(Discussion presented by Gabriel Gheorghe at the Symposium of the Romanian Academy – CIVILIZATION AND GEOPOLITICS IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN, Bucharest, 11-12 October 1999)
“Because yesterday, in his speech, Prof. Dr. Mihai Ungheanu had already discussed a number of aspects regarding the lexical elements of the Romanian language that are present in the Hungarian language, I will only confine myself to present you the impressive volume “A Magyar szókészlet Román elemeinek története (History elements of Romanian origin in the vocabulary of the Hungarian language)” written by Ferenc Bakos, eminent professor at the University of Budapest. After this, I will discuss other aspects – like presenting arguments regarding the hypothesis that the Carpathian area is the starting place of the European civilization.
In Romanian dictionaries many words are considered to be of foreign origins, among which several hundred are of Hungarian origin. What Sextil Pușcariu is saying – that in Romanian language we can find 965 Turkish words (16.73%), 589 Hungarian words (10.21%), and 50 Albanian words (0.86%) – it is a serious error, representing the opinions of the Western linguists about the Western European languages. Franz J. Sulzer, an enemy of the Romanian people, was ignored; but being forced to have a minimum respect for himself, he wrote: “although it was in contact with so many foreign languages, Romanian language never borrowed anything from them. For example, we cannot find one single common word of Hungarian origin in the Wallachian language” (the standard Romanian language spoken by all Romanians).
It is the time to acknowledge that Sulzer is the author of the so called Roesler “theory”, which was a simple act of revenge. Sulzer, Swiss by nationality, was an Austrian officer who was brought by Prince Alexander Ypsilanti (1774 – 1782) to establish a Law Academy in Wallachia. This has not been achieved – Sulzer becoming only a preceptor of the Prince’s children and a simple mediator. On the other hand, because he was married with a Saxon Transylvanian woman who was not a boyar, he was not welcomed at the Court parties characterized by a very strict etiquette. All of these had upset Sulzer even more and in order to get revenge, he made up this theory that is implying the emergence of Romanians in Transylvania starting only with the XII – XIII centuries – coming from unspecified areas south of the Danube River.
Nietzsche said: “the human intellect had produced in immense periods of time, only errors.”
However, these errors must be removed by historians. Unfortunately, in the last hundreds of years, the Romanian historiography did not came up (in a widely spoken language) with a convincing thesis that would permanently put into the dustbin Sulzer’s Roesler “theory”. In Romanian historiography, this is going to remain a duty for the future, which needs to be accomplish.
If we are going back to that 589 “Hungarian words” from Romanian language (mentioned by Sextil Pușcariu), they are a made up lie of Al. Cihac – the adopted son of Dr. Iacob Cihac. The doctor was Czech by nationality, a vassal of the Germans, polkovnic (a military grade close to colonel) in the Russian army, holder of the Tețcani estate, and was accused of financial mismanagement against the state. Al. Cihac’s work, Dictionnaire déthymologie Daco – Roumaine (Volume I at Frankfurt on Main, 1870, and Volume II at Berlin, Bucharest, 1879), is a big bluff and from 120 years is the main instrument of “work” at the Institute of Linguistics in Bucharest; as a result, the Academy from that time made him an honorary member.
Cihac’s method was something like this … in Turkish language, so from Turkish language; in Bulgarian language, so from Bulgarian language; in Hungarian language, so from Hungarian language, etc. With this method and without any kind of objective research, speaking from a historical point of view we can close the subject.
Until the age of 8, Al. Cihac lived in Iași. After this age he was sent to Dr. Iacob Cihac’s family in Germany, where he spoke only German language. We are doubting that Al. Cihac knew Romanian language so well in order to be able to write an etymological dictionary of the Romanian language. This opinion was also suggested by the fact that in his dictionary (Vol II, page 301) he wrote: “penis = parties naturelles de l’homme et de la femme”, stating very firm “sans doute” without presenting any kind of evidence for his statements regarding the Romanian words, which he is considering of being taken from other foreign languages.
The excellent research of Ferenc Bakos has been banned (by I. Iordan, Al. Graur, and Al. Rosetti) in the circles of the Romanian linguists, because was highlighting the absurdity of Cihac’s so called “etymology”.
Professor F. Bakos is proving after 15 years of work, through a rigorous historical analysis, the reality that about 2.300 words of Romanian origin has been found in Hungarian language. At the end of our presentation is an excerpt with approximately 300 Hungarian words of Romanian origin, according to professor Bakos’s work.
It is very painful that we do not know and do not respect our history. Mr. Dinu Giurescu is telling us to give up our history, but he is ignoring the fact that giving up our history it means to deprive (up to the Iron Age) of history actually the whole Europe; until the Iron Age there is no other history in Europe, except the one from the Carpathian Basin.
André Piganiol, professor at Sorbona, is writing in 1939:
1. Pour l’Europe (sauf les Balkanes), presque tout ce qui précčde la conquęte romaine fait partie de la préhistoire (p. IX).
Vers l’an 1.000, un nouveau flot d’envahisseurs, issus apparement de régions pannoniennes, déborda dans l’Italie du nord. Ces peuples incinérants connaissaient lusage du fer (p. 4).
Le reflux des populations d’Illyrie dans la péninsule italienne est attesté soit par la légende soit par la linguistique (p. 5) etc.
Mais le point de départ de la civilisation de toutes ces contrées doit ętre cherché au nord de la péninsule balkanique (p. 6) (subl. ns.).
This is the truth that is being pointed out by other western historians too – while in the Carpathian Basin (during the Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Bronze Age, and Iron Age) were being put the foundations of the European civilization, the rest of Europe was in prehistory.
Based on the archaeological discoveries made in various countries from the European continent, Marija Gimbutas (professor at UCLA – University of California) is drawing the map entitled “The Old European civilization, during the peak of its expansion – 5th millennium B.C., as the part of the ancient world.”
As shown in this map, 7.000 years ago, the only human settlements we can find were the ones belonging to the Carpathian Space and the Peri-Carpathian space. The rest of Europe was a huge white spot.
Supporting this conclusion we have the archaeological discoveries from France, England, Germany, and other discoveries from which are missing the skeletons and the pottery artefacts – this demonstrating one more time the absence of human settlements in these lands.
Although Marija Gimbutas is including the Greek and Italic spaces, probably based on the Greek civilization from later times (first millennium B.C – especially Pericle’s century and the ones who followed him), she is making a mistake – because neither the Continental Greece nor the Italic space is having the Neolithic period (A. Jardé, Mommsen, etc). Some late discoveries, which are not significant, cannot change the facts accumulated in hundreds of years of research.
That the Greeks are coming out of the Carpathian space, is resulting very clear from Pierre Lévêque book in which he is presenting (on page 25) the map entitled “The Greeks in full march”. In here we can see two hypotheses regarding the origins of the Greeks. One hypothesis presenting the Greeks coming from the North Pontic Steppes , which is not correct because the region doesn’t have salt and the other hypothesis, presenting them as coming from the Carpatho-Danubian space (page 26).
Tukydides (460-396 B.C.E) is writing: “The so called Hellas does not seem to be constantly inhabited from a long time.“
Similar mentions with the ones made by professor A. Piganiol, we can find at A. Lefèvre, Jean Laumonier, and others.
The most complete work, in order to determine the space from where the Aryans (Indo-Europeans) had formed, was conducted by scientists from Cambridge University; research conducted based on the old Vedic texts, the oldest literary monuments of humanity.
Analyzing the flora and fauna described in the Vedic texts, the authors of “The Cambridge history of India” (8 volumes, 1922) came to the following conclusions (volume 1, page 68):
– The primitive Aryans who lived in the temperate zone knew species of trees like the oak, the beech, the willow, some species of coniferous trees, the birch, the linden, and probably the elm.
– Probably they were sedentary, because the wheat was familiar to them.
– The most useful animals they knew were the ox and the cow, the sheep, the horse, the dog, the pig, and some species of deer. It seems that in ancient times they didn’t knew the donkey, the camel, and the elephant.
– Among the birds, we can conclude (from the language) that they knew the goose and the duck.
– The most familiar predatory bird was apparently aquila (the hawk).
– The wolf and the bear were known, but not the tiger and the lion.
– Knowing all of this information, we are asking ourselves if is possible to locate the primitive habitat from where the speakers of this languages had their origins.
– It is not likely that the primitive habitat to be India (how the early researchers are assuming), because neither the flora nor the fauna (how they are described in the language) are characteristic to this region. Less likely can be the region of Pamir, one of the most dreadful regions on Earth. It is not likely that Central Asia (considered to be home of the Aryans) could have been played this role, even if we admit that the obvious lack of water (implying the sterility of several areas) can be a more recent phenomenon.
– If indeed these people knew the beech, they must had lived west of a line that started from Königsberg (in Prussia) and was going toward Crimea and from there was continuing through Asia Minor. In the plains of Northern Europe does not exist an area to fulfill all of these conditions. As we know, in ancient times it was a country covered with forests.
– Is there any part of Europe that combines the farming with the shepherding, which are closely related to each other? Is there any part of Europe with warm areas, which are suitable for wheat crops to grow and in the same time with rich grasslands (necessary for the herds to graze on) situated at high altitudes? Is there any part of Europe that is having all of these and in the same time is having trees and birds too, like the ones mentioned above?
– Yes, it is the area in Europe which is bordered at east by the Carpathian Mountains, at south by the Balkans, at west by the Austrian Alps and Böhmerwald Mountains, and at north by Erzgebirge Mountains and the mountains that are making the connection with the Carpathian Mountains (38, p.68).
According to the University of Cambridge and based on the Vedic books it appears that the entire Carpathian “Fortress” does belong to the estimated area. Area that is considered to be the place from where the Aryan populations had formed.
We can conclude, according to the University of Cambridge, that the Vedic books were not created in India – but in the Carpathian Space. This reality is shown by J. Nehru: “The Vedic texts are the work of the Aryans who invaded the rich land of India. They brought their ideas.“
The same idea was found in “Marabout Université” edition of the Vedic books: “no traces (pottery, arms, jewelry, etc.) belonging to the Aryans were found in the Indian land; nothing which could have been illustrated the Vedas.”
So after all of these arguments presented, belonging to the western origins, we can formulate the hypothesis that the European civilization has been formed in the Carpathian Space. In order to become a scientific theory, this hypothesis needs studies and researches that can argument (in such a way that can be accepted by the contemporary scientific world) and verify with a critical point of view its presumptions.
Marija Gimbutas is asking herself “Why in the Carpathian area and not in the other parts of the world? It is not clear to us what had caused the initial impulse for the cultural development of the ancient European civilization.”
Our answer on this matter was published as a bilingual (English-Romanian) article – “The Salt – a criteria for rethinking history”. The article was immediately published in USA (Zoom) and in the “Carpathian Mountains” magazine.
Putting together (20 years ago) a table of nutritional factors that are present in our common foods (table that was published in a small encyclopedia in which the first chapters were referring to “smart eating”) we came to the conclusion that especially in vegetables and fruits the presence of sodium (Na) is very low, compared with the presence of potassium (K); sometimes, potassium is surpassing several hundreds of times the presence of sodium (both being expressed in milligrams per 100 grams of food).
This observation led us to a lengthy study – knowing that the hearts of humans and animals are not functioning without sodium and potassium.
Let’s quote below two prestigious American references:
1. “Without salt the body goes into convulsions, paralysis, and death.”
2. From the volume “Minerals: Kill or cure” by Ruth Adams and Franck Murray we are quoting, as following:
a) “All types of muscles – including the heart – are influenced by Na and K.” (p.133)
b) “In early America, herbivorous animals were known to have walked hundreds of miles to lick salt.” (p.134)
c) “Over many generations, only those humans survived who could carefully conserved enough sodium for good health – the rest perished.” (p. 136)
Regarding to the Carpathian space we will never find this kind of mentions, because the salt is present everywhere on the surface of the soil. Since the Neolithic period, into the backyard of every villager could have been found a block of salt – which the cow, the sheep, and the goat was licking it when they came home from grazing.
On both sides of the Carpathian Mountains we can find 300 massifs of salt. Also, in the Carpathian space we can find 2.000 salt lakes, which are indicating the presence of salt on the soil surface all over the Romanian Carpathian Space; a unique situation in the whole Eurasian area. The sodium (as salt) is representing an extra-historical natural condition, without which the historical development cannot be explained.
This is why there is no one European nation that has not started from the Carpathian Space. Pannonia, Illyria, and the Balkans – all of these regions do not have salt. The Carpathian Space was the only salt supplier for the populations who had lived in these territories (or had gone through them).
The articles about the overwhelming importance of salt in history, which we had published in our country and abroad, are containing more scientific aspects; but because the time is not allowing us to discuss more about this specific Carpathian and European subject, we are closing our discussion in here.
The Romanian language can be, as the scientists are naming it, the common Indo-European language. In order to support this hypothesis we had published a bilingual French-Romanian article of 60 pages long.
Many years of work are required in order to continue our researches regarding this hypothesis, and we don’t have the time and the instruments necessary to continue these researches. So, from our point of view this subject will remain for now at the stage of being just a hypothesis. If for the French language things could have been very brief studied because of the existence of some ancient French texts from IX-XV centuries, for the other European languages the only texts we have are the ones from later periods of time.
The main difficulty is that none of the countries that can compete (through their languages) in the process of studying and clarifying this hypothesis, had not registered the popular idioms spoken by the populations who had lived in these places in different periods of time.
In the history of French language it is very clear written that in 1790 France was French only in proportion of at most 12%, and a century before this percentage was even lower.
It is a little bit difficult to make known the dialects spoken in France and other countries, because we do not have the necessary lists of words that would reflect the meanings of the popular dialects spoken in these territories.
Because we have exceeded the time allowed to us in order to make this presentation, we will get your attention only on just one aspect regarding the history of the Carpathian space: the Romanian historiography is reproducing too easy the statements of the Hungarian historiography, about the Carpathian space. As Gustav Pordea (the first Romanian member of the European parliament) was saying, the Hungarians with their made up buffooneries are writing a history that suits their political interests. They are not writing a history “sine ira et studio” (as Tacitus was saying – “without anger and fondness”), which can be taken into consideration and be used.
Let’s give an example from many other which are available to us.
In his statements regarding his discussions (at Budapest) with various Hungarian historians, Jesus Pardo is writing as following (see “Conversations with Transylvania” page 187): “Professor György Györffy is the champion of the absence of Romanians in the Danubian – Carpathian space, until after the arrival of the Hungarians. Some of his peers are saying that he is frequently letting himself being taken by his nationalist feelings. Györffy is stating that one of the causes of the incredible growth (in only 6 centuries or even less) of the Romanian population, can be attributed to the fact that Romanians used to drink too much sheep milk, which (after the human milk) is contributing to the increase in human fertility.” Professor Ferenc Bakos said that in front of a judgement like this science has nothing to say.
In “Histoire de la Transylvanie” (a compendium in French language of the “History of Transylvania” in Hungarian language), which is the work of a team of historians and teachers published by the Minister of Culture and the Academy of Budapest, we are assisting at a change of tactics and not a change of purpose. This work is containing many erroneous statements from which we are going to give just one example:
The example of the famous battle of Lechfeld (955 A.D) in which Otto the Great is destroying the Hungarian armies and is immediately hanging their commander Horka Bulcsú, because he was christened at Byzantium and killing him it could have taken from him the so called “healing power” (belonging to the East church). So none of the historians and teachers mentioned above, had spoken in their work about this battle; although with this date (955 A.D) is going to start the Hungarian aristocracy identity crisis. They came into Europe as Mongols and by the grace of the Holy Spirit they are becoming (no one knows how) by blood and appearance, Europeans – what a miracle!!!
C.C. Giurescu and Dinu C. Giurescu are writing (according to the Hungarian historiography) in “The History of Romanians” (18) that in the second third of the XII century, the dominion of the Árpádian kings has been established in Transylvania.
This means that between the years of 1133 – 1166 in Transylvania would have been existed a Hungarian occupation; or a century later, between 1241 and 1242, there was the great invasion of the Tatars whose target was the destruction of Hungary.
Based on this, were written the Tatar chronicles and 4 Hungarian chronicles like the ones of Rogerius (Carmen miserable), Pauler Gyula, Szilágy, and Rónay Jenő.
In none of these 4 Hungarian chronicles is not mentioned (even once) the presence of any Hungarian statehood or any act of opposition of the Hungarian state in front of the Tatars’ invasion of Transylvania.
It is mentioned that Cadan’s army is entering Transylvania through Rodna mountain-pass. Cadan’s army is defeating the Rodna German garrison and is taking count Ariscald to be their guide (to lead the Tatars to Oradea and Pesta) together with 600 German soldiers.
Cadan’s army is reaching Bistrița and in Cluj, Zalău, and Oradea is killing 6.000 Christians. For the first time it is mentioned the presence of Hungarians in Oradea.
During the 400 kilometers journey from Rodna to Oradea, the Hungarian chronicles are not mentioning any kind of battle between the Hungarians and the Tatars.
The second Tatar army, led by Budzic, is entering in Ardeal through the Bran mountain-pass. On April 1, 1241, the Romanian Voivode of Transylvania (Voivode Posea, or Posa) is being defeated in the battle by the Tatar army, at Brașov.
The Tatars led by Budzic are reaching Cohalm fortress (known in today’s days as Rupea), Făgăraș, Cîrța, Sibiu, and the Mureș Valley up to Cenad where through an impressive synchronization is meeting Cadan’s army.
So, let’s recall the following: two Tatars armies are going (each) 400 kilometers through the middle and south of Ardeal killing Christians in their way, after that they are fighting a German garrison and the Romanian army of the Voivode Posea (whose diploma was discovered recently by dr. archaeologist Vasile Boroneanț) … and the so called “dominance” of the Árpádian kings in Transylvania (discovered by the C.C. and D.C. Giurescu) is not making, even once, felt their presence in all of these battles.
It seems that the dominance of the Árpádian kings in Transylvania (discovered by C.C and D.C. Giurescu historians) is coming from the Holy Spirit too.
No matter how many Romanians were in there, the Hungarian chronicles are not reluctant to mention the presence of Romanians in all of these battles at Oradea and especially the one at Sajo river, where the Hungarian army led by the Catholic prelates is destroyed (between 60.000 – 100.000 deaths among Hungarians).
So, according to the Hungarian chronicles, Hungarians are not existing in Transylvania during the Tatar invasion (1241-1242).
Rogerius is writing that during his pilgrimage after the withdrawal of the Tatars, he was sheltered by a Romanian prince who had a very large number of houses in his possession.
B.P. Hașdeu is citing the Hungarian academician Jerney who in 1842 is publishing the facsimile of a Tatar general; facsimile in which the general is addressing the Saxons from the region to not refuse the Tatar currency from the Széklers and Vlachs (ex dictis Zychy et Blachy). This is reiterating one more time the absence of the Hungarians in Ardeal, in 1241.
Also, Paulin of Venice is writing that in 1242 the Romanians and the Széklers had fortified the Carpathian mountain-passes in order to stop the eventual invasion of the Tatars in Transylvania.
So, where are the Hungarians already settled in Transylvania (according to C.C. and D.C. Giurescu historians)? MISTERY!”
Budapest, Academy publishing house, 1982, page 560
The place of Romanian language among the Romanic languages, 1920
Franz Joseph Sulzer – Geschichte des Transalpinischen Daciens, Walachey, Moldau und Bessarabiens, Viena, vol. I, 1781, p. 41
At the court of the Wallachian kings was a very strict etiquette. Clĺes Rĺlamb, a foreign diplomat sent by Carol XII to the Sublime Porte in order to close an alliance against the Russians, was crossing (from Oradea to the lower Danube) in 24 days Transylvania and Wallachia. On 23 April, 1657, he saw at the Prince Constantin Șerban’s court a secretary of state who spoke pretty well the Latin language. Two hundred horsemen with very beautiful horses and dressed in clothes made from tiger and leopard skin came to greet the visitors. The Prince let Clĺes Rĺlamb to know his desire to buy 500 Swedish soldiers, etc.
André Piganiol – Histoire de Rome, PUF, Paris, 1939
Marija Gimbutas – Culture and Civilization, Bucharest, Meridiane publishing house, 1987
A. Jardé – La formation du peuple Grec
Theodor Mommsen – Romanian History, Vol 1, Bucharest, ESE, 1967, page 195
Pierre Lévêque – The Greek Adventure, Bucharest, Meridiane publishing house, 1987
Tukydides – The Peloponnesian War, Bucharest, 1941, page 568 (translated by M. Jakota)
J. Nehru – The Discovery of India, Bucharest, Political publishing house, 1956, page 177
Gabriel Gheorghe – Getica, tom I, no. 1- 2, page 49 – 88
The culinary art – The Small Practical Encyclopaedia, Bucharest, 1982
It has been cited from the article “Salt the essence of life”, National Geographic, September 1977, page 381
Gabriel Gheorghe – Getica, 1992, tom I, no. 3 – 4, page 41 – 104 (the ancient Romanian = the common Indo-European language)
C.C. Giurescu, Dinu C. Giurescu – The History of Romanians, Albatros publishing house, page 830
B.P. Hașdeu – The critical history of Romanians, page 545
Gabriel Gheorghe | “Bazinul Carpatic” Spațiul Carpatic – Începutul Civilizației Europene?
Translated by Ioana