CONTENTS. I. ON THE ORIGIN OF THE HUNGARIANS. BY M. VAMBÉRY PAGE 147 II. MAN, SAVAGE AND CIVILIZED AN APPEAL TO FACTS . 157 1. Mr. CRAWFURD on The Physical and Mental Characteristics of the African or Occidental Negro 166 2. Mr. TYLOR on The Negro and European Dialects of Surinam and Curaçoa 173 175 3. Mr. CRAWFURD on The History of Cannibalism. V. ANTHROPOLOGY AND THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION VI. ARCHEOLOGY AND THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION VII. CORRESPONDENCE. VIII. THE ETHNOLOGICAL JOURNAL 177 180 THE ETHNOLOGICAL JOURNAL. OCTOBER, 1865. ON THE ORIGIN OF THE HUNGARIANS. BY A. VÁMBÉRY, Professor of Oriental Languages in the University of Pesth. My intention is to speak on the origin of the Hungarians. I must confess that I feel anxious not to exhaust the patience of this meeting with a subject which has undoubtedly a far greater interest for us Hungarians than it can have in this country; nor would I venture to touch the subject at all were I not aware of the fact that in England all branches of science are pursued with equal interest, and that this great country never despises the national feelings of others. The question we are about to treat bears much of the character of a deep and too often of a tedious study of antiquity. But I beg my hearers not to be frightened by appearances. I am, happily, no savant, and I hope I shall not become one. The heavy and pedantic style in which philological questions were treated formerly is not fit for the present state of science, and we therefore shall use a language which may be objected to as being easy and superficial, but which will be more intelligible, and perhaps more suitable to the purpose we have in view. As you are aware, we are chiefly puzzled to ascertain whether the Hungarians, who belong to the race called Altaic or Turanian, are to be classed with the North Altaic or Finnish, or with the South Altaic or Turco-Tartar stock. To those who look at the question superficially the point will probably seem of little significance; but I must beg of them not to forget that there is the same difference between the several sections of the Altaic race as there is between the component parts of the Iranian or Indo-European race. Englishmen, Frenchmen, Russians, Wallachians, Persians, Kurds, and Gipsies are of the same stock, and have a certain degree of mutual relation; and yet I think no Briton would be indifferent VOL. I. M if, unaware of his Anglo-Saxon origin, he should be assigned to-day to the Gipsies, to-morrow to the Russians, and so on. We Hungarians own that the children of the Celestial Empire, the Mongols, Kalmooks, Kirgis, Finns, Samoyeds, Mordvins, Voguls, &c., are all kindred to us; but nobody will reproach us if, impelled by curiosity, we strive to know the direction in which this relationship is the nearest. Nor is such an inquiry a mere impulse of national vanity: it is simply the desire to penetrate the darkness which hovers over the history of our origin-the wish to get acquainted with the fundamental structure of our language, that inheritance which is the most precious jewel of every nation. To investigate the origin of a nation we generally use three means-viz., history, ethnography, and philology. From the first we wish to learn the deeds which a nation has accomplished since its first appearance on the stage of the world; from the second we hope to ascertain the physical characteristics, the peculiarities in the manners and customs of the race; whilst the language affords us the most important resource and the best evidence in our inquiries. Although an inseparable whole, the use of these instruments depends very often upon the character of the nations which are concerned in our researches. Thus, for example, we obtain more information, and that more circumstantial, from the Iranian or Semitic races, which were always more peaceful, and had an earlier civilization, than we do from the peoples of Altaic origin, who were from immemorial times of a warlike, unquiet, and ever wandering inclination. Our knowledge of the Uigurs, Mandjoos, or the Siberian populations, will never equal that which we have gained of the Indians, Turanians, Assyrians, and Phoenicians. Such is the case particularly with the Turco-Tartar - tribes, which, entirely devoid of any historical resources, made their appearance in the West at a time when people had but very limited and confused ideas in regard to science and scientific researches. It is true that much has been written concerning the so-called Huns and their descendants; but of what use, at the present day, are the data of the Byzantine and Gothic historians? Ancient fables furnish materials for modern anecdotes, but reliable truth is nowhere to be found. I may be accused of ingratitude towards Priscus, Porphyrogenitos, Jornandes, Sidonius, Apollinarius, and others, but I cannot help saying that all those exaggerated reports of inroads, battles, and devastations have but a secondary interest for us, since we know so little about the nations in question. Hun, Avar, Uar, Khuni, Kutigur, Utigur, are names which might well be taken as belonging to the Altaic race, but we have no precise knowledge whether they represented tribes and branches of one stock or of a different origin. I venture to say that it is even doubtful whether they used at all the names we apply to them. We call, in this enlightened century, Teherkes, Kirgis, Tartars, people who have never heard these names, but who designate themselves as Addigi, Kasak, and Turk; who does not see that the like may have occurred in those times of ignorance? Our regrets as to the erroneous conceptions of the abovenamed historians are of course quite useless; but I think there can be no objection to my saying that Priscus would have done a greater service to posterity if he had transmitted to us only two strophes of the songs he heard on some festival occasion at the court of Attila, instead of giving us a description of the customs and manners of that nomadic prince. Faint, very faint, therefore, is the light which the historical monuments throw over the ancient relations of the Altaic race and its subdivisions. The Hungarians (Moger or Turcos, as they are called), we are told, appeared in Eastern Europe about the end of the ninth century; the route they took in their migration is also pretty well known; but we have no reliable information concerning the degree of affinity in which they stood to the so-called black and white Huns, or to their kinsmen whom they found already settled on the shores of the Danube and Theiss. Chronological data and the narrative of political events are of great value to the historiographer, but they do not help us to a decision in the present question, and chronology must be cautiously used. Neither will ethnography, as might have been expected, afford a greater assistance, since physical characteristics and variety of customs often depend upon climatic conditions; and it would be a very vain undertaking to expect to learn from the features of the present Osmanli, Finns, and Hungarians the relations of parentage existing between them and the Chinese Mongols and the inhabitants of Northern Siberia. As regards the aggregate of a race, amalgamation often destroys the traces of unity; but such is not the case in the tribes and branches. I found, for example, in the features of the South Turcoman, who is a mixture of the Iranian and Turanian blood, a striking likeness to the Magyar, in whose veins, too, flows much German and Slavic blood. Such is the case with the Uzbeg, among whom the trade in Persian slaves produced a strong crossing of race. This question of the different races is undoubtedly of the highest importance, and careful inquiry might lead to great discoveries, particularly in Central Asia, that cradle of the vast Turanian race. With regard to the variety of customs and manners, it might be pretended that this is rather to be ascribed to the age in which a people lives than to the intrinsic qualities of its special groups or families; and no doubt there is some truth in this. The Nomads in all parts of the world have certain mutual relations in character and habits, as have civilized societies; but we ought not to forget the peculiarities which various branches and tribes retain in spite of all differences of climate and age. Hungarians and Central Asiatics stand like child and man to each other. Religion, climate, political revolutions, have caused the greatest changes; and yet there are many proofs of resemblance in their manners and customs. This is not here the place to treat this subject circumstantially, but I cannot refrain from quoting some of them. In my travels in Central Asia I was astonished to see how the Turcoman and Uzbeg, although exhausted by thirst and fatigue in our march across the desert, would sit down to make their toilet on their beard, which consisted of plucking the hair from the upper part of the chin (shaving being forbidden by the law of Islam), and giving to the beard the form which, in Hungary, is termed the national fashion, a peculiarity which is also to be found on the statues called Hunnenköpfe in the canton of Argau, representing several colossal heads of the much dreaded Huns. These statues have, besides, a cap in the shape of a pear, edged with fur, which head-dress I have found only amongst the Chinese Tartars and the Hungarians. With regard to the garments of the women, the eye of a Hungarian is forcibly struck by finding on the females of certain tribes in Central Asia the high red boots with pointed heels, the over-dress in the form of a long huszár jacket hanging down from the shoulders, and particularly a kind of coiffure, worn only by the girls, called palta, in Hungarian párta. The Hungarian music, the origin of which the eccentric Pater Liszt ascribed to the gipsies, is also very like the national songs of the peoples who live in the eastern part of Central Asia. Deeply melancholic strains form the beginning, which gradually change into lively movements, and finish with a whirling, dashing bustle. That formulary of an oath-namely, to open a vein and so drink each other's blood-usual with the ancient Hungarians still exists among the Kiptchaks, contrary to the strict prohibition of Islamism; and even the Osmanlis practised this rite until the time of Suleiman the Magnificent, as we are told by the historian Pecheri. Finally, I will mention a kind of national disease to be met with amongst the Hungarians and Central Asiatics. It happens very often that the Tartar, after a full meal, complains of a slight uneasiness, saying, "Kanim ts'oïnördü," "My blood is thickened." Of this he is cured by being rubbed over an artery. The Hungarians call this "csömör," and it is subjected to an analogous treatment. With these examples, few in number, yet not to be despised, I do not propose to prove that the Hungarians are in a closer relationship with any particular tribe or branch than with the rest of the Turco-Tartar stock. No; the analogies of customs and manners are, like those of the language, scattered through the whole South Altaic stock. |