Hollosi Information eXchange /HIX/
HIX HUNGARY 663
Copyright (C) HIX
1996-05-10
Új cikk beküldése (a cikk tartalma az író felelőssége)
Megrendelés Lemondás
1 Re: szekely? (mind)  31 sor     (cikkei)
2 Re: Teleki (mind)  42 sor     (cikkei)
3 Re: WANTED Train Information (mind)  15 sor     (cikkei)
4 Re: Ban Nemzet @ siliconvalley.com, now!!!!! (mind)  97 sor     (cikkei)
5 Re: kalandoza1sok (mind)  72 sor     (cikkei)
6 Re: condemned to repeat it (mind)  158 sor     (cikkei)
7 Re: Objectivity (mind)  18 sor     (cikkei)
8 Re: A request to all (mind)  39 sor     (cikkei)
9 Re: condemned to repeat it (mind)  4 sor     (cikkei)
10 Re: condemned to repeat it (mind)  10 sor     (cikkei)
11 Re: kalandoza1sok (mind)  65 sor     (cikkei)
12 Re: szekely? (mind)  14 sor     (cikkei)
13 Re: szekely? (mind)  17 sor     (cikkei)
14 Re: szekely? (mind)  15 sor     (cikkei)
15 Re: szekely? (mind)  26 sor     (cikkei)
16 Re: szekely? (mind)  137 sor     (cikkei)
17 Re: condemned to repeat it (mind)  65 sor     (cikkei)
18 Re: Why not Stowewrit (mind)  26 sor     (cikkei)
19 Re: condemned to repeat it (mind)  20 sor     (cikkei)
20 Silly Valley. (mind)  86 sor     (cikkei)
21 Re: Horn, Mrs. Kosa, and the MSZP (mind)  75 sor     (cikkei)
22 Re: szekely? (mind)  58 sor     (cikkei)
23 Re: szekely? (mind)  121 sor     (cikkei)
24 Izrael (mind)  24 sor     (cikkei)
25 Re: szekely? (mind)  34 sor     (cikkei)
26 Re: szekely? (mind)  9 sor     (cikkei)
27 About our crusaders (S.Stowe,etc). (mind)  28 sor     (cikkei)

+ - Re: szekely? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Wed, 8 May 1996, W. BATKAY wrote:

> Louis Elteto derisively dismisses blood typing as a way a getting at an
> ethnic groups origins, because of its bad associations with Hitlerite
> policy.  My understanding is that blook group typing {frequency of, say
> A+ or O- types) is a perfectly acceptable way of getting at broad ethnic
> group relationships.  But I also gather that studies of mytocondrial DNA
> distributions as well as dentochronology are perhaps more reliable, as
> well as free of the taint of Nazi "science".  I have no idea whether ei-
> ther of these methods has been used to identify the ethnic origin of the
> Szekely, or their genetic relationship with any other ethnic groups or
> grouplets.
>
> Udv.,
> Be'la
>


Far be it from me to suggest so fulsome a thing as a derisive dismissal of
blood typing as a legitimate method of investigation of the ethnic
relationships of the Szekelys. What triggered my remarks was the reference
that such attempts were made during Ceausescu's reign, when in fact the
history of the political doctrine - that Szekelys are Magyarized Romanians
- is much older than that. Of course I have good reason to be very
skeptical of the Romanian proofs put forward in the 30's and 40's, because
they were thought up, ab ovo, as a propaganda weapon. A real scientific
study of this type - including more modern methods - would certainly be
interesting, though I would be willing to bet that it would be open to
various interpretations, regardless of its results.

Louis Elteto
+ - Re: Teleki (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Wed, 8 May 1996, Amos J. Danube wrote:

>        The question  was raised  recently about  whether Teleki has
>     committed suicide, which would be contrary  to a practicing and
>     believing Catholic. I believe Eva Balogh  has mentioned this in
>     connection of some historical question.
>        I have just rediscovered a letter published in the "Magyarok
>     Vilaglapja" late last year.  The letter was  in the "Postalada"
>     (mailbox, like letters to the editor). The writer has worked in
>     the Teleki  house as  an electrician.  He was an  employee of a
>     firm installing a security (alarm) system.  They have completed
>     all the wiring and they only  needed to install and connect the
>     bells. When the  workmen returned for  their last  day of work,
>     the porter (more than a doorman)  told them  what has happened.
>     Two Gestapo officers showed up the evening before and they have
>     left shortly after midnight. Shortly after that the porter went
>     to Teleki's office and has found him dead.
>        The writer has installed  a switch under  Teleki's desk that
>     he could activate the system with his knee.He is having problem
>     figuring out why would a person be  getting such a system if he
>     is ready to commit suicide.Short,he is asking what others think
>     about the suicide in light of this story.
>        I have no idea how  reliable this story is.  I have  no idea
>     whether the Horthy regime had any reason to falsify evidence or
>     whether the Communists had any reason to go along with it. I do
>     not know what the evidence  is pro or con a suicide.  Does any-
>     body know more about the case?
>        I am posting this story for those who may have missed it and
>     for those who speak only English and couldn't have read it.
>                                                                Amos
>

Always consider the source... I don't think there is any doubt about
Teleki's suicide, not among historians, not among the members of the
Teleki family, not in serious contemporary sources. Teleki's catholicism
would of course militate against the suicide, yet under the circumstances
it was very much in character for an honorable leader.  Teleki  had failed
Hungary, he felt, and had permitted his country to become dishonored. The
suicide restored his personal honor fully, and Hungary's in part, even if
only temporarily.

Louis Elteto
+ - Re: WANTED Train Information (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

You wrote:
>
>Can anyone send me (email) the list of train going from BUDAPEST to
>KOLOSZVAR (Cluj) with their time table/schedual of departures and
>arrivals.
>
>Any assistance will be appreciated.
>Thanks
>Mark

>
Try contacting http://rail.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de/rail/english.html.


Jon
+ - Re: Ban Nemzet @ siliconvalley.com, now!!!!! (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 18:48 08/05/96 -0300, Aniko Dunford wrote:
>Hi Joe:
>>
>>I didn't see any complaints or threats against Bela Liptak.

<snip>

>>Joe Szalai
>>
>Forgive my stupidity, but when I hear/see an ultimatum, I interpret it as a
>threat.  So far, I have seen two; along with a third which was a definitive
>statement relaying an already made decision.  Regarding the concerns, I
>cannot emphasize enough, that I have always been and am wholeheartedly in
>agreement with them all -

<snip snip>

>As for HL's mandate; to me, it's been crystal clear from the start.
>Establishing a constitution, with a charter of rights I see as an
>impossibility from the point of view of enforcement.  It's hard enough to
>find volunteers; let alone expecting them to be bogged down with the legal
>responsibilies of enforcing such, especially when given the vast scope of
>the Internet -

<snip snip>

>Above all; perception, being  9/10ths of the law?  If I were given the
>responsibility of HL's mandate, I would try better than my best at making
>sure that all are clearly aware of my personal feelings regarding the doc's
>mentality and my lists' association with same - along with my clearly
>outlining the restrictions preventing  me from stopping/banning  their efforts
>
>Aniko Dunford

Hi, Aniko, Joe, et al involved in this highly contentious debate -

I have been extremely busy and harried with my legal practice, unfortunately
leaving little time for participation in these far more interesting
discussions. Consequently my time is limited in which to draft a post which
actually expresses my feelings without inadvertantly hurting anyone's
feelings, so if I become a little blunt, I hope you will understand.

Hungarian Lobby is an amorphous umbrella organization whose aim is to foster
awareness of and some sensitivity toward Hungarian issues among political
leaders and the media in our respective countries, but especially in the
U.S. Within this amorphous organization, which has no directors or officers,
a leading role has been taken by Bela Liptak. I suspect that among those who
have dedicated time and effort to this cause, his commitment is just about
the greatest.

Anyone who shares the goals and is willing to help out can be a member of
the Hungarian Lobby. The Lobby has been notably successful in a number of areas
.

Now, there are complaints that an extremist has taken up the mantle of the
HL, and calls for a change to the rules, and threats (and that is what I
would call them) to Bela Liptak that he must do something - boot this person
off, prevent him from publicizing HL - or the writers will resign.What does
this do? It puts him in an untenable position, does it not? He does not have
the power to change the HL unilaterally - and if he did, the HL would lose
its unique character as a truly democratic instrument. Frankly, my feeling
is that if Dr. P. sends a letter that Bela Liptak has drafted that is
unobjectionable, his voice will be just one of many speaking out on certain
issues. If he drafts his own and sends them, and they are wingnutty, they
will be dismissed as are most such letters by people with decent sense.

John calls for Hungarians to work together for a change, but it seems to me
that this call is likely to be one of the most divisive that could have been
raised, given the nature of the HL. And I worry that such divisiveness may
discourage the wrong person and alienate him from continuing the work of the HL
.

My plea is to continue to denounce Nazism/Communism/anti-Semitism where they
occur. If it is discovered that someone is co-opting the mantle of the HL to
send letters of an extremist nature, then surely steps can be taken to make
the addressees aware of the fact that this person does not speak for the
rest of the members of the HL.

But don't throw the baby out with the bath water. I think you will be losing
something irreplaceable.

Very respectfully to all who have expressed their concerns,

Johanne

Johanne L. Tournier
e-mail- 
(soon to change to @atcon.com)


>
>
>
>
>.
>
>
+ - Re: kalandoza1sok (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

> Felado :  [United States]
>         First of all, let's explain to the readers of this list what this
> whole debate was all about. Some of our nationalists on the Forum felt that
> Western, specifically American, general textbooks on European history
> distort the history of Hungary and Hungarians. For example, said one fellow,
> here is the case of the "Raids," in Hungarian "kalandozasok" (adventures,
> roaming, wandering). The Hungarian name indicates almost playfulness but
> there was nothing playful about these Hungarian raids on Western Europe in
> the tenth century. They were raids for booty, pure and simple. This is the
> opinion of today's historical scholarship eminating from Hungary as well.
> However, our nationalist amateur historian on the Forum suggested some very
> fanciful explanation for these raids: high diplomacy, preventive raids for
> securing Hungary's borders, and similar explanations. Needless to say that
> there is absolutely nothing to prove any of these interpretation. At that
> time there was no central authority in Hungary and different tribal leaders
> were most likely acting on their own. As for security, there were no threats
> to Hungary from any of the very weak neighbors. However, some of us don't
> like the idea that our ancestors were undertaking raids for booty only.
> Well, whether we like it or not, as far as we know today (and it is unlikely
> that some new 10th century document will be discovered in the future) these
> raids were what we always thought they were.

Are the notions of raid for booty and "securing Hungary's borders" really
incompatible? Like a new kid in a rough neighborhood who must engage in a
series of fights to secure a place (E1va will hopefully forgive the
`personification of nations' metaphor) newly established nations often engage
in a series of military conflicts. Americans, looking back at the war of
independence and the war of 1812, will not find this a strange proposition.
A more recent example is Israel, which secured its place not by right (for the
Arab nations never displayed the slightest sympathy for the idea of making
restitution for the Holocaust out of their land) but by might, having whopped
its neighbors often enough and thoroughly enough to make them understand they
have no alternative but to recognize its right to existence.

While I agree with E1va that the primary motivation was booty (indeed, what
else could support nomadic existence -- the only way out was to settle down
and turn to agriculture, as Hungarians eventually did), that the country
didn't have a central authority to carry out this "beat thy neighbor" policy
as a conscious policy, and that it would be completely ahistoric to ascribe
"high diplomacy" to Hungary at the time, the net effect remains the same: this
new kid is a mean sonofabitch and it doesn't pay to mess with him. Even if the
raids were not directed against the weak (and more importantly, less rich)
immediate neighbors, they didn't get to their eventual target by airlift.  Any
raid of necessity involved a stage of large heavily armed raiding parties,
hankering after a good fight (and some manly rape and pillage), riding through
the immediate neighbors' land, something that must have been pretty
intimidating even for those who were just passed by without drawing a direct
attack to themselves.

It should also be added that I don't believe it to be very meaningful to
invoke past greatness (if indeed the ability to beat thy neighbor can be
interpreted as a sign of greatness) to discuss the present situation, and I
find any theory that attempts to explain `national character' on the basis of
what people did a thousand year ago totally unacceptable. Most Scandinavians
take little pride in the fact that their remote ancestors were seafaring
bandits, and most Hungarians feel similarly about their remote ancestors
having been mounted bandits. Americans today are considerably less likely to
enthuse about their great-great-grandparents having fought off the Indians
with musket and ball than a few decades ago, when Hollywood churned out movies
like "How the West was won". Of course I wouldn't be too surprised to find
some FORUM participants stuck at that rather juvenile stage of developing
national pride, even though a more mature view of past history has been
available for quite some time now.

Duke Ai asked Tsai Wo about the altar to the god of earth. Tsai Wo replied,
`The Hsia used the pine, the Yin used the cedar, and the men of Chou used the
chesnut (li), saying that it made the common people tremble (li).' The Master,
on hearing this reply, commented, `One does not explain away what is already
done, one does not argue against what is already accomplished, and one does
not condemn what has already gone by.'

Andra1s Kornai
+ - Re: condemned to repeat it (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Here is the English version of the article by Akos Rona-Tas posted by
Andras yesterday.  It is an excellent summary of the first reported
outbreak of acute pellionitis on the Net.  The article also provides
additional proof -- if any proof is needed -- that nothing is ever said
on the Net that has not been said before, only better.

-----
Gabor Fencsik

 ===== start of text by Akos Rona-Tas, dated 2/18/92 =====

 Bad things tend to creep up on us slowly and almost imperceptibly,
 following Lenin's Law of Incremental Evolution.  Every day we slide
 another tiny notch down the slippery slope, but we do not notice what is
 happening until we find ourselves trapped in a sticky mess.  As we slide
 downward, we occasionally hit a bump -- then we quickly get back on our
 feet and regain our balance.  Relieved, we may not be aware of having
 sunk down to another level.  This gradual slide is even more pernicious
 in cases where we lack the ability to remember past events, and to measure
 the present against the memory of what went on before.  Many of the
 FORUM's readers are recent arrivals who may not know where we have been,
 and how we got to where we are now.

 When FORUM's predecessor, named FALIUJSAG, was established as a follow-on
 to the remarkable news service operated by Ivan Weisz, we thought we were
 creating something new, something good and interesting.  FALIUJSAG was a
 mailing list that functioned as Ivan Weisz' virtual living room.  A place
 where we could talk, carry on exciting discussions, give learned lectures,
 become friends, or become disenchanted with each other.  We were also
 curious to find out what the others had to say.  It was the curiosity that
 created a community of sorts, a community that was based on its own
 unwritten rules.  The rules served as a sort of virtual furniture in the
 virtual living room surrounding us.

 What were these rules?  One rule was to avoid ad hominem arguments.
 (E.g., Forrai's clear explanations about the 'genetic fallacy', and
 the resulting debate.)  Another rule stated that facts must be taken
 seriously.  I.e., you can't accuse another of throwing around meaningless
 data without first doing your own homework.  Also, you must be ready to
 admit that you might be mistaken.  E.g., if it turns out that Bardossy
 was shot and not hanged, then do what Gabor Elek did, and admit your
 mistake instead of insulting your opponent.  Another rule is that you
 must read what your opponent wrote, and make an effort to understand what
 he or she is saying before you respond.  Lastly, you must refrain from
 trying to shame or humiliate an opponent.

 In the beginning the rules were often breached, but never explicitly
 questioned.  When one of the participants broke the rules, someone in
 the group was always ready to step in and take the offender to task.
 There may have been some growling and gnashing of the teeth, but the
 matter was quickly laid to rest, with the audience applauding the volunteer
 guardian of law and order.  The majority understood that scoring points was
 not enough -- it was also necessary to help keep the virtual living room
 clean and orderly.  We considered ourselves guests in Ivan Weisz' house.
 We were even capable of occasional joint actions: we organized a straw
 poll in March 1990 to coincide with the national elections, and we
 worked together on a number of petitions to the Hungarian authorities.
 This is the time when HIRMONDO was born, thanks to Laci Babai, Gabor
 Toth, Feri Masszi and Gyozo Drozdy.  The Radio News also started during
 this period, due to the efforts of Gabor Hanak and Dani Csanady.

 After Ivan Weisz, the baton has passed to Jozsi Hollosi and Jeno Torocsik.
 This is when FALIUJSAG changed into FORUM.  Like Ivan, Jozsi worked
 tirelessly to keep HIX going, and to allow the rest of us to keep
 chattering away in our shared virtual living room.  Every morning I turned
 on my PC, eager to find out what Hanak, Deak, Hollosi, Breznay, Hetyei,
 Borocz, Kornai, Hidas, B. Toth, Fodor, Leirer, Vorsatz, Ligeti, Drozdy,
 Greschik, Kota, Vizvari, and the others will write today.  Sometimes
 I liked what they wrote, and sometimes I found them stupid beyond belief.
 And every so often I too jumped into the ring to defend my own obsessions
 and hobby-horses.  I recommended FORUM to friends and acquaintances.
 I know there is a silent majority of readers out there who do not ever
 post articles, but still care deeply about the FORUM.

 1991 was the year when FORUM started its downward slide.  The decline
 cannot be attributed solely to Zoltan Egyed, Istvan Csorna, Andras
 Pellionisz, Jozsef Pannon, and Zoltan Szekely.  The debate about the
 Gulf War and the weapons shipments to Croatia already crossed over
 the fine line between argument and mudslinging.  In the end, this was
 settled more or less amicably.  The trouble began when I.Cs. started his
 campaign to acquit Horthy of any responsibility for the tragedy of
 Hungarian Jews, based on the works of E. MacCartney.  Cs's views, we
 were astonished to discover, were completely beyond the pale.  Nothing
 in our experience prepared us for arguing with someone sincerely holding
 such views.

 In any case, there could be no question of arguments, because Cs did
 not respond to objections at all.  In the beginning we did not even know
 his name.  It took us months to find out.  After a while, he did respond.
 That is when we found out that Cs is engaged in a crusade, promoting a
 political outlook and conduct that is alien to most of us.  What for us
 was a virtual living room was, for him, a military theater of operations.
 We did not know how to deal with Cs's views and tactics.

 Some suggested expulsion from the group, but this was (rightly) rejected.
 With that, we fell into a trap: on the one hand, we felt that Cs & Co.
 were destroying our virtual living room, but we stuck to our liberal anti-
 censorship principles.  We were too naive to see that every community,
 liberal or not, rests on communal standards -- and that these standards
 need to be supported and defended.  We forgot that the living room
 needs to be aired and swept regularly.

 The PgDn option won out, at least in principle.  What in fact happened was
 something completely different.  Everyone read Cs, everyone argued against
 Cs, and pretty soon Cs took full control of the FORUM's agenda.  How could
 this happen?  I see two reasons.  First, extremist opinions always attract
 a lot of attention.  Second, when faced with an extremist position, even
 people who otherwise would tend to disagree will find it easy to form a
 unified front.  It makes them feel good.  Cs's comments were not especially
 profound or informative, but they gave rise to an incredible number of
 wasted bytes circulating on the Net.  In the meantime, the furniture in
 the virtual living room was being smashed to pieces, while we were all
 congratulating each other behind the scenes after each brilliant
 artillery strike.

 By now we have reached the point where nobody is interested in anything
 anyone else says: the point of game is to pick a quarrel.  As you would
 expect in any extended conflict, eventually both sides will feel unjustly
 trampled upon, and both sides will have committed contemptible acts.  For
 example, I often wished that Janos Korner (a person I know and respect)
 would refrain from writing in FORUM.  Gabor Elek is in a separate category
 of his own.  I am a great fan of his playfulness, humor, and linguistic
 creativity -- but I admit that some might take this as proof of my
 partiality.  Even so, I will trade a Pellionisz for Elek any day.

 We have entered the stage of trench warfare, with no one to mediate
 between the two sides.  Jozsi Hollosi felt unqualified to do so.  Gabor
 Hetyei tried step in to moderate the conflict, but withdrew after his
 personal integrity was attacked.  The conflict kept deepening.  ZSz,
 ZE, AP, and JP joined in with Cs.  The adversaries were unable to
 come to an agreement even in cases where they happened to agree.
 ZSz tried, in the beginning, to keep the debate civilized, but then
 he dutifully took his place in the trenches.

 The tone of FORUM was becoming more and more aggressive.  Any semblance
 of content has vanished.  Shallowness and bad faith took over.  As for
 our common virtual living room, it was bashed to smithereens.  Today
 we have come to the point where nothing is beyond bounds.  Nothing is
 too contemptible, too outlandish, or too vile for FORUM.  Anything goes.
 Libel, defamation of character, dredging up people's past or their
 parents' past, anonymous slander -- everything is permitted.  There is
 no consensus, and no communal standards of conduct, to protect the
 victim of the attack.  Any and all dirty tactics can be justified by
 past transgressions -- true or imagined -- of the other side.

 In spite of the efforts by Gabor Korosy, Tamas Radnai, Miklos Findler,
 Geza Bodor, Bela Vizy, and others, the writers and readers are drifting
 away from FORUM.  Some are switching to other bulletin boards.  Others
 are getting out of the business of using the Net for discussion.  The
 way things are going, the time is not far away when the FORUM will be
 written and read only by the likes of Pellionisz, Csorna & Co.

 One of the warring armies has broken ranks and ran.  This is fine.
 But wherever we go, we must draw our lesson from what happened.
 Otherwise, we will end up once again exactly where we are now:
 in our own private Lebanon.

 Akos Rona-Tas
+ - Re: Objectivity (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

>
>         Who teaches about "heroic" Viking raids and "terrible robber raids"
> of Hungary. I haven't seen any of such description. There was no difference
> between these raids whatsoever. And whatever I read about early English
> history, I don't remember any happy remembrance of Viking raids on English
 soil.
>
>         Eva Balogh


Vikings usually mentioned with the adjectives "raping and pillaging"
however, like everything else, they have a fan-club, too; they are
into making their own very authentic-looking weapons and fighting very
realistic-looking battles, drinking unbelieving amount of (real) beer
afterwards... Shooting arrows backward while riding a horse is
much more difficult to imitate...

Eva Durant
+ - Re: A request to all (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear George Antony,

        Thank you for taking the time explaining the ins and outs of a class
action suit at the Supreme Court of the United States. You covered all the
ground:


(1) >The slight problem is that neither the World Bank nor the International
>Monetary Fund are US entities.

[Even if an American court was willing to take up the case and our
Australian/Hungarian lawyer won}

(2) >There is little chance that Hungary would see any actual compensation
money,
>given what the WB and IMF are: institutions that distribute member governments
'
>funds to other governments.  The member governments would be unlikely to accep
t
>the judgement of a US judge, however high up, to make them pay up.

(3) >On the
>other hand, they [WB and IMF] would certainly get rather ratty with
Hungary, compromising
>any goodwill that may have developed bilaterally.

(4) >In addition, given that cornerstone role that the WB and IMF play in
>international finance, every credit-rating agency would quickly mark Hungary
>down to the level of Upper Volta, with an immediate effect of freezing private
>commercial contacts.

        As for Celia's other suggestions concerning World War I and
compensation--well, I don't know who these American-Hungarians are but as
George rightly points out their ideas are hare-brained.

        For all the above reason, I am not taking back my initial reaction:
our gentleman from Hodmezovasarhely is an old fool.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: condemned to repeat it (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

I am very grateful to Gabor Fencsik for taking the time and
translating this wonderful piece by Akos Tona-Tas. Thank you.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: condemned to repeat it (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Many thanks to Gabor Fencsik for making Akos Rona-Tas's article accessible
in English on this list; and to Andras Kornai for digging it up and posting
it in the original at a most timely moment.

Food for thought there!

Sincerely,

Hugh Agnew

+ - Re: kalandoza1sok (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Andras Kornai:


>Are the notions of raid for booty and "securing Hungary's borders" really
>incompatible?

        Yes, I think so. Besides, what borders are we talking about? At the
time of these raids--according to Pal Engel as early as 899--the conquest
was still in process even in the Transdanubian area. I have here a very good
three-volume historical atlas put out for the Bavarian school district (one
wishes that we had historical atlases either here or in Hungary as good as
this one!) which has a map of Europe, showing the borders of different
states or the placements of various peoples between 916 and 1056. Even at
the latter date the borders on the east and the north were extremely fuzzy.
In the north, it was somewhere just north of Nyitra (Nitra) and Go:mo:r. In
the east, the eastern parts of later Transylvania were still in flux, but by
the end of St. Stephen's reign several Transylvanian towns were established:
Des, Doboka, Kolozsvar, Torda, Gyulafehervar.

>Like a new kid in a rough neighborhood who must engage in a
>series of fights to secure a place (E1va will hopefully forgive the
>`personification of nations' metaphor) newly established nations often engage
>in a series of military conflicts. Americans, looking back at the war of
>independence and the war of 1812, will not find this a strange proposition.
>A more recent example is Israel, which secured its place not by right (for the
>Arab nations never displayed the slightest sympathy for the idea of making
>restitution for the Holocaust out of their land) but by might, having whopped
>its neighbors often enough and thoroughly enough to make them understand they
>have no alternative but to recognize its right to existence.

        I think it is a good metaphor and it worked too. In no time even in
those times when communications were not exactly speedy or information
accurate (enough to read a few early medieval geography books to realize
this!!) most Western Europeans had a fair idea who these Hungarians were and
that they arrived!

>It should also be added that I don't believe it to be very meaningful to
>invoke past greatness (if indeed the ability to beat thy neighbor can be
>interpreted as a sign of greatness) to discuss the present situation, and I
>find any theory that attempts to explain `national character' on the basis of
>what people did a thousand year ago totally unacceptable. Most Scandinavians
>take little pride in the fact that their remote ancestors were seafaring
>bandits, and most Hungarians feel similarly about their remote ancestors
>having been mounted bandits. Americans today are considerably less likely to
>enthuse about their great-great-grandparents having fought off the Indians
>with musket and ball than a few decades ago, when Hollywood churned out movies
>like "How the West was won". Of course I wouldn't be too surprised to find
>some FORUM participants stuck at that rather juvenile stage of developing
>national pride, even though a more mature view of past history has been
>available for quite some time now.

        I think the way their minds work is as follows: an ignorant American
scholar sits down to write a general European history book in which (1) not
enough space is devoted to Hungary; (2) the few sentences which mention
Hungary mention these raids and booty; (3) such textbooks will spread the
bad name of Hungary and Hungarians of today; (4) that must be prevented and
the ignorant scholars must be taught the "true" history of Hungary.

        My reaction was that if people judge today's Hungarians by what the
Hungarian tribes did in the tenth century, we are in big trouble. I would
rather think that people will judge us by our current actions and behavior.
Moreover, if some foreigners could hear this ridiculous discussion they
would think that all Hungarians lost their marbles.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: szekely? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Thanks to Louis Elteto for his thoughtful response to my posting about
blood typing, etc.  I *am* aware of the unfortunate and politially-
tainted history of "racial typing" in East Europe and elsewhere, and we
should be justly suspicious of "proofs" of ethnic relationships put for-
ward by obviously politically-interested parties.  But my understanding is
that the newer methods of typing are remarkably accurate, although they
cannot show whether, for example, Szekely descended from Romanians or
Romanians from, say, Hungarians.  But they can show genetic relationships
among various groups.  What we really need is a truly scientific examina-
tion of these relationships, but I fear that the Szekely are too obscure
to merit such attention from the scientific community.

Udv.,
Be'la
+ - Re: szekely? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Bela Batkay:

>But my understanding is
>that the newer methods of typing are remarkably accurate, although they
>cannot show whether, for example, Szekely descended from Romanians or
>Romanians from, say, Hungarians.  But they can show genetic relationships
>among various groups.

        Something rings the bell that such genetic typing was done in
Eastern Europe and the result is that Hungarians actually are not really
different genetically from the surrounding people. I don't know whether that
includes the Romanians or only the Slavs and the Germans. If I had to guess
I would venture to say that there was relatively little intermarriage
between Romanians and Hungarians because of religious differences. But that
is only a guess on my part.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: szekely? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Eva Balogh is right about genetic typing of some groups in Eastern Europe,
and right in her conclusions.  (It's possible that a report of this ap-
peared some years ago in *Natural History*, but I could be very much mis-
taken.)  Likewise, I don't know either if it included sub-groups like
Romanians and Szekely.  Unlike Eva, however, I am not persuaded that a
putative lack of intermarriage between Hungarians and Romanians would\
have had the slightest impact on the distribution of genetic types.  Re-
member the infamous *jus primae noctis* (the right of the landlord to have
sex with the bride of his tenant/serf on the wedding night)?  Don't forget,
too, that sexual liaisons may have been quite a bit looser in earlier times.
Finally, recall the intermarriage between Bosnian Muslims and Christians.
The truth is, sadly, that I just don't know.

Udv.
Be'la
+ - Re: szekely? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On May 9,  9:32am, Eva S. Balogh wrote:
> Subject: Re: szekely?
>
>         Something rings the bell that such genetic typing was done in
> Eastern Europe and the result is that Hungarians actually are not really
> different genetically from the surrounding people. I don't know whether that
> includes the Romanians or only the Slavs and the Germans. If I had to guess
> I would venture to say that there was relatively little intermarriage
> between Romanians and Hungarians because of religious differences. But that
> is only a guess on my part.
>
>         Eva Balogh
>-- End of excerpt from Eva S. Balogh

       Eva is right. There has been a recent study done by a Hungarian
    scientist in colaboration with  Austrian and/or German scientists.
    I have scanned the book  (it was written  for the  scientific com-
    munity,  not for the general public) last year and  the conclusion
    was that  there is no  genetic difference  between the  peoples of
    that region.  Unfortunately,  I can recall neither  the author nor
    the title at this time.
       I remember that somebody on this  list has suggested the title.
    If anybody is interested,  I can dig it  up next week.  Unless the
    person who has originally suggested the title comes to my rescue.

                                                                Amos
+ - Re: szekely? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear Eva;

At 12:13 PM 5/8/96 +0100, you wrote:

>I always thought, that
>"szekely" s were the Hungarians, who lived in Transsylvania.
>But now I read in HVG, that they are a different entity
>to "erdelyi magyarok" (Transsylvanian hungarians).
>As HVG says, they are growing faster, than all the other
>bits of Hungarians put together, I'd like to know, who they are?
>Eva Durant
>
>Well, I dusted off Otto Maenchen-Helfen's _The World of the Huns_, as well
as opening up Stephen Sisa's _The Spirit of Hungary_, and dug up and out the
various books and notes from Carolingian-Medieval Europe expert, University
of Minnesota professor Bernard S. Bachrach (whose classes I took and in
which I did well--he's also the person probably most responsible for my
often irreverent sense of humor combined cynicism where people and history
are concerned).  It's been a long time since a real combination
historical-anthropological question appeared anywhere in a list group. Thank
you very much, Eva.

Ok, for the subject itself.  The consensus is that the Szeklers are the
remnant of an Asian/Eurasian people that inhabited Transylvania before the
Magyars got there.  Maenchen-Helfen seems to suggest they are the remnants
of the Avars.  He rather lets the reader draw his or her own conclusions but
cites a lot of physical anthropological, archeologial and even some early
historical evidence that show that the Szeklers and Avars had a lot in
common.  Sisa says the two major theories (about a generation of research
later than that which Maenchen-Helfen cited) are that the Szeklers are
either descendants of the Huns or Avars.  Actually, if someone in Hungary
would like to do so, combine Sisa's sources with the solid anthropology
research previously done and mentioned by Maenchen-Helfen and the answer
becomes just one, not either-or.   Here's how to find the answer.

There are known early Szekler graves from the time of the first Magyar
settlement having both grave goods and bones of those laid to rest.  Compare
the early Szekler graves with what is cited in Maenchen-Helfen's book as the
distinguishing characteristics of both the physical bodies of the Huns and
Avars, and the different grave goods.  The Szeklers are likely to be closer
to one or the other.  Myself, I'm betting on the Avars.  They were later and
more populous, and definitely inhabiting this area.

The Byzantine empire accounts of the last known descendants of Attila and
his true Huns had them living, as a much smaller entity, close to the
Byzantine empire's border at the corner of what is now Transylvania, Romania
and Bulgaria.  This, by the way, according to the Chronicles of Matthias
Corvinus is where his family's original "clan" of Gara which split into
three families: Garai, Szilagyi and Hunyadi originated.  If the oral and
semi-written traditions of Matthias' family are as good as those of the
Celts or the Homeric Greeks (Troy, etc.), then there are some interesting
possibilities for the background of these families.

Maenchen-Helfen cites several important characteristics of the Avars in
contrast to the Huns--besides language.  His sources describe the physical
characteristics as taller, and more long-headed than those of the Huns.
They are essentially a "paleo-Siberian" type found mostly in northeast
Siberia--northeastern Mongolia and Manchuria for instance.  The Huns are
much shorter and have a much flatter, rounder face and head shape.  The
Avars also had stirrups, which they buried with the owners, and a fancy,
unique belt/girdle style for both men and women.  So, now all we need is to
find someone in the "Hungary" group, or in Hungary at a reputable
university, who is familiar with the archeological and anthropological
research involving early Szekler graves.  Is there anyone in this list who
knows someone in Hungary, or elsewhere with this expertise, whom we can ask
about this?

Finally, as a footnote: the Avar language (and yes there are snippets of it
in Byzantine and other contemporary sources) appears to be closer to
Mongolian than the Hun, or Magyar languages.  It is described as being from
the Altaic branch of the Turkic-Altaic main "group roots," of the
Uralic-Altaic languages, while the Huns spoke a Turkic language, and
Magyars, as Finno-Ugric speakers were an entirely different branch of the
other main root--the Uralic.   What really drives linguists crazy, however,
is that the Magyars spent so much time with the Onogurs, that some are not
sure that the language isn't some weird hybrid of the two main groups:
Uralic and Turkic-Altaic.

Now to really wake everyone in this list up try considering this interesting
paradox:  The Avars physical-anthropologically are from northeastern Asia.
However, like the Magyars, their cultural-anthropological artifacts and the
most recent historical accounts prior to their being in the
Danubian-Carpathian Basin (and Transylvania) has them living in exactly the
same area that the Magyars once lived--southern Russia, the Urals, the Black
and Aral sea areas, etc..--yet, a lot of cultural artifacts and known
traditions of the Avars, are known to be the same as Genghis Khan's
Mongols--quite a bit farther east.  Hmmmm...

Finally, here's a real kicker (the extra caffeine in the wake-up potion):
the one area today that has both the descendants of the people who came from
the last known areas of Attila's Huns, and the Szeklers (Avars?) of
Transylvania, and Magyars is Somogy county in south_western_ Hungary.  Check
out the early parish and imperial-civil records of the early 18th century...
They make real interesting reading.  Then check out some of the traditions
and customs of this area, and the "artifacts."

This county had been badly depopulated by the Turks and was settled by
excess population from principally two areas--and much heavier on the
latter: the Gyor area of northwestern Hungary, and Transylvania...  The
Garai, Szilagyi, and other very large families, however had come into the
area much earlier and managed to hang on through the century of Turkish
raids and such.  (I always knew my grandmother's family had some bonus
"stubborn" genes...).  Then the Nyers, another large "clan" in this county
really spike this ethnic concoction by being descended from a Magyar
concubine that somehow escaped Batu Khan along with a couple of small
children, when he left Hungary.  She settled in a small town near
Hatvan--and there are church records detailing this story.  Some of the
Nyers and Garai know which town and parish church.

(Unlike rock-hunting, genealogical/historical research in Salt Lake City
doesn't normally risk bursting stitches and tearing muscles, so I did that
first, after the surgery. I'm still a lousy patient though, I wasn't
supposed to be flying to even get to SLC....)

I hope this helps answer some questions.  I'm curious about the Szeklers,
too.  Unfortunately, it may be awhile before I get to Hungary this year or
next, after all, to get the answer myself.  I'm still dealing with some
post-surgical hormonal and endocrine "unknowns" and instabilities; not to
mention some weird sort of allergic or viral thing that may or may not be
related to the deer-tick bite I suffered while rock hunting.  I was on
antibiotics, but they may not have been strong enough.   Until we really
know what all is going on and exactly how to fix it, my doctors are not
recommending travel out of the U.S..--Heck, they're no longer happy about
any excursions outside of the _urban_ U.S., after that tick bite less than
three weeks after surgery.

Respectfully,


Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker
San Jose, CA
tel./fax: 408-223-6102
e-mail: 



N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA
+ - Re: condemned to repeat it (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >, Gabor Fencsik
> writes:

> The
> way things are going, the time is not far away when the FORUM will be
> written and read only by the likes of Pellionisz, Csorna & Co.
>
> One of the warring armies has broken ranks and ran.  This is fine.
> But wherever we go, we must draw our lesson from what happened.
> Otherwise, we will end up once again exactly where we are now:
> in our own private Lebanon.
>
> Akos Rona-Tas

Nice of him to avoid laying out what the lesson is. Might save some nasty
shouting and arm-waving on here that would ruin that cloistered academic
motif we're aiming toward.

I will point out again what ought to be obvious. Martha Bihari and her
legion of unstated followers want a virtual faculty lounge. Since nearly
everyone on here is a slave to Enlightenment thinking and values
(regardez, s'il vous plait, la Tourniere's stirring libertarian homage
recently to said philosophical era), there seems to be some group dynamic
that renders large portions of our membership blind to the fact that many
of their fellow human beings who went through the same western European
and North American educational institutions as themselves aren't exactly
amenable to the cool, cleansing, refreshing waters of rationality and
civic discourse. So when a representative of a group that, say, actually
subscribes to a non-rational belief system (the Queen of England is a dope
peddlar, white Protestants are the descendants of the lost tribes of
Israel, etc., etc.) shows up here, our motley crew of rationalist
academics are singularly ineffective in dealing with them. They circle
around, bleating pleas for civility like sheep as a wolf cuts one of them
loose from the crowd and devours it.

The same thing which destroyed Forum could destroy this newsgroup. Many of
us seem to want to focus on the aesthetics of speech -- if it's ugly, it's
not appropriate. But free speech has an instrumental value as well, and it
is this value which typically carries the day in the broader democratic
public whose dynamic so many of us on this forum don't seem to understand
well at all. If you establish an ethic that all views are welcome as long
as they are couched in "civilized" terms, you cannot blame a Pellionisz
when he takes you up on your offer. In the end, failing a vigorous, even
scatalogical public repudiation of his message by a large portion of the
group, we are reduced to waiting for him to make a Kindergarten-level
excrement reference in Hungarian before we feel we have sufficient grounds
to toss his ass out. In the meantime, he's had nearly a week and a half or
more to constantly attack the reputation of one of the more academically
oriented members of the group. You really call this civilized?

I see three choices for newsgroups like this in the future. The first is
to severely restrict membership to only a small circle of professional
scholars who can be trusted to adhere to the "code of conduct." The second
is to do exactly what most of us did this time around -- wring our hands
and whine about how unpleasant all of this is while one of our list
members is being savaged. The third is to engage the intruder with every
rhetorical tool available, even the unpleasant ones that make a loud noise
when they go off, to expose him and his beliefs for what they are.

This recent round of reflection convinces me of one thing. When the
repressions born of the Age of Reason took political power in this
century, they usually shot the intelligentsia right off the bat. Next time
around, the repressors of the Age of Irrationality won't touch the
thinking class because they'll realize how truly toothless it is.
Sam Stowe
+ - Re: Why not Stowewrit (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >,
DARREN E PURCELL > writes:

>Sam, as a good southerner, even if I hail froma  border state like
>Kentucky, you must understand if the Damn Yankees had allowed us to treat
>people like dirt, allowed us to develop like we wanted to, and actually
>let the states have rights, there would never have been a war. (To be
>properly read, all the words must be pronounced with at least one extra
>syllable) :-)
>
>(Please take the above as highly tongue in cheek and highly sarcastic)
>
>The sad truth of the matter, look on Netscape or the WWW and search for
>the Southern League. they actually believe in a Southern ethnicity and
>claim discrimination in many ways. I believe in southerness, but not
>their God-forsaken ramblings of thinly veiled hatred.
>
>Darren Purcell
>Department of Geography
>Florida State University
>
I agree strongly with your last statement. I wish I had a buck for every
time I've heard one of those guys say that the war wasn't about slavery,
as if states' rights were any nobler a cause, especially then but now as
well.
Sam Stowe
+ - Re: condemned to repeat it (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 12:41 PM 5/9/96 -0400, Sam Stowe, who is not known for writing for the
faint-hearted, wrote:

>I see three choices for newsgroups like this in the future. The first is
>to severely restrict membership to only a small circle of professional
>scholars who can be trusted to adhere to the "code of conduct." The second
>is to do exactly what most of us did this time around -- wring our hands
>and whine about how unpleasant all of this is while one of our list
>members is being savaged. The third is to engage the intruder with every
>rhetorical tool available, even the unpleasant ones that make a loud noise
>when they go off, to expose him and his beliefs for what they are.

I opt for the third choice.

Joe Szalai

"Freedom is poetry, taking liberties with words, breaking the rules of
normal speech, violating common sense. Freedom is violence."

Norman O. Brown (b. 1913), U.S. philosopher. Love's Body, ch. 15 (1966).
+ - Silly Valley. (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Haliho Sam and list members,

Sam Stowe wrote:

>But you usually have pretty good judgement in regard to these things. Give 'em
hell, son!

 =)

> It would be a shame for Bela
>Liptak's good work to be overwhelmed by the far right.

It would be a damn shame.

>I note from Liptak's reply to Eva Balogh that he has no intention of
>booting Sili.Valley from his list.

Shit!! He didn't make mention of Silly Valley, let alone state any intentions.

Here's Liptak Bela's response to me:

>Dear Jancsi,
>
>I think you are mistaken (or I am getting senile?), but I have not seen any
>extremist, anti-semitic material on HL for about a month. We did have one
>piece of hate mail from Szeged from a Mr. Odor about a month ago, but after
>explaining to him, that the HL is a work group dealing only with action
>calls, he did not disturb our orderly work again.
>
>I believe that this is our proper response: We should limit HL to action
>calls and direct all discussion and debate to HAL. If a call for action is of
>an extremist nature, it will receive no support and that is that.

With all due respect to Liptak Bela: Isn't this more or less sweeping this
under the rug?? If you sweep enough dust under the rug, it'll eventually show.

>I think of HL like a bird. It has its right wing and it has its left wing and
>they make its body complete, BUT its eyes, its brain and most important its
>heart are in the center.

More like the three headed monster in those Godzilla films.

>Its heart is a Hungarian heart, Hungarians are a
>tolerant, open minded people.

Surely, you jest. Look at Hungary's history; most of it was spent stabbing our
own folks in the back.
Just when it seems Hungary was bound for glory: WHAM!!! Something happened.

>Therefore, the "HL bird" is in no danger at all of being influenced by
extremists.

In your eyes, but there's ice forming on the wings of the "HL bird".

>Two more points:
>
>1) At the moment we should be spending every free moment we have on fighting
>S1644 and HR 3161. Anything else is a harmful distraction from our most
>important effort since our formation.

I guess that using the HL name as front for some grand scheme is not as
important, then. You've said that it takes only 10min per issue per day. The
HL-list isn't that bogged down to take of this issue, is it??

>2) What I have heard about "Forum" and "nemzet" is shocking. These people are
>doing more harm to Hungary's good name than our worst enemies.

What about the list?? The good name of the list??

> Even at the Holocaust memorial in New York, Congressman Lantos quoted these
hatemongers.
>If anybody knows how to stop them, by all means do what needs to be done. The
>only remedy I know is to ignore them.

Gee, the same tactic was used by those who wrote Hitler off as some looney.

>Censorship is below us.
>
>So let us go back to our urgent work.

I can't believe what I'm reading here, Liptak Ur. It's seems that this doesn't
phase you one bit. I don't get it.

Udv.,
Czifra Jancsi
john_czifra @ shi.com
+ - Re: Horn, Mrs. Kosa, and the MSZP (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >

Eva Durant > wrote:


[Safest is the investment in a secure, totelitarian state,
[with slave labour.

I can't think of a single totalitarian state which would be thought of by any
financial institution as a safe investment.  Quite apart from the political
implications of investing in states with oppressive regimes, the main reason
is that it is simply not worth the risk.  History provides us with a long list
of heads of State who have seized foreign assets for 'redistribution', and
they are invariably States of the type that you describe.  'Secure
Totalitarian State' is the perfect oxymoron, because 'slave labour' and
oppression invariably end in some form of revolt.  The consequences of such
uprisings are usually bad for anyone who has any kind of investment in that
country, thus such countries only attract funds from politically allied
States, or by offering huge returns on investment (which comes ultimately out
of the pockets of the people).  Perhaps you can point out some examples of
totalitarian states featuring slave labour in which you consider investment to
be safe, because you've stumped me!

[The success for new investment is not
[the best measure of progress and the general well-being
[of a society.

I am not sure how one measures the 'general well-being' of a society.  Do you
look at its crime rate?  Its per capita income?  How many people play chess in
the park on a Sunday?  I think 'progress' is more easily measured because it
can be quantified in terms of, for example, level of industrialisation, number
of cars per family etc.  It can be argued that as the majority of people
globally seek more possessions, comfort, and ease of life, that those nations
that have achieved higher levels in these terms can be said to have progressed
further than those nations that have not.  Do you think it a coincidence that
these nations are also the nations considered to be the best places in which
to invest?  That is why the top industrial nations get away with offering
relatively low interest rates: you can get a better rate elsewhere, but at
higher risk.  The point I made in my previous post (which you snipped!) was
that only by playing the game with the World Bank and IMF will nations like
Hungary get to be thought of as good places to invest.  Only when that
reputation is built will Hungary be able to compete globally.


[Cheap labour and gov.t tax-handouts to investors
[only work for a limited period. Than, when the grants/subsidies/
[handouts have disappeared to the directors and sharholders,
[the investment goes to Malaysia etc, where the conditions are
[more favourable for the time being... but even more goes to
[speculation anyway, without any relation to any free market
[theories.


Erm...  not sure where to start replying to this bit!  Cheap, well-trained and
motivated workforces are NEVER out of date and DON'T just work for a 'limited
period'!  The workforce is the key element of any industry, almost without
exception. It is only when labour becomes expensive or unreliable that
production switches elsewhere, and it is the job of government to ensure that
neither happens.  Modern governments realise they are in competition with
other nations in attracting global industries and will provide inducements to
attract business.  A multi-national car maker might be offered a five year tax
holiday as well as deferred or nil business rates in return for their building
a plant.  I think you are suggesting (please chastise me if I am wrong!) that
after five years the directors of Ford, or whoever, pack a few suitcases with
#20 notes and flee the country!  That's just not what happens, but perhaps you
have access to statistics regarding exploitation of government subsidies that
I do not have.

As for 'speculation', all I can say is that ALL business is speculation.  It
is simply investing money in the hope that a good return is forthcoming.  The
only variable is the amount of risk attached.



Budapest lover!
+ - Re: szekely? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Thu, 9 May 1996, Eva S. Balogh wrote:

> Bela Batkay:
>
> >But my understanding is
> >that the newer methods of typing are remarkably accurate, although they
> >cannot show whether, for example, Szekely descended from Romanians or
> >Romanians from, say, Hungarians.  But they can show genetic relationships
> >among various groups.
>
>         Something rings the bell that such genetic typing was done in
> Eastern Europe and the result is that Hungarians actually are not really
> different genetically from the surrounding people. I don't know whether that
> includes the Romanians or only the Slavs and the Germans. If I had to guess
> I would venture to say that there was relatively little intermarriage
> between Romanians and Hungarians because of religious differences. But that
> is only a guess on my part.
>
>         Eva Balogh
>
There were anthropological studies done in Hungary in the 30's, when the
question of what/who is/are Hungarian/s was in vougue. To their credit,
the better Hungarian thinkers rejected the concept of a Hungarian 'race',
but not that of a distinct Hungarian people. The following, excerpted (in
my translation) from Bartucz, Lajos, "Magyar ember, tipus, faj" [Magyar
man, type, race], in Szekfu, Gyula, ed., Mi a magyar [What is Magyar],
BP, Magyar Szemle Tarsasag, 1939, may be of interest:

"All it takes is to go out into a Hungarian village and to take a close
look at the people there to see that the various bodily marks (stature,
color of eyes, hair and skin, the shape of the skull, face, nose, mouth
and chin, the bearing) occur in individuals in the most haphazard variety
and that the short, medium and tall, the blue, gray, greenish, yellowish,
brown and black- eyed, the blond, brunette, the black and the red-haired,
the people with small, medium, big, snub, straight, acquiline, hawk etc.
noses, the narrow and the broad-faced, the low and the high-browed, and
so forth, all live side by side."

Bartucz makes an important distinction between race, which is a product
of natural mutation, selection, etc., and a people, which is historically
determined.  As to the frequency of the most important genotypes found in
Hungary, or rather among Hungarians (in 1939 already about 1/3 of the
Hungarians were living outside of the political boundaries of Hungary),
he provides the following list:

1. Turanid and 'Alfoeld' race (also called Turkic)............25-30%
2. East Europid race.............................................20%
3. Dinaric race..................................................20%
4. Alpine........................................................15%
5. Taurid...................................................... 4-5%
6. Mongolid.....................................................4-5%
7. Nordic.........................................................4%
8. Mediterranean, and other.......................................1%

It is, in B.'s opinion, the above distribution that is unique among the
Hungarian people; there is no Hungarian race per se.

Louis Elteto
+ - Re: szekely? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear Eva, et al:

At 09:32 AM 5/9/96 -0700, you wrote:

>Bela Batkay:
>
>>But my understanding is
>>that the newer methods of typing are remarkably accurate, although they
>>cannot show whether, for example, Szekely descended from Romanians or
>>Romanians from, say, Hungarians.  But they can show genetic relationships
>>among various groups.
>
>        Something rings the bell that such genetic typing was done in
>Eastern Europe and the result is that Hungarians actually are not really
>different genetically from the surrounding people. I don't know whether that
>includes the Romanians or only the Slavs and the Germans. If I had to guess
>I would venture to say that there was relatively little intermarriage
>between Romanians and Hungarians because of religious differences. But that
>is only a guess on my part.
>
>        Eva Balogh
>
Sorry, but having had to do quite a lot with genetics lately, dealing with
some foremost world experts on that subject, unless Stanford, UC Berkeley or
the University of Pennsylvania have done a genetic-DNA study in Hungary in
the last 3 or 4 years (which various sources say they haven't) there hasn't
been any thorough, _modern_ genetic study.  Yes, various anthropology
departments have looked at bones from ancient burials, and blood marrow for
blood types, but generally within the older standards, which compared with
the very new modern testing (which itself is still working out standards) is
pretty vague by comparison.

>From a historical, genealogical standpoint, probably there is indeed very
little difference between Slovaks, Hungarians, Romanians (at least in
Transylvania), Croatians, and Serbians, and to a lesser degree, Slovenians
and Bosnians.  However, there are probably some ancient latent differences
that still appear from time to time, and can be found in those families who
intermarried less with families "known" to have "outside blood."  They were
pretty good at knowing who was descended from what and whom for up to 16
generations, too, because of the "court rules" of whom got to meet with and
intermarry with emperors and kings, etc., which had a tendency to bounce
down the heirarchy.  The parish and imperial records are quite thorough for
virtually anyone who owned land, no matter how small a parcel, or whom had a
lifelong career in "civil service."  I have yet to find a single family that
doesn't really have pretty extensive genealogical and historical records
about it.

As one quick difference that is a "throwback" to more ancient times.  There
is still a much higher percentage of Hungarians with "B" and "AB" blood
types than of Romanians or most Slavic peoples.  The "B" blood type
originated in Asia and the highest levels of that type are in Eastern Asia.
(The incidence of blood types was being taught at least 25 years ago at the
University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Minnesota.)  I suspect
part of the reason we managed to have so many Hungarians with some
distinctive non-Aryan-European characteristics is that for centuries, most
of our neighbors, like today's Romanians really did _not_ want to intermarry
what they considered (and apparently many still do) alien, Asian invaders
who really don't belong in Europe in the first place.

After all, what is the root of all the stuff about discrimination against
Hungarians by Serbians, Romanians, Slovaks, etc. we keep reading about
today?  Hasn't anyone noticed these attitudes of the current generations
were learned from their parents and grandparents?  Darned few of the
contemporary scribes from any period of history seem ever to have much good
to say about Hungarians--and they almost always refer to us as "Asian
barbarians."  Does anyone besides me remember what Metternich had to say at
the Congress of Vienna in 1815?  If the people at the top didn't/don't like
us and didn't/don't want to intermarry with us, did you really think the
majority of people beneath them were/are going to behave any differently?

Oh yes we Hungarians brought in lots of Germans--mostly from Bavaria and the
Tyrol where they were already a "mixed" race anyway because of previous
incursions of the peoples who had made empires centered on the Danube basin.
We got the population excess from areas the Germanics weren't terribly
thrilled with anyway.  Then how many of these families even when they
settled in Hungary chose to intermarry with "their own kind" as much as
possible as long as possible?  According to parish records, there wasn't
much intermarriage for centuries at times.  In my own family in 6 to 8
generations of Hungarian families, I've found only 2 persons, so far with
German last names.  I was quite surprised; it wasn't what I expected.

The human race all over the world was and still is mistrustful of
"strangers" and considered for the wellbeing of children who marry--and much
prefer them to marry the familiar for their own safety--and the majority of
children still do indeed just that--marry the familiar.  There have been
some articles about that just this past year in several publications.

Consider one other thing a history professor reminded me long ago.  Until
the end of feudalism completely, and extensive national railroads, most
people physically couldn't move around very much.  The typical person didn't
marry anyone who lived more than about a 2-hour horseback ride away, until
only about 100 years ago, and even then mobility did not really "take off"
until after the "agricultural revolution"--and huge crop increases freeing
up more than 50% of first world nations' populations for urban industry
until about the time of World War II.

Thus, human history shows our "selection" has been a long way from "random"
for a long, long time...

P.S.--about 10 years ago, my Austrian-German, Austrian-Swiss, and Celtic
husband who was a fourth generation "Minnesotan" and I (Hungarian, Celtic,
French (partly Basque) and Native American) who was 2nd generation Hungarian
on one side and a "southern American" on the other were stunned to learn
twice in the same year we were cousins to one another--6th cousins on both
our mothers' sides, and about 10th or 12th on both our fathers' sides.
Considering I had actually tried not to marry a relative, it was quite a
shock.  My husband and I still remember the 90 year old mutual cousin on our
mothers sides telling us about that connection.  When he looked at our
faces, he laughed so hard he fell off the tree stump he was sitting upon.

Respectfully,

Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker
San Jose, CA
tel./fax: 408-223-6102
e-mail: 




N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA
+ - Izrael (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

A.Kornai wrote:

>A more recent example is Israel, which secured its place not by right (for the
>Arab nations never displayed the slightest sympathy for the idea of making
>restitution for the Holocaust out of their land) but by might, having whopped
>its neighbors often enough and thoroughly enough to make them understand they
>have no alternative but to recognize its right to existence.

I do not think that this is the case. What Israel did was destroying the
threatening arab armies around her and they did it brilliantly. However none
of the wars in the middle-east solve the problem for Israel, because it was
just the question of time when the arabs rebuild their forces. The strategic
situation for Israel is basicly the same as at the time of her establisment.
There is still a potential danger from her neighbours and there will be, despit
e
any peace process. Israel can win several battle but not the war (i.e they can
never eliminate the potential danger purely by force) and can lose only once.
What most arab whom I know thinks (actually I have never met any of them who
had different ideas) that the global strategic situation is in favour of them,
 now (and this now means the last 30-40 years plus the next couple of decades)
it is a tide but later on if they will be united (what I think never will
 happen) then the final victory will be theirs.

J.Zsargo
+ - Re: szekely? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >, "Eva S. Balogh"
> writes:

> Something rings the bell that such genetic typing was done in
>Eastern Europe and the result is that Hungarians actually are not really
>different genetically from the surrounding people. I don't know whether
that
>includes the Romanians or only the Slavs and the Germans. If I had to
guess
>I would venture to say that there was relatively little intermarriage
>between Romanians and Hungarians because of religious differences. But
that
>is only a guess on my part.
>
>        Eva Balogh

Is anyone on this list familiar with an Italian scientist named Luigi
Cavalli-Sforza? Genetics aren't my gig, so I don't know how significant
his work with establishing typologies among various ethnic groups are. I
don't even know if he got around to conducting any among Eastern
Europeans. Someone with some interest in the subject might want to look
for the following works by Cavalli-Sforza and see whether they have
material that might be pertinent to this discussion:

1) Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi, Alberto Piazza, Paolo Menozzi and Joanna
Mountain. 1988. "Reconstruction of Human Evolution: Bringing Together
Genetic, Archaeological and Linguistic Data," Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences 85: 6002-06.

2) Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi, Alberto Piazza and Paolo Menozzi. 1991. History
and Geography of Human Genes. Princeton.

Happy hunting.
Sam Stowe
+ - Re: szekely? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Amos mentions a book done recently on genetic distribution among popula-
tion groups in East Europe.  I too now remember reading about the book,
but can't remember anything else except that I *think* it may have been
reviewed in the *New York Times* Book Review a year or so ago.

Anybody?

Udv.,
Be'la
+ - About our crusaders (S.Stowe,etc). (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear Listmembers,

I was not intended to contribute to the debate about HL,extremists,etc (alias
cenzorship or not), but it seems to me this debate will never end. So, let me
tell what I think after reading Rona-Tas's very nice post.

I think there is one misinterpretation of the 'PgDn' option in the post and
in the debate afterward. What happened on the forum (as far as I understood
because at that time I did not read it) is just the opposite of 'PgDn' option,
i.e everybody tried to argue with the 'intruders' and soon or later took their
debating style. And if you did not notice up to now this is what S.Stowe and
his followers suggesting to us. Whenever an 'intruder' shows up everybody
should joint together (regardless their relation in other debates) and speak
out him/her. This will not work on this NG as it did not on Forum.

Beside I cannot imagine how can you speak out of the list someone who does
not coperate. What if he/she just ignore your post even if it is overhelmed
with four letter words. In this case such a 'crusader' effort turns out to
be the situation of a dog on chain. You just bark but cannot bite, and let the
intruder playing innocent victim.

So I think there is no third choice like:

>The third is to engage the intruder with every
>rhetorical tool available, even the unpleasant ones that make a loud noise
>when they go off, to expose him and his beliefs for what they are.

J.Zsargo

AGYKONTROLL ALLAT AUTO AZSIA BUDAPEST CODER DOSZ FELVIDEK FILM FILOZOFIA FORUM GURU HANG HIPHOP HIRDETES HIRMONDO HIXDVD HUDOM HUNGARY JATEK KEP KONYHA KONYV KORNYESZ KUKKER KULTURA LINUX MAGELLAN MAHAL MOBIL MOKA MOZAIK NARANCS NARANCS1 NY NYELV OTTHON OTTHONKA PARA RANDI REJTVENY SCM SPORT SZABAD SZALON TANC TIPP TUDOMANY UK UTAZAS UTLEVEL VITA WEBMESTER WINDOWS