration, throughout the length of the northern
eurasian landmass than either europans or others were
willing to admit until recently. No big deal.
> What do Hungarian think
> about this? Do Hungarian today sweep their Asian origin
> under the carpet? Are they proud of Attila the Hun?
> How Hungarian text books describe the ancient Huns?
Good questions. Anyone got some answers?
Where's Horvath when we could use him??
Regards.
Tom Billings
--
Institute for Teleoperated Space Development
it...@teleport.com(Tom Billings)
ITSD's web site is at, http://www.teleport.com/~itsd1/index.html
gole...@cadvision.com
There are many Hungarians with very Mongol features. There was a
historical special about the Huns and the subsequent invasions by them
into Europe and how some soilders remained and settled within the
population. No doubt they intermarried. There is also no doubt that
some Turkish blood was intermingled with Hungarians because of the
occupation by the Turks. Perhaps that is the "relationship" they may
be reffering to. But the Hungarians and the Turkish are two different
groups.
gole...@cadvision.com
On Sun, 14 Jun 1998 05:02:19 GMT, hancult...@hotmail.com wrote:
>"Mulan" will be the Disney feature cartoon of the year,
>the villian in the movie is "evil band of Huns" (direct
>quote from Mulan official home page at mulan.com), which
>tried to invade China's great wall, Mulan, the heroine
>of the movie, confront the evil Huns and save China.
>The movie start on June 19 in US and Canada.
>
The time of Attila the Hun was a very savage time. Of course story
tellers tend to romanticize history, not just in the case of Attila
the Hun.
>Do Hungarian today still have any emotional ties to the
>historical Huns tribes? My guess is not, others wise
>Disney won't dare to use the word "EVIL" to describe Huns.
>Disney learned, are they?
I do not believe most Hungarians spend too much time thinking about
their origins. And most of the ones I have met seemed rather proud of
their origins from a warrior race.
>
>As I know, some Hungarian are descendent of the Huns and
>some are not, what would the reaction of the Huns
>descendents to this movie?
>
I do not think they would care one way or another. It is after all a
story and so was Alladin.
>Finally, why are there so many Westerners thought Atilla
>the Hun, Genghis Khaan and Turks in far-ancient time looks
>Caucasian, altough they were not?
Many Hungarians have disticly Asian looks. Attila the Hun was probably
westernized in looks as was Jesus in many movies and books.
>What do Hungarian think
>about this? Do Hungarian today sweep their Asian origin
>under the carpet?
Why should Hungarians sweep their Asian origins under the carpet?
Our history and origins is nothing to be ashamed of and suggesting
that we "sweep it under the carpet" makes it appear that Asian origins
are something to be ashamed of.
> Are they proud of Attila the Hun?
Just see how many boys are named Attila in Hungary.....
>How Hungarian text books describe the ancient Huns?
>
vagi...@my-dejanews.com
nuk...@worldnet.nospam.att.net
hancult...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> "Mulan" will be the Disney feature cartoon of the year,
> the villian in the movie is "evil band of Huns" (direct
> quote from Mulan official home page at mulan.com), which
> tried to invade China's great wall, Mulan, the heroine
> of the movie, confront the evil Huns and save China.
> The movie start on June 19 in US and Canada.
>
> historical Huns tribes? My guess is not, others wise
> Disney won't dare to use the word "EVIL" to describe Huns.
> Disney learned, are they?
>
Uh....?
It seems Hollywood has no problem portraying "EVIL" whites crushing the
poor innocent Native Americans (or pick your favorite PC group today),
why should they worry about offending someone else?
DAW
Istvan Lippai
Gustav Horvath <tu...@sprint.ca> wrote in article
<3583c30f...@news.sprint.ca>...
> On Sun, 14 Jun 1998 06:03:51 GMT, gole...@cadvision.com wrote:
> > But the Hungarians and the Turkish are two different
> >groups.
>
> Both are sub groups of Turkic.
> BTW. we found it rather sad that for some people WW I still
> not ended yet.
>
> Gustav
Liza is right. Hungarians and Turks are two very different groups. What
Gustav is trying to do is to play on the similarity of words. There were
some Turkic tribes that had contacts with Magyars but it is no more basis
for kinship than to say that we are all related through the great cosmic
slime from which some claim, all life came from. Others claim that it was
Adam and Eve. Other than these far fetched relations, I see no
relationship with Turks. There may be some claim to relationship to
Asians but even that is somewhat obscure.
When you consider that Hungary was decimated by the Tartars and resettled
from our neighboring countries, we can make a much better case for being
related by "blood" to Germans, Austrians, Slavs, and even Serbs (sorry
about the Serbs). Curiously Hungarians didn't mix with the occupying
ottoman Turks to any great extent. It may be due to the Hungarians being
Christians and Turks being Muslims. The Turks captured many Hungarians
and carried them off to slavery. Those we have lost forever. Some Turks
did marry to Hungarians (very few) and became magyarized just as the
Germans, Austrians, Slavs, and Serbs.
Who cares? We developed our unique culture and identity as a people that,
in spite of many infusions, is uniquely Hungarian. It is apparent in our,
language, art, science and customs.
Frankly, I don't know if it possible to attempt to have a reasonable
discussion of this topic. For reasons of his own (never explained),
Gustav is desperate for some Hungarian-Turkish connection. For reasons,
of my own (well known), I want none of it. Add to this the Hungarian
hating crazed canadian, Wally Keeler, who has completely lost all
semblance of sanity and floods every thread with his obscene and idiotic
letters under 4-5 different fake names, and you have no hope of a reasoned
discussion.
Regards, Istvan
The Foreigner
Istvan Lippai
>Add to this the Hungarian
>hating crazed canadian, Wally Keeler, who has completely lost all
>semblance of sanity and floods every thread with his obscene and idiotic
>letters under 4-5 different fake names, and you have no hope of a reasoned
>discussion.
All you have to do is prove your accusation that Wally Keeler and Gregory
Kwiek are one and the same, and Wally Keeler will be gone from SCM forever.
Can't do it can you.
Why?
Because you are a LIAR
joshua geller
tu...@sprint.ca (Gustav Horvath) writes:
> On Sun, 14 Jun 1998 06:03:51 GMT, gole...@cadvision.com wrote:
> > But the Hungarians and the Turkish are two different
> >groups.
> I beg to differ here. :-)>
> Both are sub groups of Turkic.
> BTW. we found it rather sad that for some people WW I still not ended
> yet.
It has been a very long war. It wasn't even close to being over until
the end of the Cold War. It's not quite over yet, for some people.
my very best,
josh
Charles Dombi
Lets get this straight: originally, the Huns, Avars and Magyars
were all the same, they were all Hungarians: the term Hungar
simply means Hun people. Thousands of years ago these Caucasian-
type people spread out across Eurasia from the Caspian region.
They were also known as the Turanians. These Turanians have
played a dominant role in the formation of the Turkic and
Mongolian ethno-linguistic groups, and they have also had a
determining influence on the development of Persian, Indian and
Chinese culture. There are also some Japanese connections. The
situation is similar for Europe: many ethno-linguistic and
cultural characteristics which are attributed to an Indo-
European group, such as the Slavs, are really in fact of
Turanian origin. This is only natural since the Turanians have
dominated Eurasia for thousands of years: this is the Sumerian-
Scythian-Hun-Avar-Magyar continuity.
I would also like to call on all Hungarians to boycott all
Disney products and events and to also boycott all Chinese
goods. China oppresses many Turanian ethnic groups and occupies
their territory: Eastern Turkestan (Sinkiang), Inner Mongolia,
Manchuria and Tibet.
Mark
Charles Dombi wrote:
>
> Lets get this straight: originally, the Huns, Avars and Magyars
> were all the same, they were all Hungarians: the term Hungar
> simply means Hun people. Thousands of years ago these Caucasian-
> type people spread out across Eurasia from the Caspian region.
> They were also known as the Turanians. These Turanians have
> played a dominant role in the formation of the Turkic and
> Mongolian ethno-linguistic groups, and they have also had a
> determining influence on the development of Persian, Indian and
> Chinese culture. There are also some Japanese connections. The
> situation is similar for Europe: many ethno-linguistic and
> cultural characteristics which are attributed to an Indo-
> European group, such as the Slavs, are really in fact of
> Turanian origin. This is only natural since the Turanians have
> dominated Eurasia for thousands of years: this is the Sumerian-
> Scythian-Hun-Avar-Magyar continuity.
>
Az alanti amit olvastam egy magyar nyelvu lapon, latszolag nem egyezik
meg
a Turani eredeti rokonnepek teorijaval- Mi az igazsa'g?
-e's nem a politikailag helyes velemeny? - Mark
*
"Itt és most felfedjük az igazságot és kijelentjük, hogy
a magyarság, amely a Kárpát-medencében él, nem idegen
Európában. Mi sehonnan sem jöttünk, mert a magyar a Kárpát-medence
őslakója. Árpád vezér 1100 évvel ezelőtt csak államot,
Magyarországot, de nem a magyarságot alapította.
Az árják hazugságaival ellentétben a műveltséget és a nyelveket
alapító ősnép a magyar. A magyarság semmiféle turáninak nevezett
rokonnépből nem származik, ellenben ő azok őseleme.
A magyar tehát "történelmi ősturáni faj", egy különös
összetételű, külön egyediségű és jellegű nemzettest, amit
röviden úgy fejezhetünk ki: "Árpád vezér fejedelem népe
1100 évvel ezelőtt nem honfoglalt a Kárpát-medencében, hanem
egyszerűen csak hazatért."
Elvetjük a kitalált finn-ugor, mongol és török-tatár fajelméleteket
mert ezek minden alap nélküli származási mesék. Ezzel szemben
igazság és tény, hogy a magyarság az "ősturáni szittya-hun ősnép
egyenes leszármazottja" és jelenlegi hazájában, a
Kárpát-medencében, annak kialakulási ideje óta él.
Iwala Prasad Singhal hindu régészettudós állítása szerint
a magyarság a királyi szittyáktól származik, akik évezredek
során, hol mint királyi szittyák, hol mint fehér
hunok szerepeltek az őstörténelemben. Ebből egyértelműen
következik az a kétségtelen tény, hogy az "ősvilágtörténelem" egyben
a magyarság őstörténelme is.
Azonban bármilyen álláspont igazolásáról van is szó, miden
esetben megmásíthatatlan bizonyíték a települési adatok neveinek
bizonysága. Az egész világ hemzseg a magyar nyelvű elnevezésektől."
George Szaszvari
In article <6m0pis$m...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA
says...
>Lets get this straight: originally, the Huns, Avars and Magyars
>were all the same, they were all Hungarians: the term Hungar
>simply means Hun people. Thousands of years ago these Caucasian-
The Huns were a Turkic people from the Central Asiatic Steppes,
the Magyars were from the Urals...The Huns disappeared from
history hundreds of years before the Magyars settled what is
now Magyarorszag. The term "Hungarian" for Magyar is a corruption
of Onogur [a Turkic name for Magyars] and has nothing to do with
the Huns. Similar corruptions and misnomers, are known. The people
from the Netherlands are confusedly known [in English, anyway] as
"Dutch" [apparently mixing them up with "Deutsch", or "Duits"],
and those European explorers who sailed west to find a new route
to India and called the natives of the then hitherto unknown
Americas [which the explorers initially thought was Asian India]
"Indians"! Now we have two sets of "Indians": those in India and
those in the Americas! I've even been hearing some people saying
that Indians of the Americas must be closely related to the Indians
of India because of the appellation!! The Hun=Magyar myth is on
the same level and this kind of nonsense made me give up these
discussions years ago...as for Magyar connections with the Japanese,
Mongols, Sumerians, Aliens [UFOs] and other fantasies, I'd advise
one to read somewhat more rigorous research by the likes of Prof
GF Cushing and Dr CA Macartney to get a better perspective.
--
George Szaszvari, DCPS Chess Club, 42 Alleyn Park, London SE21 7AA, UK
gole...@cadvision.com
There is no such thing as a "pure" race. Homosapiens have genetically
mixed with each other upon contact. This is true everywhere. Tracing
ones origins is an interesting hobby, but not something that should be
used in such silliness.
However, human rights is another issue and should be addressed as
such.
On 14 Jun 1998 15:17:48 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Charles Dombi)
wrote:
>
>Lets get this straight: originally, the Huns, Avars and Magyars
>were all the same, they were all Hungarians: the term Hungar
>simply means Hun people. Thousands of years ago these Caucasian-
>type people spread out across Eurasia from the Caspian region.
>They were also known as the Turanians. These Turanians have
>played a dominant role in the formation of the Turkic and
>Mongolian ethno-linguistic groups, and they have also had a
>determining influence on the development of Persian, Indian and
>Chinese culture. There are also some Japanese connections. The
>situation is similar for Europe: many ethno-linguistic and
>cultural characteristics which are attributed to an Indo-
>European group, such as the Slavs, are really in fact of
>Turanian origin. This is only natural since the Turanians have
>dominated Eurasia for thousands of years: this is the Sumerian-
>Scythian-Hun-Avar-Magyar continuity.
>
gole...@cadvision.com
On 14 Jun 1998 08:23:19 -0700, joshua geller
<dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
I dont know what the WW1 has to do with the Turkish and Hungarians
being two different groups? Perhaps I am missing something you could
enlighten me about. Actually, the few Turkish people I do know do not
feel related to me in any way. They are Muslim, I am Catholic, they
like Turkish coffee, I like expresso. At one time in their history
they did invade Europe....no doubt raping and pillaging as they went.
But then other groups in the past did the same. I was not around for
either of the wars, frankly I do not know anything about politics and
do not care. So I do not understand what you are refering to about the
war not being over for some people. But the Turkish people I know do
not regard me as their long lost relation....or any Hungarian for that
matter. They seem to feel more closenes to the Albanians. Can you
explain why?
joshua geller
gole...@cadvision.com writes:
> On 14 Jun 1998 08:23:19 -0700, joshua geller
> <dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
> >[WWI] has been a very long war. It wasn't even close to being over
> >until the end of the Cold War. It's not quite over yet, for some people.
> I dont know what the WW1 has to do with the Turkish and Hungarians
> being two different groups? Perhaps I am missing something you could
> enlighten me about. Actually, the few Turkish people I do know do not
> feel related to me in any way. They are Muslim, I am Catholic, they
> like Turkish coffee, I like expresso. At one time in their history
> they did invade Europe....no doubt raping and pillaging as they went.
> But then other groups in the past did the same. I was not around for
> either of the wars, frankly I do not know anything about politics and
> do not care. So I do not understand what you are refering to about the
> war not being over for some people. But the Turkish people I know do
> not regard me as their long lost relation....or any Hungarian for that
> matter. They seem to feel more closenes to the Albanians. Can you
> explain why?
Dear Sir,
Yes, I can.
my very best,
josh
Gustav Horvath
>Iwala Prasad Singhal hindu régészettudós állítása szerint
>(...)
Yikes!
I believe Dombi is right. TURAN !
Lookie what did I find somewhere else. :-)>
*******************
Magyar-Török nyelvi kapcsolatok
Péter Sára
( Magyar Fórum, 1996 április 18 )
A rendelkezésünkre álló adatokból arra következtethetünk, hogy a
magyar-török kapcsolatok a nagyon távoli múltban gyökereznek. Ôsi
szavainknak igen tekintélyes hányada jelzi, hogy az elômagyar (Ugor?)
és az elôtörök népek szinte a kezdettôl fogva egymás közelében éltek,
és a közöttük levô kapcsolat igen széles körű és igen (erös) intenzív
volt. Már a legkezdetlegesebb viszonyokra utaló szavak közótt is
rendkívül sok a közós eredetü szó:
atya = ata, apa = aba, anya = ana, néne = nine, (emb)-er = er; öreg =
erge, ég = gök, éj = aj (hold), kö=kaya, por = bor, sár = s'ar, sás =
jas', kés = kes, ék = ek, ij = jaj, bot = budak, tü = tik, kígyó=kay
(csúszik), béka = baka, csiga = chivga (szarv), darázs = arisi (méh),
orr = burun, száj = ajax (Jakban), nyak=yaka, kar =qar, boka =bakay,
pata =put, térd =ter, bör= bürüm (takaró), ész = äs, kicsi=kici,
hosszú=uzun, ki=kiy (széle), össze = öz (belseje), kerek =küre, lapos
= yap, elöl=il, alul=alin, jó=iyi, balog=alyy (rossz), meleg=ilik,
izzó=isi..
És a végtelenségig lehetne sorolni különössen az igéket, amelyekböl
most már igazán csak néhányat kívánunk bemutatni ízelitôül:
él=ol, öl=öl, csap =cap, döf=döv, ver=vur, ér=er, eszik=as (étel),
iszik=isu, kap=kap, nyal=jala, szív=suv, emik=ämmäk (szopni), jár=jor,
kél=kel, vet=at, (tat=etü), töm=tun, üz=üz.. stb.
A fentiek és a hozzájuk hasonló szavak százainak a közeli rokonságát
tagadni -úgy gondolom- lehetetlenség. Ugyanakkor azt kell
tapasztalnunk, hogy a hivatalos nyelvtudomány képviselôi mostanáig sem
néznek szembe ezzel a rendkívül nagy horderejü kérdéssel. Igyekeznek a
problémát megkerülni, elhallgatni, söt nem egy esetben el is
hallgattatni mert a nagyon szépen kikerekített finnugor koncepció =
(elmélet) bizony veszélybe került volna. Ebben a vonatkozásban érdemes
idéznünk Bárczi Bézát, aki egy kicsit messzire merészkedett ebben a
tabú témában: "Nem akarom különösen hangsúlyozni, mennyire
valószínütlen általában egy ilyen természetü feltevés, csak azt
jegyzem meg, hogy ennek az elgondolásnak az értelmében nyelvünk már az
ösmagyar kor kezdetén igen erös török hatásnak lett volna kitéve.
Nekem ugyan mindig az volt a véleményem, s ezt ismételten kifejtettem,
hogy a magyar szókincsben van egy szerény török eredetü réteg, mely
ebbe a korai idöbe tartozik, mégsem vélem elfogadhatónak azt a
felfogást, mely szükségszerüen ilyen régi idöben, ilyen széles körü
kétnyelvüség, illetöleg ilyen tömör török hatás föltevésével járna.
Ilyen hatásnak számos nyomot kellet volna hagynia nyelvünkben,
legalább a szókincsben..." (Bárczi Géza: A magyar nyelv múltja és
jelene.) Tegyük gyorsan hozzá, hagyott is, csak túdosaink az ismert
okok miatt nem ismerték fel, vagy ha igen, nem akartak szembesülni
ezekkel a tényekkel.
Sajnos még neves turkológusaink is jobbára csak a finnugor koncepció
(elmélet) büvös körén belúl serénykedtek és tevékenységük szinte
kizárólag arra szorítkozottt, hogy ehhez a koncepcióhoz szorítkozott,
hogy ehhez a koncepcióhoz szolgáltassanak igazoló és erôsítô adatokat.
Ennek a következtében az egyensúly még inkább elbillent, hiszen nem
volt ellensúlyozó erô és így eredetkutatásunk teljesen rossz vágányra
futott.
A "szabályos hangmegfelelések" keresése mellett - a koncepcióbó
adódóan - szivesen foglalkoztak azzal is, hogy bizony török
"jövevényszavak" hol és mikor kerülhettek nyelvünkbe? ... Szerintük a
legkorábbiak a Kr.U V-IX században jutottak hozzánk, ami természetesen
teljesen lehetetlen, hiszen a korábban idézett ôsi szavakat miért
vették volna át évezredekkel késöbb más népektöl? Nekünk talán a
primitív életfunkciónk kifejezésére nem voltak szavaink? Ne áltassuk
magunkat, mert ezek bizony a mi saját belsô keletkezésü szavaink, és
ha mégis kötödnek a török szavakhoz, akkor itt csakis rokonságról
lehet beszélni.
Természetesen senki sem akarja tagadni azt a tényt, hogy a magyar és
török népek kialakulása után ne lett volna közöttük olyan intenzív
érintkezés, keveredés, amelyek során bizonyos szavak, hangmódosulások,
egyéb nyelvi sajátosságok ne kerúlhettek volna át egymáshoz.
Természetesen ilyenek a történelmileg nyomon követhetö idöben is szép
számmal föllelhetök, de ezek köre, jelentösége korántsem volt olyan
nagy és meghatározó, mint ahogyan ezt eddig állitották. A magyarság
törökös jellege és nyelvi hovátartozása ugyanis nem kizárólag ezekböl
a viszonylag kései kapcsolatokból ered, hanem jóval korábbi idöben
gyökerezik. Minden jel szerint volt egy közös nyelvi forrásunk, amely
feltehetöen ahhoz a népességhez tartozott, amely Kr.e. kb. hétezer
körül létrehozta Belsö Ázsiában a Nyugat-Szibériában a fejlett
"andronovói kultúrát". Ezt a népességet nem ismerjúk, csak azt tudjuk
hogy déli irányból érkeztek több hullámban és valószínülegnem voltak
árja népek. Nyelvük bizonyára a magyar és török nyelvekhez hasonlóan
ragózó volt és jóval fejlettebb lehetett, mint az ott talált primitív
öslakóságé. A magam részéröl a magyar és a török nyelvekben fóllelhetö
nagyon ösi és nagyon kózeli rokonvonásokat ebból a kózós forrásból
tudom magyarázni. Ez ad lehetöséget még arra is, hogy a legôsibb
szavak eltéréseire is megfeleló választ adhassunk, mert pl. az
alapszámok jórésze eltér, de nem csak a török a magyartól, hanem a
mongoltól is.. Tehát az egymástól erösen elszigetelten élô kissebb
népcsoportok e kultúra hatására kezdtek nagyobb egységekké szervezödni
és kezdtek kialakulni a nagyobb területekre kiterjedö nyelvek és
neylvi csoportok: magyar (ugor), török stb.
Véleményem szerint a magyarság kialakulása a török népekhez hasonló
módon és hasonló körülmények között ment végbe, lényegében velük
azonos idöben. Tehát a fejlettebb termelésre és fejlettebb társadalmi
viszonyokra utaló szavakat nem kellet a törököktöl átvenni,
kölcsönvenni, mert azok kb. velük egy idöben, azonos forrásokból
eredve és természetesen saját nyelvi és hang törvények szerint
alakultak ki és váltak mégis felismerhetöen hasonlókká.
A közel kétezerre tehetö török kapcsolatú szavaink döntö többségét
semmiképen sem nevezhetjük "jövevényszónak"még a késsöbbi,
mezögazdasággal, iparral, kultúrával összefüggöket sem, mert a fentiek
alapján nem valamelyik török néptöl kerültek hozzánk, hanem belsö
keletkezésüek voltak ezek is, és csakis a forrásuk volt közös. Az
ilyen kapcsolatú szavak tehát, mint
alma=alma, árpa=arpa, bor=bor, borsó=burcaq, bika=buqa, bölény=bülen,
eke =äka, kapu=qapu, kecske=käcka, szür=sür, tengely=tengil,
tenger=tänir, betü=bitik, ige=üge, szám=sam, stb.
Nem azért hasonlítanak annyira, mert átvételek, hanem azért, mert a
gyökerük volt közös és hasonló körülmények között keletkeztek
szerintem jóval korábban, mint ahogyan a finnugor koncepció (elmélet)
alapján ezt vallják. E szavak Kr.U V-IX századi átvételének
szükségességét nem a tények indokolják, hanem csak az elhibázott,
téves koncepciónak az igazolása teszi elöírássá, paranccsá.
Nyilván a koncepció féltése miatt nem került sor eddig még arra, hogy
érdemben foglalkozzanak a magyar és a török nyelvek meglepöen sok
szerkezeti hasonlóságával, rokon vonásával. A török nyelvek szelleme,
szerkezete, építkezése szinte teljesen azonos a miénkkel. Náluk
sincsenek nembeli megkülömböztetések. A szótövek végéhez illesztett
ragjaikal, képzöikkel, jeleikkel ugyanúgy bánnak, mint mi -söt, ezek
is a miénkhez hasonlóan szigorú hangrendben illeszkednek a töszó
magánhangsójához.:
ittam =ictim, olvastam = okudum. Kerülik ök is a mássalhangzó
torlodásokat is nehezen türik, ezért lett az autóból oto náluk is.
A múlt idö jele a miénkhez hasonlóan t vagy d: futott =kostu; látta =
gödü. - A feltételes mód jele és illeszkedése is a miénkhez hasonló;
ír-ná-m = yaz-sa-m; ad-né-k= ver-se-m. Tagadó szavuk szinte a miénkkel
teljesen egyezö: nem, ne = ma, me, de ragozott formában náluk nem az
ige elé kerül, hanem közvetlenül az igetö után áll és ezt követik az
ige ragjai: nem látom = gör-me-m. Helyhatározó ragjuk megegyezik a
magyar régies formával: Kolozsvár-t = Kolozsvár-da; az övék -ta, -te
vagy -da, -de. - Eszközhatározó -ragjuk is szinte teljesen azonos a
miénkkel: ile, bile =val; atyá-m-al=ata-m-ile stb.
Avatott szemü embernek nem nehéz felismerni a névmások rokonságát sem:
én=ben; te=sen, ö=o; mi=miz vagy biz; ti=siz. Birtokos névmások; enyém
=benim, tiéd=senin; övé=onun stb. -Kérdö névmások: ki=kim; mi=ne
(men); milyen=menle; hány=hac; hol=hani; merre=nereye stb.
A jelzö a miénkhez hasonlóan a törökben is a jelzett szó elött áll és
azzal nem egyeztetjük: nem változik sem számban, sem esetben. A
melléknevet segédige nélkül is használhatjuk állítmánynak: ez a virág
szép = bu cicek güzel. Ôk is kerülik a segédigéket és a bírni
szerkezeti formát ök sem használják...
Sára Péter
***************************************
(Please give credit where credit is due. In case of further usage pls.
observe copyright)
Gustav
Istvan Lippai
>
> Most Turks are indeed (at least culturally) Muslims, but there
> are quite a few Christian and even Jewish ones as well.
Are you being a bit dubious here? Are you including people who live in
Turkey and who are Turkish citizens but are harshly discriminated against
because of their religion and ethnicity? As a side question; are you
considering the Kurds "Mountain Turks" as per the official Turkish
propaganda?
> >(...)
> >For reasons, of my own (well known), I want none of it.
>
> Then don't. Usenet is democratic. Everyone has a right to write
> or not to. Your factual comments are welcomed. If you do not
> push your obvious bias or agenda your handicap in this matter
> won't be touched upon.
You are grabbing at straws and hope to establish a kinship when there is
none. You are being disingenuous about your reasons and have never stated
or expressed them. The list of similar Hungarian-Turkish words listed in
your other post are really meaningless for trying to establish
Hungarian-Turkish kinship. The tragic fact is that large parts of Hungary
were under a brutal and repressive Turkish occupation. Still, some words
and customs were exchanged. It was a relationship between the conquered
and the conqueror. For whatever reason, it may be a source of pride and
joy for you but is one of the darkest and most tragic periods in Hungarian
history.
Regards, Istvan
Istvan Lippai
gole...@cadvision.com wrote
> ... But the Turkish people I know do not regard me as their
> long lost relation....or any Hungarian for that matter.
Your are 100% correct in that. Gustav was also repulsed by some of the
Turks for his aggressive promotion of Hungarian-Turkish kinship. I
sometimes correspond with one particular Turk because of our mutual
dislike of communists. He seems like a decent person. He has no interest
in kinship either. We would be able to understand Gustav's reasoning much
better if he would enlighten us about his reasons for wanting this
kinship.
Korosi Csoma Sandor (a great Hungarian anthropologist and linguist) looked
to the far East (not to Turkey) for Hungarian roots. Is there a Tibetan
connection? I don't know. I see no connection, other than the remnant of
Turkish occupation, between Hungarians and Turks.
Regards, Istvan
Mark
Gustav Horvath wrote:
>
> >Iwala Prasad Singhal hindu régészettudós állítása szerint
> >(...)
>
> Yikes!
>
> I believe Dombi is right. TURAN !
> Lookie what did I find somewhere else. :-)>
>
> *******************
> Magyar-Török nyelvi kapcsolatok
>
> Péter Sára
>
> ( Magyar Fórum, 1996 április 18 )
>
Koszonom Gustav. Erdekesnek talalom az indokolast
a Turan theorival kapcsolatban. - A nyelvi hasonlatokat
nehez elmagyarazni. - Megtudna valaki cafolni? - Szeretnem
olvasni.
Mark
joshua geller
gole...@cadvision.com writes:
> On 14 Jun 1998 14:18:02 -0700, joshua geller
> <dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
> >gole...@cadvision.com writes:
> >> [The Turks] seem to feel more closenes to the Albanians
> >> [than to the Hingarians]. Can you explain why?
> >Yes, I can.
> Then please do
Dear Ma'am,
The Turks and Hungarians common ancestry is several thousand years in
the past. A lot has happened since then; the two peoples have gone
their seperate ways. They have each aquired different cultural
complexes. The Albanians, on the other hand, are Slavs who, under
Turkish influence, became Muslims, that is, adopted some of the
cultural complexes that the Turks have made their own. Thus the Turks
feel a sense of relation to the Albanians; they have had friendly
relations for the past few hundred years. The Hungarians, on the other
hand, though they have a common root with the Turks, have become very
different, and what similarities they might see in each other just
emphasize the differences.
Or that is my take on the matter, anyway.
my very best,
josh
gole...@cadvision.com
>gole...@cadvision.com writes:
>> On 14 Jun 1998 08:23:19 -0700, joshua geller
>> <dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
>
>> >[WWI] has been a very long war. It wasn't even close to being over
>> >until the end of the Cold War. It's not quite over yet, for some people.
>
>> I dont know what the WW1 has to do with the Turkish and Hungarians
>> being two different groups? Perhaps I am missing something you could
>> enlighten me about. Actually, the few Turkish people I do know do not
>> feel related to me in any way. They are Muslim, I am Catholic, they
>> like Turkish coffee, I like expresso. At one time in their history
>> they did invade Europe....no doubt raping and pillaging as they went.
>> But then other groups in the past did the same. I was not around for
>> either of the wars, frankly I do not know anything about politics and
>> do not care. So I do not understand what you are refering to about the
>> war not being over for some people. But the Turkish people I know do
>> not regard me as their long lost relation....or any Hungarian for that
>> matter. They seem to feel more closenes to the Albanians. Can you
>> explain why?
>
>Dear Sir,
>
>Yes, I can.
>
>my very best,
>
>josh
>
Dear Josh:
Then please do
Liza
Leo
I don't think so. Tibetan speaks Sino-Tibetan language. It should be the
proto-Mongolian/Turkish tribes during Han Dynasty in China who should be
likely to be speaking an Altaic language.
Istvan Lippai wrote in message
Gustav Horvath
hancult...@hotmail.com
In article <6m0pis$m...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Charles Dombi) wrote:
>
>
> Lets get this straight: originally, the Huns, Avars and Magyars
> were all the same, they were all Hungarians: the term Hungar
> simply means Hun people. Thousands of years ago these Caucasian-
> type people spread out across Eurasia from the Caspian region.
What? Everybody know that the Huns, Turks, Tartars and Mongols
are all Mongoloid. These tribes invade Europe whenever they feels
like it, in fact, Caucasian had never ruled Mongoloid before the
invention of bullet; but Mongoloid had roamed Europe for centuries
like Europe is Asia's backyard.
Here is the link of Genghis Khaan drawing:
http://members.aol.com/yikhmongol/chingis2.jpg
The only proof that the Caucasian were ever went to Asia is the
discover of the remnent of Tocharian culture (Lou2 Lan2 Mummy)
in XinJiang in late 1980', the culture of Caucasian looking
Tocharian were belived to be destroyed by Turks, who arrived in
later time.
see
http://www.wlc.com/oxus/tocharia.htm
see the picture of dead red head lady in China at:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/chinamum/taklamakan.html
> They were also known as the Turanians. These Turanians have
> played a dominant role in the formation of the Turkic and
> Mongolian ethno-linguistic groups, and they have also had a
> determining influence on the development of Persian, Indian and
> Chinese culture. There are also some Japanese connections. The
> situation is similar for Europe: many ethno-linguistic and
> cultural characteristics which are attributed to an Indo-
> European group, such as the Slavs, are really in fact of
> Turanian origin. This is only natural since the Turanians have
> dominated Eurasia for thousands of years: this is the Sumerian-
> Scythian-Hun-Avar-Magyar continuity.
>
> I would also like to call on all Hungarians to boycott all
> Disney products and events and to also boycott all Chinese
> goods. China oppresses many Turanian ethnic groups and occupies
> their territory: Eastern Turkestan (Sinkiang), Inner Mongolia,
> Manchuria and Tibet.
>
Mongolian, Manchurian and Tibetan are Mongoloid looking, in fact,
the Mongolian had super Mongoloid feature -- ultra broad face,
ultra small eyes and ultra high cheek bone.
The total assimilation of Manchurian to Chinese will be completed
in a few years, this is one of the most stupid thing that had
happened in human history, Manchurian conquered Chinese and ruled
Chinese for 266 years, but were assimilated into Chinese instead.
The last Manchu Emperor Aisin-Gioro Pu Yi doesn't even speak
Manchurian at all!
________________________________________________________________
|
Han Culturalist from Malaysia |
Chiew Lee Yih |
|
visit my home page at: |
http://www.angelfire.com/ma/chiewly/index.html |
|
I support the independence of Tibet but not Taiwan, |
why? visit: |
http://www-chaos.umd.edu/history/time_line.html |
________________________________________________________________|
Sch...@my-dejanews.com
In article <6lvlgr$jue$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
hancult...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> "Mulan" will be the Disney feature cartoon of the year,
> the villian in the movie is "evil band of Huns" (direct
> quote from Mulan official home page at mulan.com), which
> tried to invade China's great wall, Mulan, the heroine
> of the movie, confront the evil Huns and save China.
> The movie start on June 19 in US and Canada.
>
> Do Hungarian today still have any emotional ties to the
> historical Huns tribes?
Hungarians = Magyars not Huns.
My guess is not, others wise
> Disney won't dare to use the word "EVIL" to describe Huns.
> Disney learned, are they?
I doubt that Disney would care if thier films offended anyone considering
that don't care about the Arab-American complaints about "Aladdin" or Native
American complaints about "Pocahantas" or the French complaints about
"The Hunchback of Notre Dame" or Greek complaints about "Hercules".
> As I know, some Hungarian are descendent of the Huns and
> some are not, what would the reaction of the Huns
> descendents to this movie?
As a distinct group the Huns broke up rather quickly after Attila's death.
Most HUngarians are decendant from Magyars, who aren't Huns.
> Finally, why are there so many Westerners thought Atilla
> the Hun, Genghis Khaan and Turks in far-ancient time looks
> Caucasian,
Most Westerners don't. If you look or read any "Western" history book
they make it pretty clear of the Asian origins & looks.
---Oscar Schlaf---
Brant Gibbard
On 14 Jun 1998 20:47:18 -0700, joshua geller
<dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
<snipped>
The Albanians, on the other hand, are Slavs who, under
>Turkish influence, became Muslims, that is, adopted some of the
>cultural complexes that the Turks have made their own. Thus the Turks
>feel a sense of relation to the Albanians; they have had friendly
>relations for the past few hundred years.
<snipped>
The Albanians are not Slavs. Their language is a separate branch of
the Indo-European Language Family, probably (although not certainly)
related to the extinct Illyrian languages.
Brant Gibbard
Toronto, Ont.
bgib...@inforamp.net
Istvan Lippai
Leo <yo...@efnet.com> wrote in article <6m1vus$guf$2...@mirv.unsw.edu.au>...
> Istvan Lippai wrote in message
> >Korosi Csoma Sandor (a great Hungarian anthropologist and linguist)
> >looked to the far East (not to Turkey) for Hungarian roots. Is there a
> >Tibetan connection
> I don't think so. Tibetan speaks Sino-Tibetan language. It should be
> the proto-Mongolian/Turkish tribes during Han Dynasty in China who
> should be likely to be speaking an Altaic language.
I just stated what Korosi Csoma Sandor did. In his youth he got the idea
that the reason Hungarians were not doing so good because we were few in
numbers. He got the notion that at the time of great migration some
Hungarians were left behind and all he had to do is find them and bring
them home to Hungary. He stared back-tracing the migration of Hungarians
and during his travels he studied the language, culture and history of
many nations. His youthful dream (quite unattainable) turned into a life
of scientific adventure of monumental proportions. He never found any
proof of any kinship with anyone (maybe there is no one like us on this
planet) but he has spent much time with Tibetan monks. He learned their
language, translated some of their works and had a lot of respect for
them.
As you can see, I didn't succeed in proving anything. I didn't even try,
as it would be quite futile to do so. The notion advanced by some that
Hungarians should be outraged by Disney's portrayal of Huns is seems
ludicrous to me (I think that Huns are just fine and Attila was a great
leader). Enjoy the animation, the story, and forget about taking offense
for anything and everything. It seems that there are professional
protester who find something to be offended about everything. There were
people who got uptight about "Lion King". That too was a wonderful
animation and a very entertaining story.
Those who want to promote some sort of kinship based on obscure, ancient
and suspicious grounds, usually do so because they have an agenda of their
own. Lets just say that through the great cosmic slime (if that is your
preference) or through Adam and Eve (if that is your preference) we are
all related.
Regards, Istvan
joshua geller
bgib...@iname.com (Brant Gibbard) writes:
> On 14 Jun 1998 20:47:18 -0700, joshua geller
> <dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
> > The Albanians, on the other hand, are Slavs who, under
> >Turkish influence, became Muslims, that is, adopted some of the
> >cultural complexes that the Turks have made their own. Thus the Turks
> >feel a sense of relation to the Albanians; they have had friendly
> >relations for the past few hundred years.
> The Albanians are not Slavs. Their language is a separate branch of
> the Indo-European Language Family, probably (although not certainly)
> related to the extinct Illyrian languages.
Dear Mr. Gibbard,
Thank you for the information; I don't think it changes my view
significantly.
my very best,
josh
gole...@cadvision.com
>gole...@cadvision.com writes:
>> On 14 Jun 1998 14:18:02 -0700, joshua geller
>> <dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
>> >gole...@cadvision.com writes:
>
>> >> [The Turks] seem to feel more closenes to the Albanians
>> >> [than to the Hingarians]. Can you explain why?
>
>> >Yes, I can.
>
>> Then please do
>
>Dear Ma'am,
>
>The Turks and Hungarians common ancestry is several thousand years in
>the past. A lot has happened since then; the two peoples have gone
>their seperate ways. They have each aquired different cultural
>complexes.
Regarding the Hungarians of the "Magyars" this is what the
encyclopedia has to say:
"Magyars
{mag'-yahrz}
The Magyars, known also in the English-speaking world as Hungarians,
are descended from the people who conquered the Carpathian Basin in
the late 9th century and founded the kingdom of Hungary. They are one
of the few European ethnic groups (along with the Finns and Estonians)
who speak a Finno-Ugric tongue, a subdivision of the URAL-ALTAIC
LANGUAGES.
The original homeland (3000 BC-AD 500) of the Magyars was in
northeastern Europe at the confluence of the Volga and Kama rivers. In
the early centuries of the Christian era they mixed with various
Turkish tribes, accepted their equestrian culture, and, beginning in
the 7th century, moved southwest to the Azov Sea area. Under the
leadership of Arpad and Kukszan, they occupied the Carpathian Basin in
895-96. For the next 60 years they made devastating raids farther west
until they were finally halted by the German king OTTO I in the Battle
of Lechfeld (955)."
As you will notice from the above, they did mix with some of the
Turkish tribes. If you have time study a bit about Suliman the leader
of the Turks who invaded Europe and who was defeated in Hungary.
"
Under STEPHEN I (r. 997-1038), the Magyars were Christianized and
established a strong national state. In the course of the 12th-15th
centuries they extended their control into the northern Balkans, while
at home they developed a constitutional, elective monarchy. Turkish
inroads, beginning in the 14th century, culminated in the trisection
(1526-1699) of Hungary between the Turks, the Austrian HABSBURGS, and
the Magyar rulers of TRANSYLVANIA. Subsequently all of Hungary became
part of the Habsburg Empire, which in 1867 was transformed into
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY.
Bibliography: Dienes, Istvan, The Hungarians Cross the Carpathians
(1972); Erdei, Ferenc, ed., Information Hungary (1968); Kosary, D. G.,
and Vardy, S. B., History of the Hungarian Nation (1969); Macartney,
C. A., The Magyars in the Ninth Century (1930; repr. 1968); Sinor, ""
>he Albanians, on the other hand, are Slavs who, under
>Turkish influence, became Muslims, that is, adopted some of the
>cultural complexes that the Turks have made their own. Thus the Turks
>feel a sense of relation to the Albanians; they have had friendly
>relations for the past few hundred years.
Friendly relations with the Turks? Wow, you should really read your
history books.In particular about the Balkan Wars.
Here is a little info from the encyclopedia for future reference
regarding the Albanians:
"HISTORY
From the 7th century BC the Greeks colonized the coastal areas of what
is now Albania and in the following centuries became a cultural
influence on the Illyrians. In about 350 BC an independent kingdom,
ILLYRIA, emerged in the region near Shkoder. Illyria and EPIRUS to
the south were conquered by Rome in 168 BC. With the division of the
Roman Empire in the 4th century AD, Albania came under Byzantine rule.
Actual Byzantine power in the area was weak, however, and in the
succeeding centuries Albania was overrun by the Goths, Bulgars, Slavs,
Serbs, and Normans (see BALKANS).
In the early 15th century the Turks began their conquest of the
region. In 1443 Albanian resistance to the Turks was organized under
the leadership of SKANDERBEG, who has become glorified as the national
hero. Skanderbeg expelled the Turks and kept Albania independent of
Turkish rule for more than 20 years. Soon after his death in 1468,
however, the Turks reasserted their power, and Albania became part of
the OTTOMAN EMPIRE. During the nearly five centuries of Ottoman rule
most Albanians converted to Islam, and a substantial number immigrated
to other Mediterranean regions. The country remained undeveloped and
neglected.
Albanian nationalism revived in the early 19th century and spurred
repeated revolts against Turkish domination. In 1912, in the First
Balkan War, the Turks were driven from much of the Balkan Peninsula,
and Albania declared its independence (see BALKAN WARS).
During World War I, Albania was a battleground for other Balkan powers
and Italy. Albania's sovereignty was upheld at the Paris Peace
Conference (1919) through the efforts of the American president
Woodrow Wilson. After a period of political instability, power was
seized (1925) by Ahmed Zogu, a conservative northern tribal chief. In
1928 he proclaimed Albania a monarchy and became King ZOG. During his
reign, Zog began the modernization of the country with Italian aid.
Italian financial and military influence increased, and in 1939 Italy
invaded Albania, forcing the king into exile."
Pano
Bibliography: Hetzer, Armin, and Roman, Viorel S., Albania (1983);
Logoreci, Anton, The Albanians (1977); Marmullaku, Ramadan, Albania
and the Albanians (1975); Pano, Nicholas C., Albania (1989); Pollo,
Stefanaq, and Puto, Arben, History of Albania (1980); Prifti, Peter
R., Socialist Albania Since 1944 (1978).
T
I doubt very much if you tell the Serbs, who are also of Slavic
origins, that the Albanians are "Slavs" that they will readily accept
that point of view.
Just for reference here is what the encyclopedia says about the Slavs:
"Slavs
{slahvz}
The Slavs are the largest mass of European peoples sharing common
ethnic and linguistic roots (see SLAVIC LANGUAGES). Classical authors
during the 1st century AD mention Slavs, and some scholars maintain
that the Greek historian Herodotus wrote of the Slavs in the 5th
century BC. The Lusatian culture, which dates back to the 2d
millennium BC, is believed by some archaeologists to have been Slavic.
Originally Asian, the Slavs migrated to Europe for economic and
political reasons.
Various Slavic groups living in eastern Europe were conquered by the
Huns during the late 4th century AD. The subsequent dissolution of
the Hun empire during the mid-5th century sparked the great migration
of the Slavs westward, southward, and northward. Some eventually
settled in Bohemia, Bulgaria, and Macedonia. Others entered what are
today Hungary and Romania. These groups have been identified as
Antae, or East Slavs (Great Russians, White Russians, and Ukrainians);
Sklaveni, or South Slavs (Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Macedonians,
Montenegrins, Bosnians, and Bulgarians); and Venedi, or West Slavs
(Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, and Wends)."
Bibliography: Crose, S. H., Slavic Civilization through the Ages
(1963); Dvornik, Francis, The Slavs: Their Early History and
Civilization (1956) and The Slavs in European History and Civilization
(1962; repr. 1986); Gimbutas, M. A., The Slavs (1971); Rowney, Don
K., and Orchard, G. Edward, Russian and Slavic History (1977);
Vlasto, A. P., Entry of the Slavs into Christendom: An Introduction
to the Med
>The Hungarians, on the other
>hand, though they have a common root with the Turks, have become very
>different, and what similarities they might see in each other just
>emphasize the differences.
>
The Turks and the Slavs look physically different.Hungarians common
"root" with the Turks was through conquest.
>Or that is my take on the matter, anyway.
>
>my very best,
>
>josh
History is a fascinating topic. Many of the problems in present day
Europe stem from the historical past. Reading about it will give you
better understanding about why there is so much conflict in various
parts of Europe and the intricate reasons behind them. Good luck
Liza
gole...@cadvision.com
On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 07:09:36 GMT, hancult...@hotmail.com wrote:
>In article <6m0pis$m...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
> dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Charles Dombi) wrote:
>>
>>
>> Lets get this straight: originally, the Huns, Avars and Magyars
>> were all the same, they were all Hungarians: the term Hungar
>> simply means Hun people. Thousands of years ago these Caucasian-
>> type people spread out across Eurasia from the Caspian region.
>
>What? Everybody know that the Huns, Turks, Tartars and Mongols
>are all Mongoloid. These tribes invade Europe whenever they feels
>like it, in fact, Caucasian had never ruled Mongoloid before the
>invention of bullet; but Mongoloid had roamed Europe for centuries
>like Europe is Asia's backyard.
>
You sound very defensive. The above you are speaking of happened
thousands of years ago. China for centuries was cut off from the rest
of the world, particularly during the times of the Emperors.
Unfortunately, it was western influence that eventually destroyed the
unique and wonderful heritage of China through the adaptation to a
Western way of goverment and Communism. It appears that the leaders of
China are slowly but surely re discovering their own past and
heritage. The communists destroyed most written records and
discriminated and tried to destroy the educated scholars whom they
considered burquise and not part of the "collective".Perhaps now they
are starting to wake up. But until recently the Imperial Palace was
not open to the public.
As for your reference of the Mongoloid roaming Europe....they were
just one of the many conquerors of that part of the world. Conquest
was a way of life back then.
The facts are that the Chinese were very well advanced compared to
Europe back then. They had doctors and scientists. The Europeans were
in the dark ages. It was their lack of contact with other cultures
that allowed them to be the unique culture that they became. Contact
with the rest of the world and Europe eventually led to the
destruction of that wonderful culture.
>Here is the link of Genghis Khaan drawing:
>http://members.aol.com/yikhmongol/chingis2.jpg
>
>The only proof that the Caucasian were ever went to Asia is the
>discover of the remnent of Tocharian culture (Lou2 Lan2 Mummy)
>in XinJiang in late 1980', the culture of Caucasian looking
>Tocharian were belived to be destroyed by Turks, who arrived in
>later time.
>see
Actually I read about the above in the Scientific Magazine, and they
havent really concluded just exactly WHO these Caucasians were or
WHERE they originated. But they were apparently civilized enough to
perform ritualistic burials. And they wore wowen clothing not animal
skins. It is pure speculation about them being destroyed by Turks as
you say, since the mummies are very much older than the Turkish
empire.
>http://www.wlc.com/oxus/tocharia.htm
>
>see the picture of dead red head lady in China at:
>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/chinamum/taklamakan.html
>
>> They were also known as the Turanians. These Turanians have
>> played a dominant role in the formation of the Turkic and
>> Mongolian ethno-linguistic groups, and they have also had a
>> determining influence on the development of Persian, Indian and
>> Chinese culture. There are also some Japanese connections. The
>> situation is similar for Europe: many ethno-linguistic and
>> cultural characteristics which are attributed to an Indo-
>> European group, such as the Slavs, are really in fact of
>> Turanian origin. This is only natural since the Turanians have
>> dominated Eurasia for thousands of years: this is the Sumerian-
>> Scythian-Hun-Avar-Magyar continuity.
>>
>> I would also like to call on all Hungarians to boycott all
>> Disney products and events and to also boycott all Chinese
>> goods. China oppresses many Turanian ethnic groups and occupies
>> their territory: Eastern Turkestan (Sinkiang), Inner Mongolia,
>> Manchuria and Tibet.
No doubt about China's oppression. It also oppresses its own people.
>
>Mongolian, Manchurian and Tibetan are Mongoloid looking, in fact,
>the Mongolian had super Mongoloid feature -- ultra broad face,
>ultra small eyes and ultra high cheek bone.
>
There are many races that have intermingled also.No one particular
race is imune to that unless they lived in complete isolation.
And if there is outside contact that would desimate half the
population with disease brought by the outside world. Australia and
its aboriginals is a perfect example. The rest would then either be
assimilated or intermarried but they would no longer be a unique race
free of any other genetic influence.
>The total assimilation of Manchurian to Chinese will be completed
>in a few years, this is one of the most stupid thing that had
>happened in human history, Manchurian conquered Chinese and ruled
>Chinese for 266 years, but were assimilated into Chinese instead.
>The last Manchu Emperor Aisin-Gioro Pu Yi doesn't even speak
>Manchurian at all!
>
I would not go so far as to say it was one of the most stupid things
that happened in history. There are a lot more that would take
precedence.
____________________________________________________________
> |
> Han Culturalist from Malaysia |
> Chiew Lee Yih |
> |
> visit my home page at: |
> http://www.angelfire.com/ma/chiewly/index.html |
> |
> I support the independence of Tibet but not Taiwan, |
> why? visit: |
>http://www-chaos.umd.edu/history/time_line.html |
>________________________________________________________________|
>
gole...@cadvision.com
On 15 Jun 1998 08:03:37 -0700, joshua geller
<dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
>bgib...@iname.com (Brant Gibbard) writes:
>> On 14 Jun 1998 20:47:18 -0700, joshua geller
>> <dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
>
>> > The Albanians, on the other hand, are Slavs who, under
>> >Turkish influence, became Muslims, that is, adopted some of the
>> >cultural complexes that the Turks have made their own. Thus the Turks
>> >feel a sense of relation to the Albanians; they have had friendly
>> >relations for the past few hundred years.
>
>> The Albanians are not Slavs. Their language is a separate branch of
>> the Indo-European Language Family, probably (although not certainly)
>> related to the extinct Illyrian languages.
>
>Dear Mr. Gibbard,
>
>Thank you for the information; I don't think it changes my view
>significantly.
>
>my very best,
>
>josh
Hello Josh:
You have no reason to change your view. "View" as you call them are
personal opinions. Many have their own. But history on the other hand
speaks for itself. You can accept it , deny it or argue with it....but
you cannot change it. That is a FACT. Unfortunately, some people take
historical happenings and make it a personal mission in life.
Liza
gole...@cadvision.com
On 15 Jun 1998 10:58:40 GMT, bgib...@iname.com (Brant Gibbard) wrote:
>On 14 Jun 1998 20:47:18 -0700, joshua geller
><dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
>
><snipped>
>
>The Albanians, on the other hand, are Slavs who, under
>>Turkish influence, became Muslims, that is, adopted some of the
>>cultural complexes that the Turks have made their own. Thus the Turks
>>feel a sense of relation to the Albanians; they have had friendly
>>relations for the past few hundred years.
>
><snipped>
>
>The Albanians are not Slavs. Their language is a separate branch of
>the Indo-European Language Family, probably (although not certainly)
>related to the extinct Illyrian languages.
Mr. Gibbard:
You are quite right about the Illyrian connection. The Albanians and
their language are closer to the Greeks.
If the Albanians were Slavs, the Serbs who are also Slavs would not be
practicing the present ethnic cleansing they are doing in Kosovo.
Albanians in Kosova are an ethnic MAJORITY, the Serbvs who are Slavs
are a minority. Why if they are all "SLAVS" would they be quarrelling
over ethnic problems today?
Liza
gole...@cadvision.com
On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:49:05 GMT, tu...@sprint.ca (Gustav Horvath)
wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Jun 1998 19:52:59 GMT, gole...@cadvision.com wrote:
>
>>
>>I dont know what the WW1 has to do with(...)
>
>Lookie here:
>
>http://www.history.upenn.edu/hist21/WWI/AntiGerm1.html
my father also reads the National Enquirer and swears everything in it
is "TRUE". According to all the clippings the world was supposed to
end in 1986, by being hit by a comet!
Count Pierre Bezuhov
Gustav Horvath wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Jun 1998 06:03:51 GMT, gole...@cadvision.com wrote:
>> But the Hungarians and the Turkish are two different
>>groups.
>
>I beg to differ here. :-)>
>Both are sub groups of Turkic.
Keep on begging. The linguistic model of Magyar being of the
Finno-Ugric branch is based on reality, I'm afraid. Much as I want to
criticize the subtle inferrances of that scholarship that I don't
agree with, it is still essentially true, as far as it delves. I
don't like how it seems to purport that the Hungarians come from the
Finnish people, [its classified as Uralic would-you-believe!] and that
the model doesn't address the possibility of the Finnish branching
from an early East Asian Hungarian people at a much earlier date. And
why didn't they call it Magyo-Finnic or something? (At least the
Magyars won some of their own battles!)
BTW, I think Horvath is a Hungarian name, for whatever that's worth.
Count Pierre Bezuhov
hancult...@hotmail.com wrote:
>Do Hungarian[s] today still have any emotional ties to the
>historical Huns tribes?
Some do, some don't. [speaking as a semi-Hungarian who knows
Hungarians.] [And who tries to minimize his cultural shitstink, as
regarding the complaint of VaginaGod who shouldn't talk, him being a
big cunt]
>My guess is not, others wise
>Disney won't dare to use the word "EVIL" to describe Huns.
The "evil" I believe is a qualifier, not a racist label.
>Disney learned, are they?
Translation one: "Disney learned, did they?"
Answer: Learned to make [your alleged] mistakes? I doubt it.
Translation two: "The people at Disney are learned, are they?"
Answer: 'Spose so.
>As I know, some Hungarian are descendent of the Huns and
>some are not,
You know? Assuming a certain Hun genealogical input, what has kept
some Hungarians segregated and some not? (otherwise they all would
have some Hun genes by now) Anyway, I like to think that they are
somewhat related. I understand that when the Hungarians entered the
Danube Basin [late ninth century under Arpadj they were [mis?]taken
for Huns, and thus had an easier time of convincing the locals of
their rightful rule. The Hungarian/Hun link is often a bit fanciful
to the Hungarian. There are Hungarian books that explore the
possibilities. I've heard it said that the Huns spoke a branch of
Turkish, which if true would pretty much kill musings of a link.
>what would the reaction of the Huns
>descendents to this movie?
Uh, what Hun descendants?
>Finally,
<whine> I was enjoying this.
>why are there so many Westerners [who] thought Atilla
>the Hun, Genghis Khaan and Turks in far-ancient time looks
>Caucasian, altough they were not?
These are all steppe nomads [Altaic] who at the least are
linguistically distinct from the Sino-Tibetan group.
>What do Hungarian think
>about this?
Hungarians are not scientifically linked to Huns, Mongols, or Turks.
But your point is still taken. I think that many Hungarians are aware
of a very possible East Asian link, especially when Oriential features
can still be easily discerned in modern Hungarians. Do they like this
realization? Ha ha. I shouldn't answer, it wouldn't be politically
correct.
>Do Hungarian today sweep their Asian origin
>under the carpet?
Some individuals might perchance interpret their own certain general
observed impressions in a manner somewhat akin to this imprecise
assertion, though not at all in any way of exact pinnable
constitution. And furthur these observations of cirumstances
discernable within their environment are of no direct bearing on any
specific phenomenon encountered in their own selves. This statement
is the opinion of the writer and is not specifically that of any
individual of Hungarian or partial Hungarian ethnicity, or anyone else
I'm sure.
(political correctness is king where I come from)
(and queen of course)
>Are they proud of Attila the Hun?
I'm lost. Should they be?
>How Hungarian text books describe the ancient Huns?
They do? Yeah, I love those How Hungarian books. But seriously, my
impression is that they keep Hun history quite seperate from anything
to do with themselves. Why? Because of an undermining influence on
Hungarian pride perpetrated by first their Austrian better half (pre
WW I), by German extreme right wing (until WWII), and by the Russians
(after WWII essentially until present).
Count Pierre Bezuhov
> Lets get this straight: originally, the Huns, Avars and Magyars
> were all the same, they were all Hungarians: the term Hungar
> simply means Hun people. Thousands of years ago these Caucasian-
> type people spread out across Eurasia from the Caspian region.
Have you anything to say about the Subartans from north-eastern
Mesopotamia??
> They were also known as the Turanians. These Turanians have
> played a dominant role in the formation of the Turkic and
> Mongolian ethno-linguistic groups, and they have also had a
> determining influence on the development of Persian, Indian and
> Chinese culture. There are also some Japanese connections. The
> situation is similar for Europe: many ethno-linguistic and
> cultural characteristics which are attributed to an Indo-
> European group, such as the Slavs, are really in fact of
> Turanian origin. This is only natural since the Turanians have
> dominated Eurasia for thousands of years: this is the Sumerian-
> Scythian-Hun-Avar-Magyar continuity.
If you don't give me sources I'll cry! >: O
> I would also like to call on all Hungarians to boycott all
> Disney products and events and to also boycott all Chinese
> goods. China oppresses many Turanian ethnic groups and occupies
> their territory: Eastern Turkestan (Sinkiang), Inner Mongolia,
> Manchuria and Tibet.
I am very interested in looking into your sources in detail if that
will be possible. I have already read some material along this vein
(Tibor Barath, The Early Hungarians) but I didn't find it satisfying
enough in the very short English summary adaptation he wrote.
Gustav Horvath
On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 07:09:36 GMT, hancult...@hotmail.com wrote:
>What? Everybody know that the Huns, Turks, Tartars and Mongols
>are all Mongoloid. These tribes invade Europe whenever they feels
>like it, in fact, Caucasian had never ruled Mongoloid before the
>invention of bullet; but Mongoloid had roamed Europe for centuries
>like Europe is Asia's backyard.
Well, not quite everybody, some of us heard about the Ephthalites
(white Huns) as well.
>The only proof that the Caucasian were ever went to Asia is the
>discover of the remnent of Tocharian culture (Lou2 Lan2 Mummy)
>in XinJiang in late 1980', the culture of Caucasian looking
>Tocharian were belived to be destroyed by Turks, who arrived in
>later time.
>see
>http://www.wlc.com/oxus/tocharia.htm
This very page, you offered here, as an example doesn't say this.
The Tocharians were incorporated into the Turkic tribes
and -even if not very well- but thank you, still exist in the
Uighur population. (BTW. the very Uighurs were that long lost
Turkic tribe, the relatives of Magyars-Hungarians that Korosi
Csoma the last century explorer wished to rediscover. His untimely
death prevented him from reaching his final destination, so happened
that he is best known nowdays after his most important work the first
*usable* Tibetean-English dictionary.
>> These Turanians have
>> played a dominant role in the formation of the Turkic and
>> Mongolian ethno-linguistic groups, and they have also had a
>> determining influence on the development of Persian, Indian and
>> Chinese culture. There are also some Japanese connections.
>>(...)This is only natural since the Turanians have
>> dominated Eurasia for thousands of years: this is the Sumerian-
>> Scythian-Hun-Avar-Magyar continuity.
This is right. The Turanians, similarly to Ottomans have always
acted as catalysators with relation to other more decadent-decaying
systems. As for the Japanese relation, this above even happens today.
(In Korea as well.)
>> I would also like to call on all Hungarians to boycott all
>> Disney products and events and to also boycott all Chinese
>> goods. China oppresses many Turanian ethnic groups and occupies
>> their territory: Eastern Turkestan (Sinkiang), Inner Mongolia,
>> Manchuria and Tibet.
I do not know about Disney, but I wonder, what's next?
A "stupid Pollack" or a Jewish "money changer" with a characteristic
schnauze?
As for Red China they don't see too much of my dollars,
I can ensure you.
>Mongolian, Manchurian and Tibetan are Mongoloid looking, in fact,
>the Mongolian had super Mongoloid feature -- ultra broad face,
>ultra small eyes and ultra high cheek bone.
The Turanian idea never knew (or rather recognise) the concept of
race. (Unlike some racist, imperialist Han Chinese do even now in
Uighuristan)
The Turanians from ancient times, either slaughtered their enemy,
--as the "Zeitgeist" required, or incorporated the "useable" species
into themselves. If this doesn't explain the different look (from
that of the Mongols) then look up:
http://www.silk-road.com/heph.htm
Also, it is good to remember that also Germanic foot soldiers served
in Attila's mounted army, and as we read elsewhere the Huns
were only a few hundred thou. in the ocean of millions of Germanic
and Slavic people. Pretty much the same happened to them that you
described in your post about the manchus. This had do to with their
geographical location, and war-rich history. Some Hungarians show now
Germanic, Finno-Ugric and Slavic physical characteristics, nonetheless
most of them retained the high cheek-bones etc. of the Huns. Some
Magyars are very similar to some Turks and some Turks are very similar
to some Magyars.
******************************************************
Though we are not now that strength, which in old days moved earth and
heaven, that which we are, we are. One equal temper of heroic hearts,
made weak by time and fates, but strong in will. To strive, to seek,
to find and not to yield.
******************************************************
Gustav
Gustav Horvath
>Keep on begging. The linguistic model of Magyar being of the
>Finno-Ugric branch is based on reality, I'm afraid.
Be very afraid. (he-he)
>Much as I want to
>criticize the subtle inferrances of that scholarship that I don't
>agree with, it is still essentially true, as far as it delves. I
>don't like how it seems to purport that the Hungarians come from the
>Finnish people, [its classified as Uralic would-you-believe!] and that
>the model doesn't address the possibility of the Finnish branching
>from an early East Asian Hungarian people at a much earlier date. And
>why didn't they call it Magyo-Finnic or something?
Depends who you call "they"?
They might do, but we dont!
" Altaic languages</h1>
{yur'-ul-ahl-tay'-ik}<p>
The many Ural-Altaic languages--constituting the Uralic and the Altaic
languages--extend from Scandinavia, Hungary, and the Balkans in the
west, to the easternmost reaches of the Amur and the island of
Sakhalin, and from the Arctic Ocean to central Asia. According to
some investigators, Japanese and Korean should also be considered
Altaic languages (see JAPANESE LANGUAGE; KOREAN LANGUAGE).<p>
Linguistic Features<p>
All the Ural-Altaic languages share certain characteristics of syntax,
morphology, and phonology. The languages use constructions of the
type the-by-me-hunted bear rather than "the bear that I hunted," and
a-singing I went rather than "I sang as I went." There are few if any
conjunctions. Suffixation is the typical grammatical process--that is,
meaningful elements are appended to stems, as in house-my, "my house,"
go-(past)-I, "I went," house-from, "from the house," go-in-while,
"while (in the act of) going," and house-(plural)-my-from, "from my
houses."<p>
A great many Ural-Altaic languages require vowel harmony; the vowels
that occur together in a given word must be of the same type. Thus
poly, "dust," is a possible word in Finnish because o any y are both
mid vowels and hence belong to the same phonetic class; likewise
polku, "path," is possible because o and u are both vowels. Words
such as polu or poly are not possible, because o and u, or o and y,
are too dissimilar. Stress generally falls on the first or last
syllable; it does not move about, as in the English series family,
familiar, familiarity.<p>
Typically, the Ural-Altaic languages have no verb for "to have."
Possession is expressed by constructions such as the Hungarian nekem
van, "to-me there-is." Most of the languages do not express gender, do
not have agreement between parts of speech (as in French les bonnes
filles, "the good girls"), and do not permit consonant clusters, such
as pr-, spr-, -st, or -rst, at the beginning or end of words.<p>
Family Status<p>
According to the standards set by linguists, languages that make up a
family must show productive-predictive correspondences. The shape of
a given word in one language should be predictable from the shape of
the corresponding word, or cognate, in another language. Thus
Hungarian -d at the end of stems, as in ad, "he gives," is known to
correspond to the Finnish consonant sequence -nt- in the interior of
words, as in Finnish anta-, "give."<p>
All of the Uralic languages have been shown to be related--the
vocabulary and grammar of each member language can be examined in the
light of correspondences such as that which obtains between Hungarian
-d and Finnish -nt-. But Altaic is not a language family in the same
sense that Uralic is, for laws of correspondence such as those
available for Uralic have yet to be discovered in Altaic.<p>
Altaic does have three branches, however--Turkic, Mongolian, and
Manchu-Tungus--each of which forms a subfamily. Turkic and Mongolian
on the one hand, and, to a lesser extent, Mongolian and Manchu-Tungus
on the other, exhibit many striking resemblances. But the shared
features may reflect only borrowing, and not a common origin.<p>
Uralic Languages<p>
The Uralic languages are traditionally divided into two major
branches, Finno-Ugric and Samoyed. Finno-Ugric in turn contains two
subgroups: Finnic and Ugric. The former is divided into the
Baltic-Finnic, Volga-Finnic, and Permian languages; the latter
comprises Hungarian and the Ob-Ugric languages.<p>
Baltic-Finnic<p>
Finnish, with 5 million speakers, and Estonian, with 1 million, are
the best known of the Baltic-Finnic languages. Others are Karelian,
spoken by 175,000 people in northwestern Russia and eastern Finland;
Veps, spoken by 8,000 people between the Dnepr and the Volga; Votian,
spoken by 700 people of the Udmurt Autonomous Republic of the former
USSR; and Livonian, spoken by 500 people in the Livonia district of
Latvia. Lapp is similar in structure to Finnish, but the various Lapp
dialects--spoken by 40,000 people spread over Norway, Sweden, Finland,
and the Kola Peninsula of Russia--diverge greatly from each other in
phonology and even to some extent in grammar.<p>
Finnish is famous above all for its many cases, 12 of which are
productive--that is, any Finnish noun can be followed by one of the 12
case suffixes. Another pervasive feature of the language is consonant
gradation, such as the t/d alternation found in the declination of the
Finnish word for "hundred": nominative sata, genitive sadan, ablative
sadalta, partitive sataa, and so on. Finnish is also distinctive in
having a verb that, translated roughly, means "not to." Compare ulvon,
"I howl," with en ulvo, "I do not howl," and ulvo, "you howl," with et
ulvo, "you do not howl," where en and et mean, respectively, "(I) do
not" and "(you) do not."<p>
Volga-Finnic and Permian<p>
Mordvinian, spoken by 1,262,000 people along the middle Volga, and
Cheremis, spoken by 600,000 people in the district where the Kama
joins the Volga, constitute the Volga-Finnic language group. Both of
them, but especially Mordvinian, are close to Finnish in grammar and
vocabulary. Less like Finnish are the Permian languages--Zyrien with
its 628,000 speakers, and Votyak with its 704,000 in northeastern
European Russia. All of the Volga-Finnic and Permian languages have a
negative verb and a large number of cases.<p>
Ugric<p>
The Finnic languages are more or less geographically contiguous, but
the Ugric languages lie at opposite ends of the Finno-Ugric
area--Hungarian occupying the extreme west, and the Ob-Ugric
languages, Vogul and Ostyak, occupying the extreme east. Hungarian
has 13 million speakers--the largest number of any Uralic
language--who live in the Danube Basin and adjacent areas. Vogul's
8,000 speakers and Ostyak's 21,000 live east of the Urals, in the Ob
Valley.<p>
One of the most striking Ugric linguistic features is the so-called
objective conjugation. In Hungarian, for instance, adok means "I
give," and adom means "I give it" or "I give them." Thus the object of
the verb--"it" or "them"--is incorporated in the verb form and does
not need to be expressed separately. Vogul and Ostyak are still more
precise. In these languages the objective conjugation has three
distinct forms, to indicate whether the object is "it," "them"
(plural), or "the two things" (dual). Furthermore, Vogul and Ostyak
can also express the subject in the singular, plural, or dual.<p>
Hungarian has more productive cases--upward of 20--than even Finnish
has. Vogul and Ostyak, however, have only from four to seven cases,
depending on dialect. The Ugric languages have no consonant
gradation.<p>
Samoyed<p>
The Samoyed languages are the easternmost representatives of Uralic.
Presumably they were the first to separate, as a group, from the
original, proto-Uralic language. They are spoken in the northeastern
corner of Europe, near Zyrian, and in north-central Siberia.<p>
Yurak, with 28,000 speakers, Tavgi, with 1,000, and Yenisei, with 500,
form a North Samoyed group, and they can be distinguished from the
South Samoyed language, Selkup, with 4,000 speakers. Other Samoyed
languages, now extinct, are known only from 18th- and 19th-century
records.<p>
Loan Words and Early Records<p>
In the course of their histories, the individual Uralic languages have
come into contact with a great many languages from other
families--Turkic, Germanic, Baltic (an earlier form of Latvian and
Lithuanian), and Slavic. Finnish kuningas, "king," is an early loan
from a Germanic language, hence its resemblance to English king and
German Konig. Finnish vapaa, "free," was borrowed from a Slavic
language--compare the Slavic root svobod-. The same Slavic root found
its way, independently, into Hungarian, as evidenced by the word
szabad.<p>
The oldest significant text written in a Uralic language is a funeral
sermon in Hungarian from about 1195. Finnish and Estonian texts
survive from the Protestant Reformation, which swept over Scandinavia
and much of the Baltic in the 16th century; the reformer of the
Finns, Michael Agricola (1512-57), also translated the Bible into
Finnish. Zyrien was recorded in the 15th century by Saint Stephen of
Perm, apostle of the Zyriens, who fashioned a special alphabet for the
language.<p>
Altaic Languages<p>
The Altaic languages are spread over an area that is even larger than
that covered by Uralic. Of the three branches of Altaic, Turkic
ranges from Anatolia to the Volga basin and central Asia; Mongolian
extends from China and Mongolia as far west as the lower Volga and
Afghanistan; and Manchu-Tungus occupies the northern coast of
northeastern Siberia, and runs as far south as the Amur and as far
west as the Yenisei, which divides Siberia into its eastern and
western halves.<p>
Turkic<p>
Written evidence of the Turkic languages begins with the Orkhon
inscriptions of the 8th century AD, found near the river Selenga in
Mongolia, and continues wherever and whenever a Turkic population came
into contact with one of the higher religions, such as Islam, Judaism,
Christianity, or Manichaeism.<p>
Linguistically, the Turkic languages form a tightly knit group.
Knowledge of one Turkic language usually enables an investigator to
analyze words and simple sentences in any other Turkic language except
Chuvash. To explain this, it is hypothesized that an original,
proto-Turkic language split into two branches: West Turkic and East
Turkic. West Turkic went its own way, both phonetically and in terms
of contact with other languages, and eventually became Chuvash, now
spoken by 1,700,000 people living in the Volga Basin in the Chuvash
Autonomous Republic of the former USSR.<p>
The early speakers of East Turkic must have remained together for a
longer time and split up only comparatively recently into the many
present-day languages. Still, the East Turkic languages are usually
classed into five subdivisions: Oghuz, mainly represented by Turkish,
the language of Turkey; Kipchak, which has over a dozen representative
languages, including Kazan Tatar, Kazakh, Kirghiz, and Bashkir; Sayan
Turkic, represented by Tuvan, Altai, Shor, and several other
languages; Turki, represented primarily by Uigur and Uzbek; and
Yakut, which comprises Yakut Proper, Khakas, and Dolgan.<p>
Turkish, like Finnish, has vowel harmony. It also uses cases and
possessive suffixes, which can combine as in ev-ler-im-in, "of my
houses," made up of the word elements found in ev-ler, "houses,"
ev-im, "my house," and ev-in, "of the house." Such agglutination is
also characteristic of Turkish verbs: compare gel-mek, "to come,"
gel-ir-im, "I come," gel-iyor-um, "I am coming," gel-di-m, "I came,"
gel-me-mek, "not to come," and gel-me-d-in, "I did not come."<p>
Mongolian<p>
Despite their considerable geographical dispersion, the present-day
Mongolian languages or dialects are all closely related and all
descend from a common proto-Mongolian parent language. The vigorous
but short-lived military conquests of Genghis Khan in the 13th century
brought the Mongols well into Europe, and to this day traces of
Mongolian may be discovered in a few provinces of Afghanistan, and
over 100,000 Kalmyk-Mongols live in the Kalmyk republic of the former
USSR.<p>
Khalkha is the language of the Mongols of Mongolia, with its capital
at Ulan Bator. Buryat (Buriat) is spoken in the Buryat Autonomous
Republic of Russia. Other Mongolian languages include Dagur, with
24,000 speakers in northwestern Manchuria and the Chinese province of
Xinjiang (Sinkiang); Monguor, in Qinghai (Tsinghai) province;
Kalmyk; Oirat; Moghol; Santa; Paongan; and Yellow Uigur.<p>
The grammatical processes encountered in the Mongolian languages are
similar to those of Turkic. The Mongolian languages have many cases
and in that respect they resemble some of the Uralic representatives,
notably Finnish and Hungarian.<p>
Manchu-Tungus<p>
Just as the Turkic languages can be thought of as the western wing of
Altaic, the Manchu-Tungus--also known simply as the Tungus--languages
constitute the eastern wing. Most of these languages have been known
only since the 19th century, but two of them, Manchu and Jurchen, are
preserved in historical records that go back much further. Manchu,
now spoken by only a few thousand people, was the original language of
the tribe of horsemen that became the Qing (Ching) dynasty and
occupied the Chinese throne from 1644 to 1912. Similarly, Jurchen,
now extinct, was the language of the tribes that became the Jin (Chin)
dynasty, ruling from 1115 to 1234.<p>
The Manchu-Tungus languages fall into two groups. South Tungus
includes Manchu, Goldi, Olcha, Orok, Udihe, and Orochon. The North
Tungus languages are Eveneki, or Tungus Proper, and Even, also known
as Lamut.<p>
THE RELATION BETWEEN URALIC AND ALTAIC<p>
The grammatical structures of Uralic and Altaic are quite similar, and
about 70 words in each group--such as the Finnish kaly,
"sister-in-law," and Uigur kalin, "bride" and
"daughter-in-law"--appear to be cognates. But the correspondences
between the two groups of languages are unsystematic; they could be
the result of borrowing or chance. No precise predictive-productive
sound laws, for instance, have been established. Alternatively, it is
argued that the parallels between Uralic and Altaic are slight because
the two groups split apart a long time ago.<p>
In addition to the Ural-Altaic hypothesis, which is that Uralic and
Altaic form a superfamily of languages, there is also an Indo-Uralic
hypothesis, in which Uralic is linked with the INDO-EUROPEAN
LANGUAGES; a Uralic-Yukagir hypothesis, according to which Uralic and
Yukagir, a Paleosiberian language, are related; a
Uralic-Chukotko-Kamchatkan (another Paleosiberian language or language
family) hypothesis; a Uralic-Eskaleut (Eskimo and Aleut) hypothesis
(see INDIAN LANGUAGES, AMERICAN); an Altaic-Korean hypothesis; an
Altaic-Japanese hypothesis; and an Altaic-Ainu hypothesis--Ainu being
the language of the prehistoric inhabitants of the northern islands of
Japan.<p>
Robert Austerlitz<p>
Bibliography: Abondolo, Daniel, Hungarian Inflectional Morphology
(1989); Benke, Lorand, and Imre, Samu, eds., The Hungarian Language
(1972); Collinder, Bjorn, An Introduction to the Uralic Languages
(1965); Comrie, Bernard, Languages of the Soviet Union (1981);
Hakulinen, Lauri, The Structure and Development of the Finnish
Language (1953-55; Eng. trans., 1961); Menges, Karl H., The Turkic
Languages and People: An Introduction to Turkic Studies (1968);
Miller, Roy Andrew, Japanese and Other Altaic Languages (1971);
Poppe, Nicholas, Introduction to Altaic Linguistics (1965) and
Mongolian Language Handbook (1970); Raun, Alo, Essays in Finno-Ugric
and Finnic Linguistics (1971); Shirokogoroff, S. M., Ethnological and
Linguistical Aspects of the Ural-Altaic Hypothesis (1970); Vago, R.,
The Sound Pattern of Hungarian (1980).<
>BTW, I think Horvath is a Hungarian name, for whatever that's worth.
Well, this was lost on me, whatever you mean by that.
FYI, it is the Hungarian way of writing/saying "Croatian".
One granpa of my was certainly a szekely-magyar the others came from
the various part of the K. u. K. Monarchy. (If you care to know there
was no Jew amongst them. Happened it differently I could care for less
it would not change what I am.) Anyhow after the Zrinyi/Zrinski-s
(Miklos and Ilona) performance in Hungary a several centuries before
I believe some Croats turned into fairly good Magyars. So you tell me
what is it worth.
Szervusz, Gustav :-)>
Charles Dombi
Akiket komolyan erdekelnek a magyar ostortenelemmel kapcsolatos
kerdesek, azok figyelmeben ajanlom a kovetkezo tanulmanyokat:
Padanyi Viktor: Dentumagyaria; Erdy Miklos: A Sumir, Ural-Altaji
Magyar rokonsag kutatasanak tortenete; Gosztony Kalman: Osszeha-
sonlito szumer nyelvtan; Gotz Laszlo: Keleten Kel a Nap.
Ennek a "nem hivatalos" es nem "finnugorista" iranyzatnak az a
lenyege, hogy a szumir nep es muveltseg meghatarozo szerepet
toltott be az eurazsiai nepcsoportok es nyelvcsaladok kialakula-
saban es fejlodeseben, es ez termeszetesen a Magyarokra is
vonatkozik: a kutatasok eredmenye azt bizonyitja, hogy a magyar
nyelv all a legkozelebb a szumirhoz. Ez tobbek kozott azzal is
magyarazhato, hogy a Szumirok ugyanabbol az eszakmezopotamiai
tersegbol szarmaznak mint a Magyarok: a Szumirok ezt a terseget
Szubirki-nek neveztek az ottlako Szubir nep utan es kesobbi
bizanci forrasok arra utalnak, hogy a Magyarok sajat korabbi
Szabir elnevezese ugyanerre a nepre vonatkozott. Az is bizonyi-
tott teny, hogy szumir gyarmatosok mar kb. 5 ezer evvel ezelott
a Karpatmedencebe is jutottak. Azt is fontos eszrevenni, hogy
e kerdesek tudomanyos es targyilagos kutatasat politikai es
ideologiai erdekek megakadalyozzak: a tenyek nem kedveznek a
zsido es az arja faji felsobbreduseg elmeletenek, mivel a
Szumirok se nem indo-europaiak, se nem szemitak, igy tehat
lekellett ertekelni es agyonhallgatni a Szumirok oriasi
szerepet az emberiseg muveltsegenek kialakulasaban.
OperettaJK
In article <35852f03...@news.cadvision.com>, gole...@cadvision.com
writes:
> China for centuries was cut off from the rest
>of the world, particularly during the times of the Emperors.
>Unfortunately, it was western influence that eventually destroyed the
>unique and wonderful heritage of China through the adaptation to a
>Western way of goverment and Communism.
Westerners' ignorance of Chinese history never ceases to amaze me. Most of
westerners, who bother at all, would just pick up something from the recent two
centuries and then assume it's always so throughout China's 5,000 year history.
China was NOT cut off from the rest of the world. I guess that misperception
was formed in the West to mask the West's embarrasing ignorance of one of the
oldest civilization of the world. China had fought against and consequently
mingled with many different ethnics, especially steppe nomads in the north, the
Roman and later Muslim culture in the west, Tibetan culture in the Southwest.
Silk road was established during Han Dynasty. During Tang Dynasty, China was
open to all comers. There were Buddhists, Christians, Judaists, Muslims present
in China (this is an archelogically verified). There were also students from
Tibet, Korea, Japan, Southeast Asia to study Chinese culture, art and
architecture. There were also Tang statues of Central Asian dancers. Central
Asian fruits, music instruments, costumes and hairstyles were introduced.
Tang's emperor sent Buddhist monks to India for Buddhist scripts. Under
Mogolian rule, China was a part of a huge empire. East and west traffic was
frequent. During Ming Dynasty, Chinese emperor sent an eunuch and several ships
to Southeast Asia, which opened the immigration of Chinese to that region. It
wasn't until the western imperialists started banging on China's door with gun
ships, cannons and opiums in the 19th century that Chinese emperors adapted a
"close-door policy".
China wasn't Japan. Japan was relatively isolated for most of its history
because it's an island country. China is on the continent and has borders with
more different ethics and cultures than most countries. To say China could
somehow manage to cut itself out from all of its neighbors through five
thousand years is a fantasy the Westerners entertain. It's not based on
reality.
Joe Szalai
In article <35853b31...@news.cadvision.com>,
<gole...@cadvision.com> wrote:
>You are quite right about the Illyrian connection. The Albanians and
>their language are closer to the Greeks.
>
>If the Albanians were Slavs, the Serbs who are also Slavs would not be
>practicing the present ethnic cleansing they are doing in Kosovo.
>Albanians in Kosova are an ethnic MAJORITY, the Serbvs who are Slavs
>are a minority. Why if they are all "SLAVS" would they be quarrelling
>over ethnic problems today?
Why do the Irish fight?
Joe Szalai
--
M. Ranjit Mathews
Gustav Horvath wrote:
> Typically, the Ural-Altaic languages have no verb for "to have."
> Possession is expressed by constructions such as the Hungarian nekem
> van, "to-me there-is."
The South Indian languages Tamil and Malayalam also use the construction
"to me there is" for "have".
gole...@cadvision.com
On 15 Jun 1998 18:58:45 GMT, opere...@aol.com (OperettaJK) wrote:
>In article <35852f03...@news.cadvision.com>, gole...@cadvision.com
>writes:
>
>> China for centuries was cut off from the rest
>>of the world, particularly during the times of the Emperors.
>>Unfortunately, it was western influence that eventually destroyed the
>>unique and wonderful heritage of China through the adaptation to a
>>Western way of goverment and Communism.
>
actually the above was a remark based on the comments
from a documentary.I do not remember the name of it but it was about
the Chinese dissidents. It refered to how the communist Maoist
colective way of life supposedly destroyed many cultural artifacts as
well as styfling the educated. By the 'rest of the world" they meant
Europe, not Asia.
>Westerners' ignorance of Chinese history never ceases to amaze me. Most of
>westerners, who bother at all, would just pick up something from the recent two
>centuries and then assume it's always so throughout China's 5,000 year history.
In this case I was not trying to be disrespectful.Mainly what I read
about China was athropology based. Not much of the cultural aspects.
Unfortunately this "westerner" watched some documentary no doubt one
sided about dissidents and the above comment was made that China was
cut off from the rest of the world.I guess in that same respect Asians
ignorance of European history is equally amazing as the silliness
about the Huns and the Slavs.
>
>China was NOT cut off from the rest of the world. I guess that misperception
>was formed in the West to mask the West's embarrasing ignorance of one of the
>oldest civilization of the world. China had fought against and consequently
>mingled with many different ethnics, especially steppe nomads in the north, the
>Roman and later Muslim culture in the west, Tibetan culture in the Southwest.
>Silk road was established during Han Dynasty. During Tang Dynasty, China was
>open to all comers. There were Buddhists, Christians, Judaists, Muslims present
>in China (this is an archelogically verified). There were also students from
>Tibet, Korea, Japan, Southeast Asia to study Chinese culture, art and
>architecture. There were also Tang statues of Central Asian dancers. Central
>Asian fruits, music instruments, costumes and hairstyles were introduced.
>Tang's emperor sent Buddhist monks to India for Buddhist scripts. Under
>Mogolian rule, China was a part of a huge empire. East and west traffic was
>frequent.
yes....but not so before.Most of their contact was with Asians and the
Arabs, not Europeans.No one is disputing your comments. However I was
refering to the West....not Asia.
According to the encyclopedia:
Opium Wars
The Opium Wars (1839-42, 1856-60), the first major military clashes
between China and the West, ended the long Chinese isolation from
other civilizations. For China, defeated in both conflicts, these
wars represented the beginning of a century of humiliation by foreign
powers through the imposition of unequal treaties that extracted
commercial privileges, territory, and other benefits from the Chinese
government."
They must also have erronious information, as they consider China
isolated from other civilizations.
More from the encyclopedia:
"
The First Opium War stemmed from China's efforts to bar the illegal
importation of opium by British merchants. Britain scored an easy
military victory. By the treaties of Nanking (1842) and the Bogue
(1843), China opened the ports of Canton, Amoy, Foochow, Ning-po, and
Shanghai to British trade and residence, ceded Hong Kong to Britain,
and granted Britain EXTRATERRITORIALITY, that is, the right to try
British citizens in China in British courts. The other Western powers
soon received similar privileges.
The Second Opium War, or Anglo-French War, in China also resulted from
China's objections to the opium trade. A joint offensive by Britain
and France secured another victory. The Treaty of Tientsin was signed
in 1858, but the Chinese refused to ratify it. Hostilities resumed,
and Peking was captured by the Western allies.
In 1860, China agreed to the provisions of the treaty, which opened 11
more ports, allowed foreign envoys to reside in Peking, admitted
missionaries to China, permitted foreigners to travel in the Chinese
interior, and legalized the importation of opium (see TIENTSIN,
TREATIES OF).
Bibliography: Beeching, Jack, The Chinese Opium Wars (1975); Collis,
Maurice, Foreign Mud (1946; repr. 1968); Fay, Peter W., The Opium
War, 1840-42 (1975; repr. 1976); Holt, Edgar, The Opium Wars in
China (1964); Waley, A., The Opium War through Chinese Eyes (1958;
I do not see any reference to emperors or closed door policies. This
is an actual quote from a reference textbook.
>During Ming Dynasty, Chinese emperor sent an eunuch and several ships
>to Southeast Asia, which opened the immigration of Chinese to that region. It
>wasn't until the western imperialists started banging on China's door with gun
>ships, cannons and opiums in the 19th century that Chinese emperors adapted a
>"close-door policy".
You are speaking once again about contact with Southeast Asia.
Maybe I should have phrased it better. China did not have contact with
the western world at least not until Genghis & Kubla Khan. They
encouraged trade and the relative peace attained under their rule
encouraged prosperity. They definitely had interaction between other
Asian countries, but NOT with the Europeans.
And had it not been for that contact perhaphs they would not have
adopted a western way of life or communism.According to the same
documentary, they are supposedly seeing some of the error of their
ways and bringing back some of the old cultures such as religious
worships of ancestors which were banned under the communist system.
What I am trying to say is that they chose westrnized ways and are
only realizing slowly that the old ways worked better for them.
Opiates have been used since ancient times both for medicinal purposes
and for pleasure. Opium was taken orally, as a pill or added to
beverages, for centuries in many countries of Asia, including India.
Addiction did not become a wider problem until the practice of opium
smoking was introduced from India into China in the 17th century. The
Chinese attempted to deal with the problem by restricting cultivation
and importation of opium in the 19th century. This led to the Opium
Wars, as opium trade was highly profitable to Western countries,
particularly Britain. I am not sure what you mean by the "closed door
policy". They did try to curb the problems of addiction and stemming
the flow of the incoming drugs.
>China wasn't Japan. Japan was relatively isolated for most of its history
>because it's an island country. China is on the continent and has borders with
>more different ethics and cultures than most countries. To say China could
>somehow manage to cut itself out from all of its neighbors through five
>thousand years is a fantasy the Westerners entertain. It's not based on
>reality.
Like I said, perhaps I used the wrong words to try and get my meaning
accross. Naturally they interacted with their neighbours. But I was
referring to the contact between Asia and Europeans. I was not basing
my response to a Westerner's fantasy as you assume rather to the
reference of the writer referring to the Mongols using Europe as their
back yard.Until Marco Polo and the Silk trade not much was known about
the Chinese, except perhaps from the Arabs(Moors)
gole...@cadvision.com
On 15 Jun 1998 19:41:51 GMT, jgsz...@library.uwaterloo.ca (Joe
Szalai) wrote:
Religion. And the fact that Protestant Ireland was favoured more by
the British and the Catholic government felt they were tricked to
signing a treaty to join the two countries.
And the did not want to have any ties to Britain and the Protestants
did and probably many remember the potato famine and its results.
Jeane Armstrong
gole...@cadvision.com wrote in article
<35852f03...@news.cadvision.com>...
> On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 07:09:36 GMT, hancult...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >In article <6m0pis$m...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
> > dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Charles Dombi) wrote:
> >>
China for centuries was cut off from the rest
> of the world, particularly during the times of the Emperors.
> Unfortunately, it was western influence that eventually destroyed the
> unique and wonderful heritage of China through the adaptation to a
> Western way of goverment and Communism. It appears that the leaders of
> China are slowly but surely re discovering their own past and
> heritage. The communists destroyed most written records and
> discriminated and tried to destroy the educated scholars whom they
> considered burquise and not part of the "collective".
And yet, curiously enough, the Han Dynasty (the one under which the
original Mulan poetry took form), around 2200 years ago, did exactly the
same as the Communists: the infamous Burning of the Books, in which they
sought to supress freedom of thought as it encouraged ethical, intellectual
and political idealism which inevitably implied criticism of the pragmatic
nature of governance.
There is nothing, it would seem, new under the sun: not even the east-Asian
sun.
Pip.
>
> As for your reference of the Mongoloid roaming Europe....they were
> just one of the many conquerors of that part of the world. Conquest
> was a way of life back then.
>
> The facts are that the Chinese were very well advanced compared to
> Europe back then. They had doctors and scientists. The Europeans were
> in the dark ages.
Some Europeans were in the Dark Ages. The Byzantine Empire was
flourishing, and in the cold, far north, the decadent Anglo-Saxons - having
shaken off their penchant for pillage & conquest, were settling down to
produce wonders like the Lindesfarne Gospels.
> >see the picture of dead red head lady in China at:
> >http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/chinamum/taklamakan.html
Whoah! Is this the sorta thing we want on this Newsgroup??? :-)
Pip.
The Foreigner
Gustav Horvath wrote
>On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 19:59:51 GMT, gole...@cadvision.com wrote:
>>Religion. And the fact that Protestant Ireland was favoured more by
>>the British and the Catholic government felt they were tricked to
>>signing a treaty to join the two countries.
>>And the did not want to have any ties to Britain and the Protestants
>>did and probably many remember the potato famine and its results.
>
>
>What you wrote about has nothing to do with religion.
>On the other hand Christians are not supposed to fight.
>Especially not with other Christians.
>Where did you gather your information?
>Gustav
The Canadian educational? system. LOL
The Foreigner
Gustav Horvath wrote in message <3585a400...@news.sprint.ca>...
>On 15 Jun 1998 19:41:51 GMT, jgsz...@library.uwaterloo.ca (Joe
>Szalai) wrote:
>
>>Why do the Irish fight?
>
>Gustav
Practice, practice, practicide
The Foreigner
Istvan Lippai wrote:
> Lets just say that through the great cosmic slime (if that is your
>preference) or through Adam and Eve (if that is your preference) we are
>all related.
Cousin Pista, how ya doin'
The Foreigner
gole...@cadvision.com wrote
>my father also reads the National Enquirer and swears everything in it
>is "TRUE". According to all the clippings the world was supposed to
>end in 1986, by being hit by a comet!
Is your father alive, or are you just using him as a ruse to elicit a
response from Gustav?
X.W.
> : asians, it is recorded, even by Chinese scholars, that
> : some had red hair, and other features descended mostly
> : from what is now thought of as european stock. This
You bet! It is just some sort of descriptions. In China, young girls are
"traditionally" called "yellow-head", though they sure have black hair.
And you may find records of people having red, black, and even blue faces,
well all kinds of color. It does not refer them to be South-east Asian
descent, African descent, or whatever descent you may think of for a
person with a blue face! I think it is more cultural or symbolic of
personalities. As red symbolizes warm-heartedness, loyalty, hot tempered.
Black symbolizes truth, justice, sternity, and loyalty too.
Well, white is not as good as black or red, it is usually used to
symbolize ruthless, cruelty, and crafty. :=)
X. W.
Count Pierre Bezuhov
gole...@cadvision.com wrote:
>I believe that white is supposed to also symbolize mourning. And red
>is often used when a couple marry hence joy, and good luck.
Oh no. White symbolizes paleness and weakness. Black symbolizes
really good tanning. Red symbolizes bad burning. Yellow symbolizes
sickliness. Blue symbolizes being very cold. Uh, purple means yer
either really drunk or getting so angry at the direction of this
thread...
Istvan Lippai
gole...@cadvision.com wrote
> Istvan, the above is not quite right. Most of those fighting
> are ordinary people, not the wealthy. Not so much about
> oppression but the fact that they do not wish to be under
> British rule and some others do. The protestants are on
> the British side...the Catholics the other. In this case your
> religious affilliations can get you stabbed, shot or your
> house bombed. Gustav is naive when he claims Christians
> do not fight with Christians. Most wars were caused by
> religion. A little history and less dogma.......
> Liza
Erzsebet, on one hand they were fighting a religious war and on the other
hand they were fighting an economic war. Because of religious
discrimination, the Irish Catholics are poor, while the Irish Protestants
are well off. That is the result of hundreds of years of persecution.
Today, it is all about economics. The Irish Catholics feel that without
British rule, they could regain some of the economic advantages that they
have lost. It will be very difficult for them because, due to
discrimination, they are also less educated than the Irish Protestants.
Everyone is saying that they have reached some sort of a compromise
(thanks to American mediation), and perhaps they will stop killing each
other. I don't like the idea of civilians of either side getting killed.
Regards, Istvan
gole...@cadvision.com
On 16 Jun 1998 01:20:51 GMT, "Istvan Lippai"
<szat...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>There is religion in them potato fields. Based on my cursory
>understanding of British history, the Catholic King of England wanted to
>marry his mistress but the Pope wouldn't consent to a divorce from his
>wife. The King decided to make his own religion, declared himself the
>head of his church, divorced his wife and married his mistress. As the
>head of his new church all of his subjects were obliged to denounce their
>faith and submit to the King's religion. Most of his English subjects
>followed suit without much protest and thus the Church of England came
>into existence.
>
Actually Istvan, Henry did not need the blessings of the pope or
anyone else. He simply executed his wives. But the Irish problem has a
different cause.
as for the Church of England, it is still very similar to the Catholic
church. In fact a few years ago they were seriously discussing
re-uniting the two, but the fact that Catholic Priests are not allowed
to marry, and divorce is forbidden (annulment is not however...and in
some cases even after YEARS of marriage, nor is birth control) while
Anglican priests do marry and those differenced stalled the
discussions.However, Catholics and Anglicans can take communion in
each others churches.
Good old HenryVIII...he was actually before the present day Irish
problem which occured in the 1700's.....
Liza
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Istvan Lippai
gole...@cadvision.com wrote in
> or anyone else. He simply executed his wives. But the Irish
> problem has a different cause.
We had a long PBS series "The wives of Henry VIII". He had quite a few of
them put to death. My version, if somewhat simplistic, has a lot of truth
to it. There was a dispute with the Pope about divorce, the King declared
his own church with himself as its leader, most Irish resisted conversion,
those who resisted were punished, those who converted were rewarded ...
> as for the Church of England, it is still very similar to the
> Catholic church. In fact a few years ago they were
> seriously discussing re-uniting the two, but the fact that
> Catholic Priests are not allowed to marry, and divorce is
> forbidden (annulment is not however...and in some cases
> even after YEARS of marriage, nor is birth control) while
> Anglican priests do marry and those differenced stalled the
> discussions.However, Catholics and Anglicans can take
> communion in each others churches.
There was a huge scandal with one of the Kennedy's who tried to get an
annulment after 20 years of marriage and several children. Things like
that are the reason why I am not all that religious.
> Good old HenryVIII...he was actually before the present day
> Irish problem which occured in the 1700's.....
If it is any consolation, good old Hank had some kind of a terrible skin
decease. Another argument for monogamy, clean living, and tennis.
Regards, Istvan
Peter k Chong
tu...@sprint.ca (Gustav Horvath) wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Jun 1998 06:03:51 GMT, gole...@cadvision.com wrote:
>> But the Hungarians and the Turkish are two different
>>groups.
>
>I beg to differ here. :-)>
>Both are sub groups of Turkic.
>yet.
>
>Gustav
First off, given the general confusion (not to mention apathy) in Hungary
towards the Hun-Magyar relationship, I don't feel many Magyars would
care. Of course there are a few Hun-Magyar boosters who would take
offense to labelling Huns as evil and of course staunch Finno-Ugric
supporters who'd laugh at the whole idea and perhaps even direct a few
laughs towards the Huns. For me personally, I'm not sure if the Huns were
as evil as people make of them. I've read that Germanic literature does
view Atilla with some respect (in contrast to the rest of Western
literature which villifies Atilla completely) and of course Hungarians
name their sons after this old warrior. Being Chinese, I should probably
view the Huns with some suspicion but really we historically viewed
anyone who wasn't Chinese as barbarian. Thus Romans = Greeks = Persians =
Arabs = Turks = Mongols = Manchus = Japanese = Vietnamese = Tibetans =
etc. = barbarians. :-)
However, in my own research I reject the Finno-Ugric base to Hungarian
due to its inconsistences and politically-motivated researchers. The
Hungarians are a true hybrid people and became more so on their settling
in Central Europe. Excavations by archaelogists have revealed that the
"Baltic" or "Uralic" type was less predominant than the Taurid-Turanian
type and these bodies date from a time before the supposed mixing of
Turks and Magyars into the "Onogurs" (ca. 500 AD)...
Peter Chong
Rommel Calderon
I read NG's a lot. I read a lot of stupid things on NG's. This perhaps
invoked the greatest "good grief" I have ever said.
You're going to question the Political Correctness of the Huns in Mulan?!
Good fucking grief! For heaven's sake, who gives a rats ass about what the
fuck Hungarians will think about the "evil band of Huns"?! This movie is
seen from the Chinese point of view, and to the Chinese, the Huns were the
most evil sons of bithces to come crawling out of Hell! And according to
history, they were!
I respect the power of the Huns, and if it weren't for the deaths of so many
Kahns, they Huns would have ruled the world faster then the Romans or Greeks
could ever have done. To those being conquered, the Huns were some evil bad
asses.
Disney has learned their shit about political correctness. That's why most
of their movies and rereleases have been half ass works that can't push the
envelope and reach their true potential. Morons who keep pestering about
what certain ethnic groups will think about this, that or the other thing is
the problem here. Swallow it folks. It's a fucking movie. Leave it at
that. Don't go throwing this P.C. shit here. I'm fucking tired of it!
Leave the creators of these films alone. Let them tell their story. If it
offends you, then don't watch it. Let the rest of us decide for ourselves.
hancult...@hotmail.com wrote in message
<6lvlgr$jue$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>"Mulan" will be the Disney feature cartoon of the year,
>the villian in the movie is "evil band of Huns" (direct
>quote from Mulan official home page at mulan.com), which
>tried to invade China's great wall, Mulan, the heroine
>of the movie, confront the evil Huns and save China.
>The movie start on June 19 in US and Canada.
>
>Do Hungarian today still have any emotional ties to the
>historical Huns tribes? My guess is not, others wise
>Disney won't dare to use the word "EVIL" to describe Huns.
>Disney learned, are they?
>
>As I know, some Hungarian are descendent of the Huns and
>some are not, what would the reaction of the Huns
>descendents to this movie?
>
>Finally, why are there so many Westerners thought Atilla
>the Hun, Genghis Khaan and Turks in far-ancient time looks
>Caucasian, altough they were not? What do Hungarian think
>about this? Do Hungarian today sweep their Asian origin
>under the carpet? Are they proud of Attila the Hun?
>How Hungarian text books describe the ancient Huns?
>
>Thank you.
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
joshua geller
Peter k Chong <pet...@inforamp.net> writes:
> Being Chinese, I should probably
> view the Huns with some suspicion but really we historically viewed
> anyone who wasn't Chinese as barbarian. Thus Romans = Greeks = Persians =
> Arabs = Turks = Mongols = Manchus = Japanese = Vietnamese = Tibetans =
> etc. = barbarians. :-)
This is, of course, true. I point out that the attitude towards the
Indians was ambiguous; on the one hand they were foreigners and hence
barbarians - and black ones too! On the other hand, Buddhism came from
India. So if you were a Chinese Buddhist you might have a certain
reverence and respect for ancient India. Of course if you were a
Chinese anti-Buddhist you would emphasize the foreignness and the
barbarity of the Indians. And after 200 AD or so, even Chinese
Buddhists would have to admit that the Indians had rejected Buddhism,
so maybe they were really barbarians after all.
Chinese monks went on pilgrimage to India on more than one occasion.
my very best,
josh
George Szaszvari
In article <3586ffeb...@news.cadvision.com>, gole...@cadvision.com
says...
>>Because the English invaded and tried to subjugate their country.
>>It's still a sore point today, in case anyone hadn't noticed, and
>>they need to keep their hand in, just in case the current talks
>>don't manage to get Cromwell's cronies out this time. It might
>>also have something to do with blood sports like Gaelic Football
>>and Hurling...or drinking lots of stout...
>not quite....just ask any Irishman.
I work, drink and live with Irish men and women virtually every day,
but you weren't to know that, and therefore you missed the humour
in the posting...
--
George Szaszvari, DCPS Chess Club, 42 Alleyn Park, London SE21 7AA, UK
eeb...@spice.cc.utexas.edu
I am afraid Mr. Chong's statement is not true.
the Chinese counterpart of the English word
"China"("Hua-Xia", etc) in ancient times
was mainly used in a cultural, rather than
racial sense. It is true, in the mind of
ancient Chinese(or educated ancient Chinese,
anyhow, at that time only the educated had
a say ), Chinese is whoever follows the Chinese
way, a barbarian is whoever follows the
barbarian way. Confucius made this clear in
"Analects": "Chinese behave like
barbarians, treat them like barbarians;
barbarians hehave like Chinese, treat them
like Chinese". Of course, you can argue
you need to define the concept "Chinese"
before you use it. However, I think Confucius's
idea is made quite clear by his words.
One of best emperors in Chinese history,
Xiao-Wen-Di of North Wei, he was from non-Han
background, but he promoted the cultural assimilation
of his own race(Xian-Be, which is related to
today's minorities like Xi-Bo and Tibetans)
into the "Chinese", I don't think any modern
Chinese will doubt his "Chineseness". Koreans
served in Tang and Ming as imperial officials and
generals. And unlike later Empires, in various
Chinese dynasties, either a place was ruled
indirectly by the central government via some
local lords, or directly by the central government,
in this case people in that place had the
same right as people in any other places:
the most important one was of course the right
to take Imperial official exam. So in this
sense, there was not much discrimination against
any particular people under direct ruling.
Of course, in fact, because of the wealth,
the number of successful examinees, and
the temperament of people of one place, people(officials)
had their preferences/.
You can find some quite beautiful poems
written by Vietnamese scholars in various times.
I am sure some of them must be quite successful
in imperial official exams.
One interesting thing to note is that
in many cases, the emperors were better
than imperial officials in their attitude
to minority people. In Ming Dynasty,
some officials reported to Emperor Wan-Li,
that Tibetans and Ughurs were fighting
a bloody war between them, and their suggestion
was to let them fight to their satisfication.
But Emperor Wan-Li had different idea,
he told his officials the war must be stopped.
The reason?
"They(Tibetans and Ughurs) are also my people".
As to ancient India, Chinese usually have
very good impression about it. Buddhism
was introduced to other part of China
through today's Xingjiang, by Monks from
Xingjiang and India. If you read Chinese,
you will find some Buddist sutras which
are now used by Chinese monks were actually
translated by them in ancient times.
At the time when India was still a
Buddist country, for some Chinese Buddists,
the biggest wish for the "next life"
is to be re-born in India.
It is safe to say many Chinese have quite
fond feeling about India. However, indian clowns
like "Mo" and "Dr. XXj" have really done
a job to dis-illusion them.
joshua geller (dcl...@shell5.ba.best.com) wrote:
gole...@cadvision.com
On 17 Jun 1998 10:30:35 GMT, g...@dial.pipex.com (George Szaszvari)
wrote:
George:
Unfortunately, body language which is also important in communication
is not available on the Net. Often it is hard to tell
Liza
by the way....I happen to hang out with a lot of Brits......"luv"
....they also like their beer...I guess that would explain it. Beer &
politics......like living on the edge.
Liza
gole...@cadvision.com
No need to get testy. Most of us Hungarians do not give a "rat's ass"
either.People tend to get offended about the stupidest things, and
assume everyone else should. I have not seen the movie...but no doubt
it is a good story and good entertainment. The key word here is
"entertainment". If people start complaining about political
correctness or taking offense... over things that happened thousands
of years ago...I suggest they get a life. I probably won't see the
movie, since I have no small children....but then I did not see the
Lion King either for that same reason.
Incidentally, "HUN"garians are not the descendents of "HUNS". We are
Magyar. Hungarian is an English name . We call ourselves Magyars and
our country Magyarorszag.
In ancient times power and conquest meant survival for many
nations.Loyalty to particular leader, if he was successful meant also
protection for individuals.
But for the most part I have to aggree, all this political correctness
crap is getting out of hand. Just recently our school board decided
that there would be no distiction between genders....and one is no
longer a male or female....but a person. ie. police officer (not
policeMAN) maliperson (not mailMAN). It is the stupidest thing I have
ever heard. In fact one nite club even went so far as putting in
UNISEX washrooms! Seems the pendulum of stupidity swings both
way.....too far!
Most such silly suggestions are usually brought up by someone who may
have an identity problem or wants to start something.
Its so stupid ..........
eeb...@spice.cc.utexas.edu
Gustav Horvath (tu...@sprint.ca) wrote:
: On 17 Jun 1998 11:03:18 GMT, eeb...@spice.cc.utexas.edu () wrote:
: (...)
: >But Emperor Wan-Li had different idea,
: >he told his officials the war must be stopped.
: >The reason?
: >"They(Tibetans and Ughurs) are also my people".
: You see, that's the root of the problem.
: They -most of them believe- were/are not!
: Gustav
Sorry, had Emperor Wan-Li done something to displease
pan-turkism?
Istvan Lippai
Rommel Calderon <ro...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
> You're going to question the Political Correctness of the
> Huns in Mulan?! Good fucking grief! For heaven's sake,
> who gives a rats ass about what the fuck Hungarians
> will think about the "evil band of Huns"?! This movie is
> seen from the Chinese point of view, and to the Chinese,
> the Huns were the most evil sons of bithces to come
> crawling out of Hell! And according to history, they were!
and somewhat flattering that so many are fighting for the bragging rights
of kinship with Hungarians. Well, I could see why. I also find it
curious that those who so desperately want to be our "brothers", have
invaded and decimated our country in the past. The Tatars and the Turks
seem to be the front runners and really want get brotherly with us. They
have both invaded our country and done their share of destruction of our
nation and people.
My suggestion is that if these folks are really serious about wanting to
be our "brothers", they should start by compensating Hungary for the
destruction they have caused to us. I thing that $1 trillion would be a
nice demonstration of brotherly feelings.
When can we expect the first installment?
Regards, Istvan
Charles Dombi
Istvan, once again you are wrong. Today, the peoples who are
related to the Hungarians, and this includes the Turks and the
Tartars, have a genuine feeling of sympathy towards the Hun-
garians, and just because you find it personally distasteful,
you shouldn't confuse your opinion with the facts: when the
Mongols and Turks invaded Europe, they both offered an alliance
to the Hungarians. However, Hungary fell increasingly under
Western influence as a result of the German-backed coup d'etat
which imposed the christianization and feudalization of the
Hungarian state one thousand years ago, and as a result, Hungary
was manipulated by foreign interests and forced to reject the
alliances offered by the Mongols and the Turks. It is the West
which owes Hungary compensation for the resultant centuries of
devastation. In the 16th century, Europe would not have been
to withstand the combined forces of the Hungarian Kingdom and
of the Ottoman Empire. The incalculable losses suffered by
Hungary over the centuries could have been avoided if the Hun-
garians would have been free to make the right choices for
their own national interests. The West used Hungary as a buffer
or as a battering ram against the East. It is high time that
these historical events be re-evaluated in an objective manner.
Mark
Istvan Lippai wrote:
> My suggestion is that if these folks are really serious about wanting to
> be our "brothers", they should start by compensating Hungary for the
> destruction they have caused to us. I thing that $1 trillion would be a
> nice demonstration of brotherly feelings.
>
> When can we expect the first installment?
>
> Regards, Istvan
Gustav, please dust off the collection plate !
gole...@cadvision.com
On 18 Jun 1998 00:41:16 GMT, g...@dial.pipex.com (George Szaszvari)
wrote:
>In article <3587c62...@news.cadvision.com>, gole...@cadvision.com
>says...
>>>I work, drink and live with Irish men and women virtually every day,
>>>but you weren't to know that, and therefore you missed the humour
>>>in the posting...
>
>>Unfortunately, body language which is also important in communication
>>is not available on the Net. Often it is hard to tell
>
>>by the way....I happen to hang out with a lot of Brits......"luv"
>>....they also like their beer...I guess that would explain it. Beer &
>>politics......like living on the edge.
>
>Liza,
>
>I forgot to mention that "Limerick George" [one of the other
>George's at my Irish local] has bestowed upon me the prestigious
>title of *Honorary Irishman*...ratified by Liam and the Mackey's
>of Tipperary and Thomas of County Meath...there were others too,
>but my memory seems to be going <hic>...
>
>"I'm an ordinary man, nothing special, nothing grand..."
>Christy Moore.
>
>--
>George Szaszvari, DCPS Chess Club, 42 Alleyn Park, London SE21 7AA, UK
>
yer a bonnie ladddie......
Liza
escudeiro
well, bad news. there has been some speculation that king mathias was
acctually a ''QUEEN''. istvan disgusted with the fact that is brother
made public that the entire arpad dinasty was tottaly inbred decided
neve to sleep with him again.
trukky Escu...@webtv.net
Mark
George Szaszvari wrote:
> I forgot to mention that "Limerick George" [one of the other
> George's at my Irish local] has bestowed upon me the prestigious
> title of *Honorary Irishman*...ratified by Liam and the Mackey's
> of Tipperary and Thomas of County Meath...there were others too,
> but my memory seems to be going <hic>...
>
George, I drink to the Honorary Irishman!
What is an Irishman? -By Pat Gallinagh
It's not shamrocks or shillelaghs that makes the Irish true
Nor clay pipes or leprechauns or Galway Bay so blue
It's their boundless sense of humour and their warm and gentle
smiles It's their trust in human kindness as naive as a young child's
It's their hatred of oppression and compassion for the weak
It's their love of family, faith and country and the words
with which we speak It's a sea of wild emotions with
lots of tears and laughter too And yes, an Irish temper that
can explode without a clue
It's a Celtic's sense of combat and the will to work til dark
Tis courage to face misfortune and the strength of one's own heart
It's their gift for song and poetry and of music for our ears
It's pride in Ireland's traditions and its folklore of the years
It's a spirit not a costume that makes the Irish proud
Cross continents and oceans and mountains tall and loud
It's a feeling words and pictures cannot too well relate
And for those who are not Irish, can only hope to emulate
--and here is a joke....
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a
pub together. They each proceeded to buy a pint of Guinness.
Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, a
fly landed in each of their pints and became stuck in the thick head.
The Englishman pushed his beer from him in disgust.
The Scotsman fished the offending fly out of his beer and continued
drinking it as if nothing had happened.
The Irishman picked the fly out of his drink, held it out over
the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT!! SPIT IT OUT!!!!"
Cheers
Mark
George Szaszvari
In article <3587c62...@news.cadvision.com>, gole...@cadvision.com
says...
>>I work, drink and live with Irish men and women virtually every day,
>>but you weren't to know that, and therefore you missed the humour
>>in the posting...
>Unfortunately, body language which is also important in communication
>is not available on the Net. Often it is hard to tell
>by the way....I happen to hang out with a lot of Brits......"luv"
>....they also like their beer...I guess that would explain it. Beer &
>politics......like living on the edge.
Liza,
I forgot to mention that "Limerick George" [one of the other
George's at my Irish local] has bestowed upon me the prestigious
title of *Honorary Irishman*...ratified by Liam and the Mackey's
of Tipperary and Thomas of County Meath...there were others too,
but my memory seems to be going <hic>...
"I'm an ordinary man, nothing special, nothing grand..."
Istvan Lippai
Charles Dombi <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in article
<6m9kah$q...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>...
>
> Istvan, once again you are wrong. Today, the peoples who are
> related to the Hungarians, and this includes the Turks and the
> Tartars, have a genuine feeling of sympathy towards the Hun-
> garians, and just because you find it personally distasteful,
> you shouldn't confuse your opinion with the facts: when the
> Mongols and Turks invaded Europe, they both offered an alliance
> to the Hungarians. However, Hungary fell increasingly under
> Western influence as a result of the German-backed coup d'etat
> which imposed the christianization and feudalization of the
> Hungarian state one thousand years ago, and as a result, Hungary
> was manipulated by foreign interests and forced to reject the
> alliances offered by the Mongols and the Turks.
religion, laws, and customs. At the time of Mongol invasion, Hungary was
already a Christian nation and they treated us with the same contempt, and
cruelty as they treated any other Christian nation.
First the Mongol hordes ran over Hungary and annihilated more than half of
our people. These were not the actions of brothers or sympathetic friends
but of ruthless enemy. Bela became a king with a country but no people.
He has resettled the country from neighboring countries and that is where
our true blood roots lie. We are a nation of European stock because our
original ancestors, whoever they were, were destroyed by those you would
now claim to be our brothers.
> It is the West
> which owes Hungary compensation for the resultant centuries of
> devastation. In the 16th century, Europe would not have been
> to withstand the combined forces of the Hungarian Kingdom and
> of the Ottoman Empire.
The second great Hungarian tragedy occurred at Mohacs. That is where the
Turks have defeated our forces and began a ruthless occupation that lasted
150 years. The nation that Bela built out of the ashes of Mongol invasion
was once again destroyed by people who would claim to be our brothers.
The Turkish occupation and the ensuing wars have, by some estimates,
caused us to loose 1-1/2 million of our people. When the Turks were
finally driven out, these territories were once again settled with
non-Hungarians from neighboring countries. These people were Austrians,
Croats, Germans, Romanians, Serbs, ... These were the people who at
Trianon demanded those Hungarian territories that they have settled into.
We lost 2/3 of our land and 3 million of our people. Without the Turkish
invasion and destruction, the tragedy of Trianon would have never
happened. Without Trianon, we would have been strong and confident enough
to say no to Hitler. These are the tragic consequences of Turks invasion
of Hungary.
That is why the Turks owe compensation for the devastation of Hungary.
By the 16th century, Hungary has been a Christian nation for 600 years.
There was no way that Hungary could ally with the invading Turkish hordes
who treated the Christians they conquered as less than human. You just
have to look at Greece and the Balkans where the Turks ruled for 500
years. They have treated the "infidels" as something less than beasts of
burden. Hungary couldn't enter into an alliance with the Turks without
rejecting everything that made us who we were.
> The incalculable losses suffered by
> Hungary over the centuries could have been avoided if the Hun-
> garians would have been free to make the right choices for
> their own national interests. The West used Hungary as a buffer
> or as a battering ram against the East. It is high time that
> these historical events be re-evaluated in an objective manner.
The location of Hungary between the warring powers of the East and West
created many problems. For centuries Hungary prospered under the rule of
Hungarian Christian rulers and if the Turks had stayed where they belong,
Hungary would have continued to prosper.
Today, we are a mixture of many European peoples, many of whom we have
fought against in the past. It is time to look at our neighbors as our
brothers, make peace with them and thus assure Hungary's future prosperity
and security as well as the respect for the rights of Hungarians living
outside of our present borders.
Why are people like you and Gustav deny the responsibility for destruction
of the Hungarian nation by the Mongol and Turkish hordes? Why are you
pushing this kinship with those who have cause so much tragedy for us?
You both seem to have a hidden agenda that goes against 1,000 years of
Hungarian history. The difference between us is that I am open about my
personal reasons for opposing Turkish domination of Hungary (as if any
Hungarian would need a personal reason for opposing foreign domination of
his country), but you and Gustav hide your personal reasons and agenda.
Why don't you come clean and tell us why you dream of Turkish rule over
Hungary!
Istvan Lippai
Istvan Lippai
Istvan Lippai <szat...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
I might add that the third Mongol invasion occurred in 1956. Large
segments of Russian troops who had spent some time in Hungary were
reluctant to fire on the Hungarian workers and students. Most of these
troops were withdrawn and replaced with troops from Mongolia. They didn't
have any problem slaughtering unarmed demonstrators.
Istvan
Istvan Lippai
escudeiro <escu...@webtv.net> wrote in article
<6m9nku$a70$1...@newsd-174.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
We have seen these kind of filthy letters from the Turks before. They
have contempt for our people, our history and they express it in the only
way they know. With sexual depravation and filth.
What I find curious that I haven't posted any of my letters to the Turkish
list, yet one of these dirt bags is already here. Gustav, did you call in
your brothers? Are they going to use fake Hungarian names again as they
post filth to SCM?
Tell us man, they are "your" brothers.
Istvan
Istvan Lippai
Gustav Horvath
On Wed, 17 Jun 1998 19:55:41 -0700, Mark <mar...@kingston.net> wrote:
>Istvan Lippai wrote:
>> When can we expect the first installment?
>>
>> Regards, Istvan
>
>Gustav, please dust off the collection plate !
Minek? Ha Pista batyad tartana, nem hiszem, hogy sok kulonbseg lenne.
(Poros maradna :-)>
Te Markusz, mar olyan reg irtal, hogy azt hittem, hogy Mo.-ra
koltoztel. :-)))>
A multkoriban valami olyasmit irtal, hogy Camus neked tul baloldali
volt. Szerintem a non-conformist(a) jelzo jobban megfelelo lenne.
Hogy ezt valoban meg tudjuk itelni ahhoz egy kicsit tobbre van szukseg
mint amit az iskolai konyvekben vagy lexikonokban olvashatsz.
Ezert beszkanaztam egy dokumentumot amely kevesbe ismert.
Nem volt konnyu mert a masinam nem akarta semmi aron.
Aztan rajottem, hogy tul kicsik voltak a betuk es felkellett a
fotocopieren nagyitani. Aztan is meg eleg sok manualis javitani valo
volt rajta, de most itt van. Remelem Pista batyad is megnyugszik ha
ezt latja es nem arrol propagandazik amirol halvany goze sincs. :-)>
Enjoy,
*****************
Albert Camus
KADAR HAD HIS DAY OF FEAR
(The Hungarian Minister, of State Marosan, whose -name sounds like a
program, declared a few days go that there would be no further
counter-revolution in Hungary. For once, one Kadar's Ministers has
told the truth. How could there be a counter-revolution since it has
already seized power There could be no other revolution in Hungary.)
I am not one of those who long for the Hungarian people to take up
arms again in an uprising doomed to be crushed under the eyes of an
international society that will spare either applause nor virtuous
tears before returning to their slippers like football enthusiasts on
Saturday evening after a big game. There are already too many dead in
the stadium, and we can be generous only with our own blood, Hungarian
blood has proved to be so valuable to Europe and to freedom that we
must try to spare every drop of it.
But I am not one to think there can be even a resigned or provisional
compromise with a reign of terror that has as much right to be called
socialist as the execu-tioners of the Inquisition had to be called
Christians. And, on this anniversary of liberty, I hope with all my
strength that the mute resistance of the Hungarian peo-ple will
continue, grow stronger, and, echoed by all the voices we can give it,
get unanimous international opin-ion to boycott its oppressors. And
if that opinion is too flabby or selfish to do justice to a martyred
people, if our voices also are too weak, I hope that the Hungarian
re-sistance will continue until the counter-revolutionary state
collapses everywhere in the East under the weight of its lies and its
contradictions.
The Bloody and Monotonous Rites
For it is indeed a counter-revolutionary state. What else can we call
a regime that forces the father to inform on his son, the son to
demand the supreme punishment for his father, the wife to bear witness
against her husband -that has raised denunciation to the level of a
virtue? Foreign tanks, police, twenty-year-old girls hanged,
committees of workers decapitated and gagged, scaffolds, writers
deported and imprisoned, the lying press, camps, censorship, judges
arrested, criminals legislating, and the scaffold again-is this
socialism, the great celebra-tion of liberty and justice?
No, we have known, we still know this kind of thing-, these are the
bloody and monotonous rites of the totalitarian religion! Hungarian
socialism is in prison or in exile today. In the palaces of the
State, armed to the teeth, slink the petty tyrants of absolutism,
terrified by I the very word 'liberty," maddened by the word The proof
is that today, the '5d' of March, a day of invincible truth and
liberty for all Hungarians, was for] Kadar simply a long day of fear.
For many years, however, those tyrants, aided in the West by
accomplices who were not obliged by anything or any one to show such
zeal, cloaked their true actions or in a heavy smoke screen. When
something could be seen through the screen, they or their Western
interpreters explained to us that everything would be all right in ten
generations or so, that meanwhile everyone
Was joyfully heading toward the future, that the de-ported had made
the mistake of getting in the way of traffic in the magnificent road
of progress, that the executed agreed completely as to their own
suppression, that the intellectuals declared themselves delighted with
their pretty gag because it was dialectical, and that the proletariat
were charmed with their own work because, if they worked overtime for
wretched wages, this was in the proper direction of history.
Alas, the people themselves spoke up! They began to talk in Berlin,
in Czechoslovakia, in Poznan, and even-tually in Budapest. All at
once, everywhere, intellectuals tore off their gags. And together,
with a single voice, they said that instead of progress there was
regression, that the killings had been useless, the depor-tations
useless, the enslavements useless, and that hence-forth, to be sure of
making real progress, truth and liberty had to be granted to all.
Thus, with the first shout of insurrection in free Budapest, learned
and shortsighted philosophies, miles of false reasonings and
deceptively beautiful doctrines were scattered like dust. And the
truth, the naked truth, so long outraged, burst upon the eyes of the
world.
Contemptuous teachers, unaware that they were thereby insulting the
working classes, had assured us that the masses could readily get
along without liberty if only they were given bread. And the masses
them-selves suddenly replied that they didn't have bread but that,
even if they did, they would still like something else. For it was
not a learned professor but a Budapest blacksmith who wrote: "I want
to be considered an adult eager to think and capable of thought. I
want to be able
To express my thoughts without having anything to fear and I want,
also, to be listened to."
As for the intellectuals who had been told and shouted at that there
was no truth other than the one that served of cause, thi sis the oath
they took at the grave of their comrades assassinated by that cause:
"Never again, not even under threat and torture, nor a misunderstood
love- of the cause, will anything but the truth issue from our
mouths."
(Tibor Meray at the grave of Rajk.)
The Scaffold Does Not Become Any More Liberal
After that, the case is closed. The slaughtered people are our
people. What Spain was for us twenty years ago Hungary will be today.
The subtle distinctions, the ver-bal tricks, and the clever
considerations with which people still try to cloak the truth do not
interest us. The com-petition we are told about between Rakosi and
Kadar is unimportant. The two are of the same stamp. They differ only
by the number of heads to their credit, and if Rakosi's total is more
impressive, this will not be so for long.
In any event, whether the bald killer or the perse-cuted persecutor
rules over Hungary makes no difference as to the freedom of that
country. I regret having to play the role of Cassandra once more and
having to disappoint the fresh hopes of certain ever hopeful
colleagues, but there is no possible evolution in a totalitarian
society. Terror does not evolve except toward a worse terror, the
scaffold does not become any more liberal, the gallows are not
tolerant. Nowhere in the world has there been a party or a man with
absolute power who did not use it absolutely.
The fist thing to define totalitarian society, whether of the Right or
of the Left, is single party, and the single party has no reason to
destroy itself. This is why the only society capable of evolution and
liberalization, the only one that deserves both our critical and our
active
Support is the society that involves a plurality of parties as a part
of its structure. It alone allows one to denounce, hence to correct,
injustice and crime. It alone today allows one to denounce torture,
disgraceful torture, as contemptible in Algiers as in Budapest.
What Budapest Was Defending
The idea, still voiced among us, that a party, because it calls itself
proletarian, can enjoy special privileges in regard to history is an
idea of intellectuals tired of their ad-vantages and of their freedom.
History does not confer privileges: it lets them be snatched away.
And it is not the function of intellectuals or of workers to glorify
even slightly the right of the stronger and the fait accompli. The
truth is that no one, neither individ-ual nor party, has a right to
absolute power or to lasting privileges in a history that is itself
changing. And no privilege, no supreme reason can justify torture or
terror.
On this point Budapest again showed us the way. Hungary conquered and
in chains (which our false real-ists compare with commiseration to
Poland), still on the edge of equilibrium, has done more for freedom
and jus-tice than any people in twenty years. But, for that lesson to
reach and convince those in the West who close their eyes and ears,
the Hungarian people (and we shall never be consoled for this) had to
shed their own blood, and it is already drying up in people's
memories.
At least we shall try to be faithful to Hungary as we have been to
Spain. In Europe's present solitude, we have but one way of being
so-which is never to betray, at home or abroad , that for which the
Hungarian combatants died and to justify even indirectly, at home or
abroad, what killed them.
The untiring insistence upon freedom and truth, the community of the
worker and the intellectual (who are still stupidly warring here, as
tyranny aims to keep them doing), and finally political democracy as a
necessary and indispensable (though surely not sufficient) conditions
of economic democracy-this is what Budapest was defending. And in
doing so, the great city in insurrection reminded Western Europe of
its forgotten truth and
greatness. It made short work of that odd feeling of infe-riority that
debilitates most of our intellectuals but that I, for one, refuse to
feel.
Reply to Shepilov
The defects of the West are innumerable, its crimes and errors very
real. But in the end, let's not forget that we are the only ones to
have the possibility of improve-ment and emancipation that lies in
free genius. Let's not forget that when totalitarian society, by its
very prin-ciples, forces the friend to denounce his friend, Western
society, despite its wanderings from the path of virtue, always
produces a race of men who uphold honor in life-I mean men who stretch
out their hands even to their enemy to save him from suffering or
death.
When Minister Shepilov on his return from Paris dares to write that
"Western art is bound to tear the hu-man soul apart and to form
butchers of every sort," it is time to reply to him that at least our
writers and artists have never butchered anyone and that yet they are
gen-erous enough not to blame the theory of socialist realism for the
massacres ordered by Shepilov and those who resemble him.
The truth is that there is room for everything among us, even for
evil, and even for Shepilov's writers. There is room also for honor,
for the freedom to desire, for the adventure of the mind. Whereas
there is room for noth-ing in Stalinist culture except for edifying
sermons, colorless life, and the catechism of propaganda. To any who
still had any doubts about this, the Hungarian writers have just
shouted the truth before choosing perma-nent silence today when they
are ordered to lie.
It will be hard for us to be worthy of so many sacri-fices. But we
must try to do so in a Europe at last united, by forgetting our
quarrels, by getting rid of our own er-rors, by multiplying our
creations and our solidarity. And to those who wanted to humble us
and persuade us that history could justify a reign of terror, we shall
reply by our real faith that we share, as we now know, with Hungarian
writers, Polish writers, and even, indeed, with Russian writers, who
are also gagged.
Our faith is that throughout the world, beside the impulse toward
coercion and death that is darkening his-tory, there is a growing
impulse toward persuasion and life, a vast emancipatory movement
called culture that is made up both of free creation and of free work.
Our daily task, our long vocation is to add to that cul-ture by our
labors and not to subtract, even temporarily, anything from it. But
our proudest duty is to defend personally to the very end, against the
impulse toward coercion and death, the freedom of that culture-in
other words, the freedom of work and of creation.
The Hungarian workers and intellectuals, beside whom we stand today
with so much impotent grief, real-ized that and made us realize it.
This is why, if their suffering is ours, their hope belongs to us too.
Despite their destitution, their exile, their chains, it took them but
a single day to transmit to us the royal legacy of lib-erty. May we
be worthy of it!
Franc-Tireur 18 March 1957 "
Nevzat Akdemir
Istvan Lippai wrote:
>
>
> We have seen these kind of filthy letters from the Turks before. They
> have contempt for our people, our history and they express it in the only
> way they know. With sexual depravation and filth.
>
> What I find curious that I haven't posted any of my letters to the Turkish
> list, yet one of these dirt bags is already here. Gustav, did you call in
> your brothers? Are they going to use fake Hungarian names again as they
> post filth to SCM?
>
> Tell us man, they are "your" brothers.
>
> Istvan
Turks wouldn't write to you. Because you are an unimportant piece of
garbage
you Armenian boy. You are nearly close to nothing, lost and posts
uneducated
guesses on the net type dingelberry.
You are being hated not only by Turks but Hungarians as well.
Get lost.
nevzat
P.S This one goes also to SCT. Maybe you learn not to talk on behind
people's backs.
Nevzat Akdemir
Istvan Lippai wrote:
> Rommel Calderon <ro...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
> >
> > You're going to question the Political Correctness of the
> > Huns in Mulan?! Good fucking grief! For heaven's sake,
> > who gives a rats ass about what the fuck Hungarians
> > will think about the "evil band of Huns"?! This movie is
> > seen from the Chinese point of view, and to the Chinese,
> > the Huns were the most evil sons of bithces to come
> > crawling out of Hell! And according to history, they were!
>
> It is no big deal, one way or another. Actually, I find it entertaining
> and somewhat flattering that so many are fighting for the bragging rights
> of kinship with Hungarians. Well, I could see why. I also find it
> curious that those who so desperately want to be our "brothers", have
> invaded and decimated our country in the past. The Tatars and the Turks
> seem to be the front runners and really want get brotherly with us. They
> have both invaded our country and done their share of destruction of our
> nation and people.
>
> My suggestion is that if these folks are really serious about wanting to
> be our "brothers", they should start by compensating Hungary for the
> destruction they have caused to us. I thing that $1 trillion would be a
> nice demonstration of brotherly feelings.
>
> When can we expect the first installment?
>
> Regards, Istvan
I see the moron Istvan started running his flap about Turks again.
Hey you stupid human being: You are not Hungarian first of
all. Your mother is Armenian, your father carried Hungarian
passport but who knows what was his origins, you escaped to US
when very young. And right now you don't have any relations
to Hungarianness but just talk the language.
No Turk wants to be a brother with you. Not Turks wants to be
in close vicinity with you. Turks maybe wants to get friends with
Hungarians and some Hungarians wants that too. But you? Jesus.
They probably go kill themselves before they become a brother
with a scumbag like you.
If you need money go and work for Manukyan in Istanbul.
Or go and apply for financial help to US government.
I'll be wathcing you!!!
nevzat
P.S. I added SCT to the thread, so you don't talk behind the Turks.
Sch...@my-dejanews.com
In article <6m9kah$q...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Charles Dombi) wrote:
>
>
> Istvan, once again you are wrong. Today, the peoples who are
> related to the Hungarians, and this includes the Turks and the
> Tartars,
The Finns, Estonians, Komi, Urdmuts, and other Finno-Ugric peoples
are related to the Hungarians. Turks & Huns aren't.
have a genuine feeling of sympathy towards the Hun-
> garians, and just because you find it personally distasteful,
> you shouldn't confuse your opinion with the facts: when the
> Mongols and Turks invaded Europe, they both offered an alliance
> to the Hungarians.
The Mongols offered a unconditional surrender to the Hungarians & planned
to turn all the pastures & crop land into grazing for the Mongol army.
While the Turks wished to turn the Hungarians into virtual slaves to
service the needs of the Moslems of the Ottoman Empire, who were for
the most part Turks.
However, Hungary fell increasingly under
> Western influence as a result of the German-backed coup d'etat
Bela IV & then Andreas III at the time of the Mongol invasion were
certainly not and in fact had fought with Bohemia's Ottokar II, who was
allied to the German(Holy Roman) Emperor.
> which imposed the christianization and feudalization of the
> Hungarian state one thousand years ago,
Fuedalization was a natural progression which the Hungarian rulers adopted
to maintain control, which they couldn't have done had thiey maintained
the traditonal political system of thier previous nomadic life.
and as a result, Hungary
> was manipulated by foreign interests and forced to reject the
> alliances offered by the Mongols and the Turks.
The Turks & Mongols wished to manipulate Hungaria against the German states
with whom the Hungarians had fought since thier arrival in Europe.
It is the West
> which owes Hungary compensation for the resultant centuries of
> devastation.
Both own Hungaria, but in the same fashion, one could argue for devestating
Europe between 899 - 955 and for dominating Crotia (1089-1526) and for
invading Austria (1458-1490), the Hungarians own a bit, not to mention
for alling with with Nazis & taking bits of Slovakia, when Germany took
the rest in 1938.
It's all the past really though and modern persons probably shoudn't look
for compensation.
In the 16th century, Europe would not have been
> to withstand the combined forces of the Hungarian Kingdom and
> of the Ottoman Empire.
You over estimate the Hungarians & the Ottoman Empire, both of which had
serious internal economic & political problems.
The incalculable losses suffered by
> Hungary over the centuries could have been avoided if the Hun-
> garians would have been free to make the right choices for
> their own national interests. The West used Hungary as a buffer
> or as a battering ram against the East.
And the Ottomans didn't do the same? And it wasn't "the west" as a whole
but specially the German states under the Hapsburgs. The Hollenzollern rulers
of Prussia for a time were actually allied to the Otttomans, as were the
French & for a time the Swedish.
It is high time that
> these historical events be re-evaluated in an objective manner.
>
It's high time you picked up a history book and read it.
--Oscar Schlaf--
Istvan Lippai
Nevzat Akdemir <nev...@accesscom.net> wrote in article
of
> garbage
> you Armenian boy. You are nearly close to nothing, lost and posts
> uneducated
> guesses on the net type dingelberry.
>
> You are being hated not only by Turks but Hungarians as well.
>
> Get lost.
>
>
>
> nevzat
>
> P.S This one goes also to SCT. Maybe you learn not to talk on
behind
> people's backs.
They were ruthless, barbaric, uncivilized murderers in the middle ages and
that is what they are today. They are incapable of putting together one
coherent sentence but they are good at writing filth.
Why did you bring them to SCM?
Istvan
Joe Szalai
In article <6m9s5k$n...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
Istvan Lippai <szat...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>We have seen these kind of filthy letters from the Turks before. They
>have contempt for our people, our history and they express it in the only
>way they know. With sexual depravation and filth.
>
>What I find curious that I haven't posted any of my letters to the Turkish
>list, yet one of these dirt bags is already here. Gustav, did you call in
>your brothers? Are they going to use fake Hungarian names again as they
>post filth to SCM?
>
>Tell us man, they are "your" brothers.
>
>Istvan
Settle down Istvan. The Turks are a proud and nobel people and they have
given much to Hungary's culture. Perhaps your problems with them could be
resolved if you set up, or joined, some kind of a "Hungarian-Turkish
reconciliation and friendship society".
Joe Szalai
--
Istvan Lippai
Joe Szalai <jgsz...@library.uwaterloo.ca> wrote in article
> have given much to Hungary's culture.
They may be proud, but noble? Ask a Kurdish villager whose home they just
fire bombed.
Yes, we took some from their culture, but at what price?
> Perhaps your problems with them could be resolved if you set
> up, or joined, some kind of a "Hungarian-Turkish reconciliation
> and friendship society".
Would you like to invite the ghosts Armenian and Kurdish children murdered
by the Turks?
I didn't post any of my letters to the Turkish list and only expressed a
historical view that is shared my the majority of Hungarians. The Turks
got here because Gustav, who is a regular contributor to the Turkish list,
invited them here. Ask him why.
Istvan
Istvan Lippai
Gustav Horvath <tu...@sprint.ca> wrote in
> On 18 Jun 1998 01:22:37 GMT, "Istvan Lippai"
> >troops were withdrawn and replaced with troops from Mongolia.
>
>
> Gustav
I suppose you would like to turn the historical debate about the Mongol
and Turkish devastation of Hungary into an Armenian-Turkish debate. There
is no place for it on SCM.
What I find utterly disgusting is that you would bring the worst Turkish
provocateurs here in hopes of suppressing my freedom of expressing my
views with floods of obscene and vile letters. They are incapable of
reasoned debate and that is why they use obscenities. Well, it is not
going to work this time. I will distribute their obscene letters to as
many lists as possible.
Istvan
Joe Szalai
In article <6mavvp$c...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
Istvan Lippai <szat...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Joe Szalai <jgsz...@library.uwaterloo.ca> wrote in article
>> Settle down Istvan. The Turks are a proud and nobel people and they
>> have given much to Hungary's culture.
>They may be proud, but noble? Ask a Kurdish villager whose home they just
>fire bombed.
Can you *never* distinguish between a people and their government? The
people often don't have much of a say in what their governments do.
>Yes, we took some from their culture, but at what price?
And what price are the Hungarians paying for the Americanization of
Hungary - the total loss of culture?
>> Perhaps your problems with them could be resolved if you set
>> up, or joined, some kind of a "Hungarian-Turkish reconciliation
>> and friendship society".
>Would you like to invite the ghosts Armenian and Kurdish children murdered
>by the Turks?
Yes, and you should also invite the ghosts of Vietnamese, Cambodian,
Panamanian, Iragi, etc. children murdered by the Americans.
>I didn't post any of my letters to the Turkish list and only expressed a
>historical view that is shared my the majority of Hungarians. The Turks
>got here because Gustav, who is a regular contributor to the Turkish list,
>invited them here. Ask him why.
Why are you so hostile to people from various ethnic groups communicating?
I don't have any problem with Gustav inviting anyone he wants. His posts
are usually informative and interesting. If you wouldn't be so hostile
with him, and read his posts in the spirit in which, I'm sure, they were
meant, you'd learn something. Or have you already made up your mind and
don't want to be confused by facts?
Joe Szalai
--
Charles Dombi
The greatest tragedy of Hungary's history was the defeat of the
national resistance forces led by Koppany who was the rightful
heir to the leadership of the Hungarian nation formed by the
Covenant of Blood. This event which took place 1000 years ago
paved the way for all the subsequent tragedies: the Mongol and
Turkish invasions, and Trianon as well. "King" Istvan's accession
to power 1000 years ago with German backing opened Hungary's
doors to foreign colonization and to foreign rule. Koppany's
dismemberment led to Hungary's dismemberment. In order to see
this reality, one must be free of the Eurocentric cultural and
religious biases, and have the courage to admit that the turn
taken by Hungary's history 1000 years ago has led the Hungarian
nation to the brink of extinction. Hungary's current European
neighbors have done more harm to Hungary than the Mongols and the
Turks combined: Hungary survived both the Mongol and Turkish in-
vasions, but currently the Hungarians are losing the ethnocidal
and genocidal war which has been waged against them by their
"civilized" European neighbors since the Habsburg takeover in
the 16th c. It is essential for Hungarian survival to be free
of the foreign ideological biases which prevent the recognition
the real national interests.
Joe Szalai
In article <6mb3hu$m...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
Istvan Lippai <szat...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>I suppose you would like to turn the historical debate about the Mongol
>and Turkish devastation of Hungary into an Armenian-Turkish debate. There
>is no place for it on SCM.
>What I find utterly disgusting is that you would bring the worst Turkish
>provocateurs here in hopes of suppressing my freedom of expressing my
>views with floods of obscene and vile letters. They are incapable of
>reasoned debate and that is why they use obscenities. Well, it is not
>going to work this time. I will distribute their obscene letters to as
>many lists as possible.
>Istvan
I'll give you a head start by posting this message to soc.culture.turkish.
Now, don't say that I never do anything for you.
Joe Szalai
--
Istvan Lippai
Charles Dombi <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote
> national resistance forces led by Koppany who was the rightful
> heir to the leadership of the Hungarian nation formed by the
> Covenant of Blood. This event which took place 1000 years ago
> paved the way for all the subsequent tragedies: the Mongol and
> Turkish invasions, and Trianon as well. "King" Istvan's accession
> to power 1000 years ago with German backing opened Hungary's
> doors to foreign colonization and to foreign rule. Koppany's
> dismemberment led to Hungary's dismemberment. In order to see
> this reality, one must be free of the Eurocentric cultural and
> religious biases, and have the courage to admit that the turn
> taken by Hungary's history 1000 years ago has led the Hungarian
> nation to the brink of extinction.
You don't understand our history. In the middle of
Christian Europe Hungary couldn't have survived as a hostile, pagan band
of loosely connected tribes. Our neighbors had it with us and were
preparing to wipe us off the face of the earth. The conversion of
Hungarians to Christianity, as tragic as it was, was the only way to
survive. Many of us mourn the loss of the free spirit that Koppany and
his followers represented for us. Much more than someone like you with a
single minded agenda could understand. I wish, that Hungary's conversion
could have been done without bloodshed, but it had to be done for us to
survive.
> Hungary's current European
> neighbors have done more harm to Hungary than the
> Mongols and the Turks combined:
Not true, and they couldn't have harmed us as much as they did if the
Mongols and Turks hadn't decimated our people.
> Hungary survived both the Mongol and Turkish in-
> vasions, but currently the Hungarians are losing the ethnocidal
> and genocidal war which has been waged against them by their
> "civilized" European neighbors since the Habsburg takeover in
> the 16th c. It is essential for Hungarian survival to be free
> of the foreign ideological biases which prevent the recognition
> the real national interests.
Because of the Mongol and Turkish invasions and destruction of Hungarian
people, we are already a nation of many European nationalities with a
unique Hungarian character. If there ever were any Hungarians with Mongol
or Turkish trace, which I don't believe, they are gone because the Mongols
and Turks killed them.
Regards, Istvan
Istvan Lippai
soc.culture.turkish.
> Now, don't say that I never do anything for you.
>
> Joe Szalai
and the Hungarian people to the Russians and communists. Selling out to
the Turks must be natural for you.
Istvan
Gustav Horvath
On 18 Jun 1998 01:57:08 GMT, "Istvan Lippai" (...)
>Gustav, did you call in
>your brothers?
No, you did by your reckless statements.
(I don't know if it ever occured to you, but a lot more people read
scm, then those who write into.)
>post filth to SCM?
As for filth, depends on you. If you have nothing better to do then
spread hatred, I guess they will refute you.
BTW. I hope you are not suggesting that I wouldn't be able to handle
you, so I needed "outside" help? :-)>
Gustav
Gustav Horvath
On 18 Jun 1998 12:08:25 GMT, "Istvan Lippai" (...)
>The Turks
>got here because Gustav, who is a regular contributor to the Turkish list,
>invited them here.
That's a lie, --and you know it.
Readers of scm are smart enough to see trough this. Character
assasination gets you nowwhere. I you are brave enough to shout
"fire" in a crowded place like Usenet, then take responsibilty for it.
If you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen ! :-)>
Remember last time,--when you stirred up the pot-- I choose NOT to get
involved, because you blinded by Armenian propaganda and Magyars have
nothing to do with Turkish-Armenian business, so just play alone with
them. Same time make sure though if you speak as a (half) Armenian or
as a (half) Magyar.
What is the interest of the Magyars in the Kurdish question?
If you think that the Turks should give up 1/3 of their country
to a communist-terror organisation thats your opinion.
They think differently. Ataturk prevented a Turkish- Trianon from
happening in Turkey, in the hour of danger, and pushed back the
conquerors, -good for them- I'd say, sadly the Magyars could not do
so.
Gustav
Gustav Horvath
On 18 Jun 1998 13:09:18 GMT, "Istvan Lippai"
>I suppose you would like to turn the historical debate about the Mongol
>and Turkish devastation of Hungary into an Armenian-Turkish debate. There
>is no place for it on SCM.
I believe you are the one who did so.
The topic was the ancient relationship between Magyars-Hun(=Turkic)
and old Turkic. Then you started your propaganda about Mohacs etc.
then Kurds, Armenians. The Turkish and Magyar nations officially made
peace during WW 1, became Brothers in Arms and fought such, helping
each other. No amount of Meow-ing from your part will ever change the
facts.
Gustav
Istvan Lippai
Gustav Horvath <tu...@sprint.ca> wrote
> >Gustav, did you call in
> >your brothers?
>
> No, you did by your reckless statements.
> (I don't know if it ever occured to you, but a lot more people read
> scm, then those who write into.)
You mean the Turks are monitoring all the newsgroups just to catch someone
who is not crazy about kinship with them? Sound pretty fishy. It is more
likely that you have alerted them to this debate about Hungarian history
during the Turkish invasion.
> >post filth to SCM?
>
> As for filth, depends on you. If you have nothing better to do then
> spread hatred, I guess they will refute you.
With choice obscenities and threats, no doubt, as it is the way of Turks.
> BTW. I hope you are not suggesting that I wouldn't be able to handle
> you, so I needed "outside" help? :-)>
You do not wish to use the kind of vile obscenities that your "brothers"
are so good at.
Istvan
>
Istvan Lippai
Gustav Horvath <tu...@sprint.ca> wrote
>
> >I suppose you would like to turn the historical debate about the
> >Mongol and Turkish devastation of Hungary into an Armenian-Turkish
> >debate. There is no place for it on SCM.
>
> I believe you are the one who did so.
> The topic was the ancient relationship between Magyars-Hun(=Turkic)
> and old Turkic.
So it was. I found the debate interesting even if I don't believe that
there is the slightest Hungarian-Turkish relationship, other than that of
the conquered and invaders.
> Then you started your propaganda about Mohacs etc.
Propaganda about Mohacs? Tell why is a factual statement of Hungarian
history is propaganda.
> then Kurds, Armenians.
Only after your Turks came here with their obscenities.
> The Turkish and Magyar nations officially made peace during
> WW 1, became Brothers in Arms and fought such, helping
> each other. No amount of Meow-ing from your part will ever
> change the facts.
Where did you get that? When did the Turks ever do anything for Hungary
other than killing our people and carrying our women and children off to
slavery?
Istvan
Istvan Lippai
Gustav Horvath <tu...@sprint.ca> wrote
> On 18 Jun 1998 12:08:25 GMT, "Istvan Lippai" (...)
> >The Turks
> >got here because Gustav, who is a regular contributor
> >to the Turkish list, invited them here.
>
> That's a lie, --and you know it.
It is the truth -- and you know it.
> Readers of scm are smart enough to see trough this. Character
> assasination gets you nowwhere. I you are brave enough to shout
> "fire" in a crowded place like Usenet, then take responsibilty for it.
> If you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen ! :-)>
> Remember last time,--when you stirred up the pot-- I choose NOT
> to get involved, because you blinded by Armenian propaganda and
> Magyars have nothing to do with Turkish-Armenian business, so
> just play alone with them. Same time make sure though if you
> speak as a (half) Armenian or as a (half) Magyar.
I put my cards on the table a long time ago so that everyone can see where
I am coming from and can decide who I represent. I am a Hungarian whose
mother was Armenian and whose Armenian part of family was butchered by the
Turks. Everyone who has been with this list for any length of time have
known that. You are the one who is playing tricks and hiding his true
loyalties and agenda. Your undeclared but obvious dream of Turkish
domination of Hungary will never be realized.
> What is the interest of the Magyars in the Kurdish question?
None, other than the humanitarian interest civilized people have in poor
Kurdish villagers being murdered by the thousands, including women and
children. The same kind of interest that horrified us at the Serb
atrocities against Bosnian Muslims. Just humanity. In any case, I
haven't mentioned any of that until your Turkish brothers showed up (at
your invitation) with their obscene letters.
> If you think that the Turks should give up 1/3 of their country
> to a communist-terror organisation thats your opinion.
I do not believe that the Kurds are communists or any more terrorist than
the Turks.
> They think differently. Ataturk prevented a Turkish- Trianon
> from happening in Turkey, in the hour of danger, and
> pushed back the conquerors, -good for them- I'd say,
> sadly the Magyars could not do so.
How could we defend ourselves against outside enemies when so many have
loyalties to foreign powers? Too many traitors who would sell the
interests of Hungary to foreign invaders.
Istvan
Joe Szalai
In article <6mb9e8$g...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
Istvan Lippai <szat...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
You shouldn't write when you're pissed off at me because you make no sense
whatsoever.
You don't know me and you never knew my parents. So, please, stop making
a fool of yourself by making stupid accusations.
Joe Szalai
--
nev...@accesscom.net
In article <6masj1$4...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
Yeah you are very coherent piece of scum.
Who brought what to SCM?
Anyways, you are a dirty, filty, underrock crawling half
Armenian half God knows what kind of copy of a human. You
do nothing but urinate and draw your borders for your virtual
domain on SCM.
Why don't you bring your filth to Armenian lists?
Get out of SCM. You have nothing related those people.
Nevzat Akdemir
Charles Dombi
Herr Schlaf! What history book(s) are you referring to? Would it
be by any chance one of those Eurocentrically biased books which
portray the Huns and the Magyars as primitive Asiatic barbarian
intruders of your "civilized" Europe? I think I have read enough
of those.
nev...@accesscom.net
In article <6m9q4t$9...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
Istvan the moron, retired and retarded in Colorado is a filthy lier.
He wants to forget that he is half Armenian. Thus broadcasting in
Hungarian he is liked by almost *noone* in any newsgroups. As a matter
of fact he was told so on another Hungarian group that he should "get
out".
Poor moron. I feel sorry for you.
nevzat
P.S Do you have any tennis news? I would like to hear some. :-)
nev...@accesscom.net
nev...@accesscom.net
In article <6mb3hu$m...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
"Istvan Lippai" <szat...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> Gustav Horvath <tu...@sprint.ca> wrote in
> > On 18 Jun 1998 01:22:37 GMT, "Istvan Lippai"
> > >troops were withdrawn and replaced with troops from Mongolia.
> >
> >
> > Gustav
>
> and Turkish devastation of Hungary into an Armenian-Turkish debate. There
> is no place for it on SCM.
As long as you broadcast Radio Erivan on SCM, there will be a place for
these on SCM. I don't see how come you cannot comprehend this? Oh, I forgot
you were retarded. Sorry.
>
> What I find utterly disgusting is that you would bring the worst Turkish
> provocateurs here in hopes of suppressing my freedom of expressing my
> views with floods of obscene and vile letters. They are incapable of
> reasoned debate and that is why they use obscenities. Well, it is not
> going to work this time. I will distribute their obscene letters to as
> many lists as possible.
>
> Istvan
Istvan tooting his Armenian horn, as always.
If he goes like this, some other newsgroups will know
about his life's details. No more feeling sorry for the...
hmmm? I cannot find any word to describe him. Anyways...
He used to send letters to webmasters on certain .edu
domains putting out some worst a human can do.
No more feeling sorry for him.
nev...@accesscom.net
In article <6mb9e8$g...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
"Istvan Lippai" <szat...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> Joe Szalai <jgsz...@library.uwaterloo.ca> wrote in article
> >
> > I'll give you a head start by posting this message to
> soc.culture.turkish.
> > Now, don't say that I never do anything for you.
> >
> > Joe Szalai
>
> Wouldn't expect anything less from someone whose parents sold out Hungary
> and the Hungarian people to the Russians and communists. Selling out to
> the Turks must be natural for you.
>
> Istvan
No selling, no renting, no panting.
THEY JUST DON'T LIKE YOU!!
nevzat