from GoldLybrary Website

 

 

"When the contents of the Metal Library are known, there will be no more wars!"
Juan Moricz

 

 

Proof on film, made in 1976, showing Ecuadorian archaeologist and journalist
Presley Norton naming Andres Fernández Salvador as the person who first informed
Juan Moricz about the Tayos Caves treasure [in the mid-1960s].

 

Solo para Internet Explorer

En FireFox usar AddOn 'Enhanced IE Tab'

 

 

 

Thanks to the initiative of scholar/translator Dr. Gyorgy Sipos, Hungarian speakers can now read Stan Hall's coordinated information on the matchless role the Magyar language and Magyar scholars must play - however daunting the task - in revising, facilitating, and correcting the translation of Egyptian, Sumerian, and other ancient inscriptions, thus bringing to scholars, and to the public in general, a fuller and truer understanding of world history.

Juan Moricz believed that history lacks global vision; that, after the Deluge, the so-called New World of the Americas became the mother of civilization and that its culture was ancient Magyar:

  • that European and Middle-Eastern cultures had appeared suddenly, without the indispensable logic of evolutionary development

  • that these cultures were transported from the Americas, where their evolutionary antecedents are simple to identify

  • that some groups survived the Deluge, but those on the crests of the Andes were primarily responsible for the post-diluvian dispersion of knowledge and culture

  • that between 8000 and 7000 BC they arrived in Lower Mesopotamia in boats made from balsa wood found only in South America

  • that, in Ecuador, place names like Shumir, Zumir, Shammar, Mosul and an infinity of others found mainly in the province of Azuay, identify this region of South America as the motherland of the ancient Sumerians, or Zumirs, whose language is a derivation of proto-Magyar

"The Neolithic settlement in Mehgarh, located within the physiographic region of upper Sindth, has revealed that human settlement in the Indus region dates back to the 6th millennium BC."
Prof. Mohammed Rafique Mughal, Boston University (March 2007)

The Magyars of the Carpathian Mountains of Europe are of American origin, said Moricz:

upon leaving the Andes they brought across the Atlantic idiomatic elements of the Magyar language, together with an accumulation of legends, traditions and beliefs: that, in Ecuador - as elsewhere in the Americas - the Cayapos, Jibaro-Shuar, Tschachis, Saragurus, Salasakas and others speak versions of the old Magyar tongue; that place-names and dialects of Ecuador, although many have been eroded by acculturalisation, or eliminated by force, are numerous.

The similarity between the old Magyar and Sumerian tongues, declared Moricz, cannot be attributed to coincidence: apart from philological similarities - such as nap for 'light of the Sun', Ur for 'lord' and Isten for 'god' - there are ethnographic, religious, artistic and folkloric connections.

 

At the end of the 8th Century AD, a Magyar people, the Karas (royal Scythians or White Huns), emigrated from India across the great eastern sea {the Sinus Magnus of Ptolemy} to their solar Motherland in South America; these being the same Caras who, according to late 18th Century father of Ecuadorian prehistory, Padre Juan de Velasco, arrived that same century in what has since been called the Bahia de Caraquez, in the province of Manabi.

Too little is known of this amazing man, Juan Moricz, born Janos Moricz Opos, in Hungary, in 1923; and, because he wrote so little, that is probably how it will remain. There are explorers who organize expeditions of a lifetime to experience what he lived daily.

 

He was a brilliant, charming, but difficult and stubborn man. Before armchair critics identify him as a mere adventurer, here follows a list of specialists - apparently invisible to western scholars - who responded to an enquiry concerning possible Magyar-Quechua connections, sent by the Ecuadorian Ministry of Foreign Relations at the request of Moricz.

 

Their collective response is no less astounding than the silent neglect presently accorded to their work.
 

 

 


Magyar Specialists

  • Dr Barna Kósa - Melbourne, Australia: Specialized in the cultures of Mesopotamia, Palestine, and Anatolia [Turkey]. Has verified and ratified the hypotheses of Juan Moricz with respect to cultural diffusion from America and the American origin of the Magyars. Has issued publications for half-a-century including a paper concerning the discoveries of Juan Morícz.
     

  • Dr. Lázló Rimanóczy - NSW, Australia: Member of Scientific Societies in Belguim. Sumerologist specialized in the cultural exchange between America and Mesopotamia. Has realized studies on dynasties that ruled the ancient Kingdom of the Kitus {Quito}. Confirms the studies of Juan Morícz.
     

  • Gyula Szentirmay - NSW, Australia: Friend of renowned investigator Pataky Kálmán: Scientific intermediary between Kálmán and Juan Morícz. Compiling 50 years of work on the American origin of the Magyars into a book.
     

  • Lázló Turmezei - Investigator: ex-member of the Academy of Sciences of Hungary. A leading authority on Malaysia, Polynesia, etc. After revising the studies of Morícz he confirmed that his discovery open the doors for a complete revision of the history of the American Continent.
     

  • Alexander Csóke - Schlossberg 2, Austria: Philologist specializing in the languages of the Caucasus, the Urals, Altai etc. Since the discoveries of Juan Moricz has been dedicated to the pre-colombian tongues of Ecuador and has confirmed Moricz's American origin and cultural diffusion of the Magyars.
     

  • Dr. Tibor Baráth - Montreal, Canada: Many years professor of History and Geography at the Sorbonne, Paris. Leading investigator of Sumerian and Egyptian cultures. His publication on Mesopotamian cultures mentions the discoveries of Juan Morícz as an important clarification of prehistory.
     

  • Dr. Dénes Gergely - Ontario, Canada: Eminent linguist who spent many years in Central and South America investigating the origin of the Magyars. Has confirmed the hypothesis of Juan Morícz, having arrived at similar conclusions after comparative studies between Magyar and the pre-colombian languages of the Republic of Colombia.
     

  • Dr. Szólloósy S. Said - Germany: Investigator specialized in the cultures of Central and South America and analyzer of the connections of the latter with Europe and the Near East. In a publication has ratified the discoveries of Juan Morícz regarding cultural diffusion from the Americas.
     

  • Elemér Homonnay - Cleveland, Ohio, USA: professor of History and Geography. Specialist in pre-colombian cultures and their Magyar relationships.

Others with whom Morícz corresponded were

  • Dr. Gosztony, the Sorbonne, Paris

  • Dr. Alfredo Tagliabue, professor of History and Geography at the Universidad de la Plata, Argentina

  • historian Dr. Alfredo Kolliker Freers - President of the Universidad Argentina de Ciencias Sociales.

     

 



 


Many of the above scholars are of Magyar background, which may be advantageous or not, but seldom are reputations risked lightly. All are evidently versed in Magyar history and language and offer a unique opportunity for western scholars to study their work.
 

 

 


The Hungar - Magyar Key to the Sumerian and Egyptian Cultures
(after Dr. Tibor Baráth and Dr. László Marácz)

Something important in the investigation of early civilization and language is presently at a standstill because principal factions debating the origin of the Magyar-Hungarian language, that is, the Finno-Ugrian and/or Turkish faction and the Sumerian faction – which include, on all sides, Hungarian-speaking scholars, cannot agree. Well, if they cannot agree…. And the Finno-Ugrian would appear to carry prevailing opinion, maybe there is room for my synthesis of the work of a few scholars championing the Magyar-Sumerian cause.

On May the 22nd, 1997, a linguistic conference was held in the grounds of Gödöllő Agricultural University, participation by invitation only.

 

The organizer was Dr. Sándor Győri Nagy, who invited the following scholars:

  • János Péntek (Kolozsvár),

  • György Papp (Ujvidék),

  • Jenő Kiss and Géza Balázs (ELTE),

  • Gábor Pap (Gödöllő/Miskolc),

  • József P. Pesti (Kalocsa),

  • László Marácz (Amsterdam).

The goal was to discuss the present state of linguistics in Hungary, which has heretofore been forced to adhere to either the Finno-Ugrian or the Turkish line of linguistic theory, totally neglecting the Magyar line of word origins.

 

The participants agreed on the following:

  1. The origin of the Magyar language cannot be fully and successfully researched within the constraints of the currently prevailing Finno-Ugrian theory, which is untenable from a linguistic and scientific point of view.

  2. The main aim of Magyar linguistics is to fully research and bring to light the internal structure of the language.

  3. Only then can it be compared to other Eurasian languages, its relationships with which will be then thoroughly researched.

  4. The evaluation will be done very systematically and with great care.

The Editorial Staff of the Journal of Hungarian Studies print a news item which covered the following issues.

 

The Magyar language was banned in schools during the Habsburg regime (15th – 20th Century). In 1826, Count István Széchenyi formed and funded the Hungarian Academy of Sciences to uphold the Magyar language and culture. Following his death in 1860, the Habsburgs effectively took control of the Academy…

 

The Gödöllő conference will be the first step in re-establishing Count Széchenyi’s ideals.

 




Sándor Csomo de Koros reports:

The linguist and diplomat Sir John Bowring wrote the following about the Magyar language in 1830:

“The Hungarian language goes far back. It developed in a very peculiar manner and its structure reaches back to times when most of the now spoken European languages did not even exist. It is a language which developed steadily and firmly in itself, and in which there are logic and mathematics with the adaptability and malleability of strength and chords. The Englishman should be proud that his language indicates an epic of human history.

 

One can show forth its origin; and alien layers can be distinguished in it, which gathered together during the contacts with different nations. Whereas the Hungarian language is like a rubble-stone, consisting of only one piece, on which the storms of time left not a scratch. It is not a calendar that adjusts to the changes of the ages. It needs no-one, it doesn’t borrow, does no buckstering, and doesn’t give or take from anyone.

 

This language is the oldest and most glorious monument of national sovereignty and mental independence. What scholars cannot solve, they ignore. In philology it’s the same way as in archaeology. The floors of the old Egyptian temples, which were made out of only one rock, can’t be explained.

 

No one knows where they came from, or from which mountain the wondrous mass was taken. How they were transported and lifted to the top of the temples. The genuineness of the Hungarian language is a phenomenon much more wondrous than this.

 

He who will solve that will analyze a divine secret, the first thesis of which is: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

...and continuing...

The often-quoted Bowring opinion brings up a few new questions.

 

First of all what is he talking about in this quotation? Second, where did he receive his knowledge of the Magyar language and the courage to declare these about the Magyar language. Thirdly, what is the divine secret of which he speaks. Let us try to answer these questions. Bowring, when he talks about language thinks of the vocabulary, according to the practice of his day.

 

He knows, that the lexical elements of the Magyar language are very old, and developed according to their inner order. The origin of the lexical order is rooted in the spiritual realm. We may suppose that Bowring who spoke the Magyar language himself first of all knew this secret, otherwise he would not have composed his statement in such a mystical yet secure way.

 

What he could not do was to research the secret of the Magyar language since there was no writing on this subject in his time and it is not very likely that he would have discovered it.

 

This could have come only from a man, whose mother tongue was Magyar, who was a linguist, who knew the basis of the theoretical Indian linguistics, the grammatics of Panini about the Sanskrit language, who was well versed in the ancient culture languages, like the Sumerian, the Sanskrit, etc. which he could compare with the Magyar, and knew the ancient cultures and their spiritual wisdom.

 

All these attributes could have been present in 1830 in only one person, named Sándor Csoma de Körös. This supposition is strengthened by the fact that Bowring knew and even supported him.

 

So we may well suppose that Bowring was introduced into the divine secrets of the Magyar language by Csoma de Körös.


 

 

Begin at the Beginning!

Two languages flourished in the Ancient East.

  • One, Sumerian, originated north of the Tigris and Euphrates basin, coming to full bloom in Szemúr (Sumer, Sumir), spreading southward, then westward to the Mediterranean.

  • The other was Ancient Egyptian. Both are believed to be the world's oldest languages.

These languages matched exactly the territories where Hungar-Magyar peoples represented the culture-bearing population.… There is no historical evidence that the languages were actually called Sumerian or Egyptian by the indigenous cultures or record-keepers of the time.

 

These names were adopted by scholars of the 19th century AD, not as names for the people or their languages, but only as geographical markers.

 

Sumerian:

The texts we call Sumerian were written in pictographs for older texts and cuneiform writing for younger texts. Scholars have hardly touched the pictographs. Few, if any, have been read. The reason for this is that they can only yield their meaning and sound values in accordance with the real Sumerian language, namely Magyar (Hungarian).

Current views on the Sumerian language are based on the cuneiform texts. Cuneiform signs usually mark only the consonants, which may be read without knowing the real Sumerian language, but neither exposes the nouns nor how to break the text into words.
 


Egyptian:

Egyptian texts, also, used simplified pictures, developing later a simplified form of lettering called hieroglyphs made from the pictures. These, too, marked only the consonants. Vowels have to be added according to the spirit of the language. Egyptologists read only the newer hieroglyphic texts but they are unable to deduce with certainty the nature of the accompanying vowels or how the text should be broken into words.

 

Hard and soft consonants were frequently represented with the same sign (T=D, P=B, S=SZ, K=G, R=L) so there are considerable possibilities for errors in transcribing the texts into modern alphabets.

Either scholars never think of employing the Hungarian alphabet or the Habsburg factor is still prevalent. Yet, basing transliteration on the English spelling-system, how can they mark the Hungarian GY, TY, LY sounds which have a firmly established spelling system in Hungarian? The same word or name is translated according to the nationality of the translator, as in the case of the Muger ruins in the city of Ur, or in other Hungar and Magyar names.

 

A scholar can believe he knows the pronunciation but cannot find in his alphabet the symbol for the perceived sound, so he may use a symbol of {say} the Italian alphabet. What might ensue from this same text if, say, a German scholar transliterates according to the German alphabet?

The foremost prerequisite for attaining the proper sounds and transliteration of ancient scripts is familiarity with the language and its rules of pronunciation.

 

Non-Hungarian speaking researchers lack the magic language {Magyar} key to unlock the secret. They resort to replacement keys. Mesopotamian Sumerian is translated with the help of Persian, Assyrian and, most of all, Hebrew.

 

Egyptian is translated with the help of the Coptic and Greek languages.

 

Consequently, words transliterated from Sumerian and Egyptian may lack vowels at critical points or have vowels introduced unnecessarily. The resulting transcription is a distortion of the original, in Sumerian and in Egyptian. The errors in the transliteration-translation process understandably evolve a language that does not resemble any known language - truly a language without relatives!

The uncertain sound-values of the Sumerian and Egyptian languages and incorrect transliteration of original characteristics were noted by Orientalists. {Prof. Lawrence Austine} Waddell reproached linguists for basing the transcriptions of Mesopotamian Sumerian texts on the Assyrian language.

 

These scholars, says Waddell,

"begin their work laden with false racial and religious theories and do not have a key to the sound-values of personal names, which we inherited with Sumerian signs that had several sound-values.”

(Lloyd Seton: Foundations in the Dust, Bristol 1955, p.121).

 

“The destruction of the Sumerian language took on such proportions that the first translations proved useless and had to be laid aside”.

(Samuel Noah Kramer, Sumerian Mythology, New York 1961 p.22.)

Samuel Kramer, an American Sumerologist, himself took extensive liberties in translating Sumerian texts into English, resulting in something completely different from what is written.

 

He faced seemingly insurmountable problems (Sumerian Mythology pg. 65, 68, 69, 73, 75-77) because so often he only feels the meaning of the words based on the text surrounding it (S.N.Kramer: Twenty-Five Firsts in Man's Recorded History; From the Tablets of Sumer, Indian Hills, 1956).

We fare no better with the Egyptian hieroglyphs. Sir Wallis Budge affirms that the pronunciation of a great number of words, mostly verbs, cannot be ascertained. (Budge, E.A.W. Egyptian Language. Easy lessons in Egyptian hieroglyphics with sign list. London, 1958, p.146 and passim).

 

The great French Egyptologist, Maspero, laments:

"It is our endeavour that we attempt the pronunciation of the Egyptian words, but it may lead only to marginal results because we never know with sufficient certainty how they sounded. Our only recourse is that we establish what sound-values some of the words had in Greek times, as far as this is possible."

(Maspero G.: History of Egypt, Chaldea, Syria, Babilonia and Assyria. 6.vol. London, s.d. I, VI)

 

"The general pronunciation of the Egyptian names in our days is not so much Egyptian, but ‘Egyptologian’; in other words, pronunciation according to Egyptologists."

(Ceram C.W. A Hettiták Regénye, Hungarian translation by Márton Hegyi Budapest, 1964, p.26).
 

 



 


In the orthography of names, complete confusion reigns throughout the scholarly literature. (Ceram C.W. The Secret of the Hittites, V; New York, 1956.)

 

It is hardly necessary to say that differences of opinion exist among scholars as to the method in which hieroglyphic characters should be transcribed into Roman letters, (Budge E. Wallis Egyptian language; Easy lessons in Egyptian hieroglyphics with sign list. London, 1958 - p.32).

 

Since in hieroglyphic writing only the consonants and not the vowels are indicated our reading of Egyptian names is only a compromise and we do not pretend that our form of transcription renders the names as they were pronounced. (Tutankhamun Treasures. Trésors de Toutankhamon. Montreal, 1964 - p. 4)

In certain instances it is difficult to read the written text well and find its true meaning, even with knowledge of the rules of this writing and reading, and use of the only good key, the Hungarian language, in establishing the sound values. We are dealing with the spiritual heritage of a world of 4-5000 years ago. The working of minds then was different, a difficulty that can only be bridged if we become familiar with the belief systems of the ages BC.

Egyptian and Sumerian texts frequently use the following names for Sungod:

  • Égúr

  • Székúr

  • Kerek Úr

  • Napúr

  • Ősúr

  • Magúr

  • Útúr

  • Honúr

  • Szemúr

  • Égető Úr

  • Vörös Szemű,

  • and at least twenty more expressions...

Western scholars unfamiliar with the key-Magyar language understand only the Úr suffix, which they translate as God.

 

They believe that, since many names end with Úr, many gods were worshipped. For these scholars there is a God An, God Utu, God Sek and so on.

Anyone familiar with the key language will recognize the above as names for the same Sungod; the ancients stressed each characteristic of the Sungod by a given name. We can compare this with the Roman Catholic Church calling God the ‘Father’ in his creative capacity, the ‘Son’ in his redemptive capacity and the ‘Holy Spirit’ in his sanctifying capacity.

 

The Sun, a heavenly body, is God's visible picture.

  • since the picture is round, he is Kerek Úr (Round Lord)

  • since the Sun brightens and sees everything like a giant eye another name is Szemúr (Occulate Lord)

  • since his eye is single, they call him Egyszemű (One Eyed) and, according to the Sun's color, Vörös Szemű (Red Eyed)

  • since the Sun resides in the sky they also called him Égi Szem or Égszem (Eye of Heavens)

  • given its immense heat they called him Égető Úr (Scorching Lord) and Sütő Úr (Shining Lord)

They also believed that he is the only Lord in this world, so they called him,

  • Honúr (Lord of his Home) and Égi Király (King of Heavens)

  • his motion-name at sunrise is Ra-Kel (Ra rises)

  • his rising on the eastern borders Kel-Út (The Road of Rising/East)

  • where he sits down onto his chair, Szék-Úr (Lord of the Chair or the Seated/Settled Lord)

  • later, he sits in his chariot to travel the shiny roads of the skies as Útúr (Lord of the Road)

  • when he finishes his daily journey in the west, Nyug-Út (Resting/Western Road)

  • finally, as he sinks below the horizon, Esút, Este (The Falling/Evening Road, Evening)

All becomes clear when we realize that ancients whose religion was connected with the Sun were never polytheistic but worshipped one solar God!

The ancient theologians substituted the names of their God with symbols, pictures that had no apparent relationship with their God but were useful as symbols that convey sounds. The sentences and prayers they created appear incomprehensible today.

 

For example, when they write God's name as,

  • Ég-Úr (Lord of Heaven) they draw a mouse (Egér)

  • Székúr (The Seated/Settled Lord) is conveyed by a wagon (szekér)

  • Kerek-Úr (Round Lord) is represented by a wagon-wheel (kerék)

  • Úri-Ős (Ancestral Lord) with a giant (óriás)

...and so on.

How could anyone unfamiliar with Hungarian find his way among the symbols? When is it proper to talk about the Lord of Heaven (Égúr) and when the animal (egér) that represents his name on Earth? (For similar reasons the Babylonians worshipped a mouse). We are not idol-worshippers when we pray before statues in the churches, rather worshipping the essence of what they symbolize.

 

We often find in the late Stone and Bronze Ages a tiny bronze-wagon on the altar. This did not signify worship of the wagon but the meaning the artifact conveyed as one of the names of the Sungod Székúr or Az-Ég-Ur (The Seated/Settled God or The Lord of Heaven).

It is surely vitally important - especially for Hungarians - to understand the true form of the Sumerian and Egyptian languages. The word-plays egér - Égúr (mouse - Lord of Heaven), szekér - Székúr (wagon road) are perfectly clear in the Hungarian language, as it is in case of Szemúr when his name is written with the image of a donkey (szamár).

 

These ancients never worshipped crocodiles, snakes, frogs and insects. Historians should know this is as a figment of the imagination, just as much as the supposed relativeless Sumerian and Egyptian languages.

Since it is difficult to transcribe the ancient Eastern texts into today's alphabets few are willing to try. Study of the near one-hundred-thousand known Sumerian and Egyptian literary texts known to scholars has hardly progressed (S.N. Kramer Sumerian Mythology New York, 1961, VIII).

 

Present transcribed texts are unsuitable for linguistic studies, a problem appreciated by A. Nehring, a German scholar, who remarked as early as 1936:

"Thus far there was no attempt to make use of the grammar, study of sound and structure and sentences in connection with the problems of the history of the ancients."

Something is seriously wrong with the old languages presently baptized Sumerian and Egyptian. The first examiners of the Mesopotamian language called it a Scythian language. Today they relate it clearly with the Magyar, Finno-Ugrian or Ural-Altaic languages but still call this language Sumerian.

 

The name Sumerian was coined in 1869 by Oppert, a French linguist, and was picked up in the scientific journals of the day ….

 

But Oppert never understood the meaning of Sumer (Szemúr = Occulate Lord) and Agade (Égető = the Scorching Lord), two different names for the Sungod. The above mentioned names can be substituted by other names of the Sungod, in territory marking names such as Hon, Kő, Ma, and Ta.

 

There existed a Napotthon (Home of the Sun), a Szemhon (Home of the Occulate Being), Makor-Ta, Hét-Ta, Ég-Ta, Szem-Ta, etc ... (The lands of Makar, Hét, Ég, Szem, are all names of the same Sungod).

 

 



 

 

 


Hungarians and Celts
by Dr. Tibor E. Baráth
(Excerpt)

“In the present state of our research, we must make use of circumstantial evidences to learn more about the ethnic identity of the Celts.

 

A closer look at the manifestations of Celtic civilization convinces us that they contained no new feature; all their most striking characteristics having already been evident in the previous, Scythian civilization. These included the fortified place protected by embankments, ditches and hedges, the multitude of animal images which pervaded their arts, the use of horses and sunworship, a heritage from the New Stone Age.

 

There was only one new addition to Celtic culture: the extensive use of iron. It follows that the ’Celts’ must have been an amalgam of the previous non-Indo-European inhabitants of Europe. This is exactly what scholars have discovered during the course of their comparative studies. It was found, indeed, that the Picti of northern Scotland were already Celts — “early Celts” — who called themselves by that word in the form of Khaldes or Chaltis, which is the Kelti in ancient graphic form. J. Hawkes also places the makers of the bell-shaped vessels into the category of the Celts.

 

There too, the peoples of the barrow-graves can be found (i.e. the Scythians), and also the Turoni, who migrated from Central Europe to the banks of the Loire, as well as the Secani, who went from Hungary to France, etc. There were also peoples called Kelto-Scythians, Kelto-Ligurians, Kelt-Iberi. Thus, it is evident that the Celts were not a new race in Europe and the Celt or Kelti name was used as a comprehensive designation of the entire pre-Christian population of Europe.

The huge and kindred Celtic mass of BC Europe was linked together by a common language as well, in addition to the identical elements of their civilization mentioned above. According to the estimate of Camille Julien (Paris) “a hundred million” Europeans spoke the Kelti language in the second half of the first millennium BC; consequently, there was no linguistic barrier in ancient Europe.

 

In spite of these categorical statements, nobody has, alas, identified the Celtic language, nor proved its affiliation with any other. In that respect we are still completely in the dark. The reason? Nobody has yet approached the Celtic problem with the Hungarian key. In the following, we shall try to analyze the etymological meaning of the fundamental word: Kelti.

Before us, Henri Hubert, the most eminent French specialist of the Celts has made great efforts to find out the meaning of the Celti name. He carefully noted all the various graphic forms in which this name occurred and concluded:

  1. that it reached its widest diffusion during the sixth and fifth centuries BC

  2. that it contains the root-word Kel (Quel in French graphic form), “implying the idea to rise”

He mentions this meaning as the most probable one, among many other conjectures listed in a footnote. He could, however, not go any farther in his explanations, thus the question remained unsolved.

In Hungarian the word Kel signifies ’to rise’ and Kelet the cardinal point where the Sun rises, i.e. ’Orient, East’. And the same word, when the -i suffix is added as Kelt-i, Kelet-i means ’He who has come from the direction of the rising Sun’, was spelt in various ways, such as Chaldi, Chaldean and Scoloti. Like most ancient Hungarian ethnic names, it indicates no ethnic particularity, but is merely a geographic appellation recalling their previous fatherland.

 

As such, it was a fitting comprehensive name, because all the pre-Indo-European ethnic groups originated from the same region: from the ancient Orient. Thus the name Kelti or Keleti was the general term designating all the Hungarian speaking ethnic groups which had migrated to Central and Western Europe from the ancient Orient since the Stone Age.

The Kelti were a very cultured human mass to which Europe owes a great deal. They were the ones who christened all the great rivers and mountains of that continent, who designated the places of the future great cities, and planned the first network of communication. They were the ’first Europeans’. Had History given them another hundred years they would have formed a great unitary nation centered around Gallia and Hungary. But this century had not been granted to them.

 

The holocaust of the Celts in Gallia was perpetrated by Julius Caesar and his legions in the first century BC.


 

 

Short Biographies

Professor László Marácz was born in Utrecht in 1960.

 

His parents left Hungary at the time of the 1956 Hungarian revolution. He completed his studies at the University of Groningen in Hungarian and general linguistics. In 1980 he translated Ferenc Sánta’s novel The Fifth Seal into Dutch. He attained his qualifications in general linguistics in 1984.

 

He worked as scientific assistant at the University of Groningen’s at the department general linguistic from 1984 to 1990. He defended a thesis concerning the Magyar language structure under the title “Asymmetries in Hungarian” doctoral dissertation in 1989.

 

The study centered on the generative-structuralist analysis of the syntax of the Magyar language. He engaged in free research from 1991-1992 within the framework of the Niels Stensen Foundation. He was a guest-researcher at the MIT in Boston. He held lectures at eight American universities concerning his doctoral dissertation. He is working at the Amsterdam University’s Institute of Eastern-Europe from 1992 as Associate Professor of the program of Magyar studies.

 

His book Hungarian Revival, Political Reflections on Central Europe raises several important questions concerning problems of Hungarian survival. He received a permanent post at the University of Amsterdam.

Professor Tibor E. Baráth was born in Alsólendva Hungary in 1906. He received his Ph.D. in History in Budapest, and continued his postgraduate studies in Vienna, Paris and Montreal. He was professor of history at the University of Kolozsvár, Hungary (1940-45).

 

He was Secretary of the Hungarian Institute in Paris (1932-39) and fulfilled the role of Assistant-Secretary of the International Committee of Historical Sciences at the same time. He moved to Paris with his family in 1945 where he founded a Hungarian newspaper. He left Paris for Montreal, Canada in 1952.

 

He continued his research on ancient Hungarian history and was author of over one hundred historical essays and several books.

 




Atl Antis, in the Amerindian language, means 'Old Andes' - namely, the Andes before they were elevated - by interplanetary cataclysms - "on the night of the falling stars!"

The most ancient register of Hungarian-Magyar origins begins with Nimrud, King of Zmr (Sumeria) and his two sons, Hunor and Magor, who married an Eskitus (Scythian) princess called Dul.

The secret of who built the Stonehenge megalithic stone circle is found in its Magyar name Isten Henger, meaning Circle, or Cylinder, of God. The Magyar tribe involved was the Kazi, or Cassi, the same that centuries later sent the veteran roman legions fleeing back across the English Channel after their first invasion of the British Isles (Albion) in 55 BC.

 

 



 

 


For readers and students of Magyar the following table was kindly contributed by Zsombor Kaali Nagy: