Hollosi Information eXchange /HIX/
Copyright (C) HIX
Új cikk beküldése (a cikk tartalma az író felelőssége)
Megrendelés Lemondás
1 Re: Hungarian and Sumerian? (mind)  13 sor     (cikkei)
2 Re: R.O.M.A. (mind)  18 sor     (cikkei)
3 Re: R.O.M.A. (mind)  30 sor     (cikkei)
4 BBS, Internet, Fidonet In Budapest? (mind)  8 sor     (cikkei)
5 Re: Hungarian and Sumerian? (mind)  6 sor     (cikkei)
6 Re: Akkor most egy ebed utanra (was: Re: Hungarian and (mind)  12 sor     (cikkei)
7 Re: R.O.M.A. (mind)  191 sor     (cikkei)
8 Re: Looking for kin fold in Hungary (mind)  10 sor     (cikkei)
9 Re: babe, banben ( was: Re: Hungarian and Sumerian? (mind)  14 sor     (cikkei)
10 Magyar (mind)  37 sor     (cikkei)
11 Re: Magyar (mind)  41 sor     (cikkei)
12 Bathory csalad ( elotte: Re: Hungarian and Sumerian? (mind)  58 sor     (cikkei)
13 Re:Nestor & Vlachs I (mind)  149 sor     (cikkei)
14 Want to locat any reletives still residing in Hungary (mind)  97 sor     (cikkei)
15 Re:Nestor & Vlachs II (mind)  158 sor     (cikkei)
16 newest hungarian-faq, plusz HUNGROUPS on HIX (mind)  20 sor     (cikkei)
17 Re:Nestor & Vlachs III (mind)  163 sor     (cikkei)
18 Re: BBS, Internet, Fidonet In Budapest? (mind)  14 sor     (cikkei)

+ - Re: Hungarian and Sumerian? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

CLARY Olivier ) wrote:

: Nem 17. ez a század? :-)
: 1610... igen, például Balassi is eléggé érthető ma is mindenkinek, ez kb.
: 400 év. De 100 évvel korábbi, 1500 körüli szöveg sokkal nehezebben olvasható.
: Állítólag angolul is ez a határ.

E'n nem emle'kszem a pontos da'tumra e's ne'vre, de azthiszem hogy valami 
halotti besze'd a legido"sebb irott magyar szo:veg -- igaz hogy nem ko:nnyu:
olvasni  { mik vogmuk por e's chomu vogmuk } de aze'rt hasonlit 
valamelyest a mostani magyarra.   E'n olvastam middle e's old english-t
-- a middle english egy kicsit me'g hasonlitott a modern englishre, the 
az old english olyan volt mint egy ma'sik nyelv.
+ - Re: R.O.M.A. (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >,
>As for the infantile scribblings of your one whoar fan club, the best way
>to describe her willingness to be tickled by anything that makes Romanians
>look bad is an old hungarian saying, describing the laughter of the imbecile:
>'Rohog mint egy fa kutya' !

What's the matter, Hermes?  Can dish it out but can't take it?
Compared to you and your pals' gutter language used as a substitute for
arguments, Wally's language indeed had an element of poetry, though
perhaps in a dark sense.  You know, the way black humor relates to real
humor.  (Though I must say that he couldn't hold candle to Dragon Fly.  ;-)

You know what is obviously missing from Romanians?  A sense of
selfdeprecating humor.  You guys just think yourself too damn important;
a perfect setup for leg pulling contest.  Your legs, that is. 

+ - Re: R.O.M.A. (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On 23 Jun 1995  wrote:

> >look bad is an old hungarian saying, describing the laughter of the imbecile
> >'Rohog mint egy fa kutya' !
> What's the matter, Hermes?  Can dish it out but can't take it?

Every time I am trying to be a truth loving man, they spew acusations
upon my posting !

> You know what is obviously missing from Romanians?  A sense of
> selfdeprecating humor.  

There is plenty of that, alas you are like a blind man wondering
where is the sunrise  [;=) 

> You guys just think yourself too damn important;

Very perceptive ;=(  In your cursory, even slothy examination of reality,
you are doomed to fail to grasp the essential.  We are important ! 
We talk to God ! And behold, he even talks back.

                                  |    |     |
                                 )_)  )_)   )__)
          m. cristian     ---\  Hic  et  ubique   /---------
                       ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+ - BBS, Internet, Fidonet In Budapest? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

If someone could provide me this information, I would be greatful.

I'm looking for a BBS with Fidonet access, or an Internet Provider in 
Budapest, such that the user has at least e-mail capabilities.

thank you

+ - Re: Hungarian and Sumerian? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article > T. Kocsis > writes

Yes, this one was a little weak... :-)         -- Olivier
+ - Re: Akkor most egy ebed utanra (was: Re: Hungarian and (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article > T. Kocsis > writes
>(részlet Zvonanich Mihály, Sárvár helység prédikátorának vallomásából)

Ott nem csinálnak nagy turistacélpontot a Dracula dolgok példájára? :-)

Ez a Báthory család ugyanaz, mint akik olyan szép templomot építtettek
Nyírbátorban? Láttam tavaly és volt némi magyarázat, hogy milyen szerepük
volt a magyar történelemben és mikor, de már alig emlékszem rá, mesélnél
egy picit erről?

-- Üdv: Olivier
+ - Re: R.O.M.A. (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

: In article >,
: >
: >As for the infantile scribblings of your one whoar fan club, the best way
: >to describe her willingness to be tickled by anything that makes Romanians
: >look bad is an old hungarian saying, describing the laughter of the imbecile
: >'Rohog mint egy fa kutya' !
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

: What's the matter, Hermes?  Can dish it out but can't take it?
: Compared to you and your pals' gutter language used as a substitute for
: arguments, Wally's language indeed had an element of poetry, though
: perhaps in a dark sense.  You know, the way black humor relates to real
: humor.  (Though I must say that he couldn't hold candle to Dragon Fly.  ;-)

: You know what is obviously missing from Romanians?  A sense of
: selfdeprecating humor.  You guys just think yourself too damn important;
: a perfect setup for leg pulling contest.  Your legs, that is. 

: Joe

Subject: R.O.M.A.
On June 19/95, ) m cristian wrote:
> I feel guilty . . .

You never feel anything about anything; this is amply demonstrated by your
"ambush mockery" posting that are low on substantial information and high on
insults, mockery, vulgarity . . . 

> . . . it must be Romania that has done you in.

What fraudulent chutzpah! You are the state. You are the nation. You are
nothing more than Mark Cristian, and nothing less. You are all alone with this
opinion. Of course, opinions are like assholes -- everyone has one.

> A sad day . . .

For you perhaps.

> . . . to see a 'poet' having to stretch the limits of the English language.

It is elemental for poets to stretch the limits of any language -- this is one
way new words are minted, new phrases coined, new aphorims printed. 

> . . . in the cut and paste manner . . . 

It is how collage is produced, the conbining of new and interesting elements
to amuse, delight and enlighten.

> . . . of a Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

Good metaphor Mark. (Your intent was derogatory no doubt -- it is elemental to
your character.) Nevertheless, it is one method of many possibilities. An
artist utilizes whatever method is most appropriate to accomplish the task at
hand. In this singular instance it was to disturb the mountain of merde that
is your impertinent impersonality. Here is another way of putting the method:


Here's another one from the Air Farce of the Peoples Republic of Poetry. It's
the one I use when I want to make the Magyars look bad, after all they have
their own equivalent of CodreAnus:

zsarol zsarol zsarol zsarol zsarol zsarol <ZSARNOKI
                                    RAKOSI RAKOSI RAKOSI RAKOSI
zsarol zsarol zsarol zsarol zsarol zsarol <ZSARNOKI

> You exhibit the manic ravings . . .

It is a necessary condition for artists, poets, & such -- it breaks down the
confines of convention. You would be a lot healthier & less cynical if you let
it happen to yourself Mark.

> . . . of the intellectually challenged apprentice . . .

We are all apprentices Mark, every one of us. Who can claim not to be? It is
our challenge, intellectual, creative, whatever.

> . . . that is trying to pass himself as a master craftsman!

I work on it -- haven't accomplished it yet, if ever. Anyway, here's what Dr
Alec Lucas wrote in the Introduction to my first book of poetry, Walking On
The Greenhouse Roof,  published by Delta Canada in Montreal, 1969. Dr Alec
Lucas was chief of the English Literature Department of McGill University.
Here's what he wrote: "He writes with gusto and sincerity. His poems are
characterized by an intensity that may owe something to the neo-remanticism of
the age, but that owe most, directly to Keeler's own experiences in life.
Gusto and intensity do not of course make art, but when they are combined, as
in his poetry, with an unusual gift for creating images the results are
striking. Even if the form breaks, the verse has a power that cannot be
denied. It leaves the impression that the passionate involvement of the poet
is at fault and not an inability to polish his lines. It is a "fortunate flaw"
that manifests the strength of the poet's imagination, chafing as it does at
the restraints placed upon it by the needs of form. Keeler's is no tame talent
to be shackled without a struggle."

Jeez, I'm falling love with myself again.

Anyway, Mark, don't set yourself up as any kind of literary critic, because we
all know you are not. It is quite apparent from your posting that you are not,
and if you want to make a thread of this, I'll wipe my feet all over your
inadequacy on this score. I don't have humble opinions here. 

> I regret . . . 

Don't waste your time.

> if you have trouble . . . 

No trouble, after all, I'm not a Gypsy living in Romania.

> reconciling the fragile, make believe house of cards world that you built to
> escape the realities of a world in which you are clearly unfit to compete.

I have no economic concerns in my life, so I did quite well competition-wise
on that score. I take no money from the state. Indeed, unlike most artists,
writers, poets and culturati in Canada, I never applied for any state funding
for my artistic endevours. I like it that way -- I am grateful to no one.

Interestingly, I was good enough to go in and out of the Eastern Bloc nations
several times smuggling samizdat, tamizdat, magnetizdat, all manner of stuff,
meeting with dissidents and activists. I was arrested a couple times -- no big
deal. I was an ethnic Canadian so what could they really do to me. Ceausescu's
Romania was a tough case for me. I was scared -- not of Gypsies, but of the
Securitate. I had some run ins with them -- always unpleasant and threatening.
I can vouch that most Canadian-born citizens here are largely niaive about the
'realities of the world' as you put it. Relative to the rest of the world and
relative to history, Canadians have been living in paradise, whether that be a
fool's paradise or not, they are living it day by day. 

It was no make believe world crossing borders of the old commie countries
doing what I was doing. It was an adventure to be sure. It was more also.

> As for the infantile scribblings of your one-whoar fan club . . .

This is a rather infantile comment of your own Mark. Actually, I received a
lot of favourable e-mail for my postings, so . . .  

> . . . the best way to describe her willingness . . . 

Copy-cat. Just because I begin to change gender-pronouns doesn't mean you have
to follow. Where's your creative wit?

> . . . to be tickled by anything that makes Romanians look bad . . .

Nobody can make Romanians look bad except Romanians themselves. If you and
others didn't like my postings about the Roma, tough tubes. I call it like it
is. You do the very same. If it is a big laughing matter for a considerable
number of Romanians in SCR to post mocking humour about another nation,
another ethnicity (ie. Roma) then surely I can post the same  sort of thing
using the Romanians as my subject. It's all the same. If you don't like it,
then look in the mirror and understand that others (Roma) may not like it.

> . . . is an old hungarian saying, describing the laughter of the embecile: >
'Rohog mint egy fa kutya'!

Well, I seem to recall you guffawing like a hyena at a refrigerator-fart joke
recently. I heard adolescents laughing at the same stuff. 

See ya square Markus Malarious, Dorkus Delerious!

Wally Keeler					Poetry
Creative Intelligence Agency			is
Peoples Republic of Poetry			Poetency
+ - Re: Looking for kin fold in Hungary (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article > Oliver Tershansy, 
>The speeling of the last name was changed to Tershansy. Don't know
>the original spelling.

I think it was Tersa'nszki (Tersánszki) like the name of
the Hungarian writer, Tersa'nszki Jo^zsi Jeno" (Tersánszki
Józsi Jenő)

+ - Re: babe, banben ( was: Re: Hungarian and Sumerian? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article > T. Kocsis > writes
>  "mert ő különben be nem járt az asszony házában,"
>A TIPP-en írtál a -ba, -be ragok -ban, -ben helyén való használatról.
>Íme itt egy példa a fordítottjára. Illetvbe a jó ég tudja. Lehet,
>hogy a 'be' jelentése itt: 'bent'.

Az is lehet, hogy akkoriban, vagy a helyi beszédben létezett olyasmi, hogy
"bejár valahol".
A TIPP-féle vitáról: (ha már itt ékezetek is vannak) szerintem fővárosi
jelenség, hogy mássalhangzó előtt nem mondják úgy, hogy ban, hanem úgy,
hogy bă (latin-1 nazális a, nem a latin-2 román ă): mindjárt a francia
nyelv útjára indul a magyar a szóvégekkel :-) (azzal is: mindjár')
-- Olivier
+ - Magyar (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >,
Nikolaj Nielsen  > wrote:
>  The Hungarian language's uniqueness is derived from its non-Indo 
>European roots.  For over a thousand years the language has evolved, but 
>how has it survived in such an lingual-isolationist environment?  Most 
>languages in Europe are "genetically rooted" (with the exception of 
>Finnish, Basque and some other minor languages).  I assume that its the 
>Hungarian nature to preserve their language through cultural traditions, 
>which I believe are not flourishing (at least when I was there) except to 
>appease tourists.  But now, with the advent of English computer jargon 
>etc., the Hungarian language is beginning to subsume more foreign lexicon 
>in ways not unlike the German influence during the Austro-Hungarian 
>empire.  All languages change continously, but what kind of impact does 
>Indo-European languages have on an isolated non-Indo E. language such as 
>Hungarian, especially since Hungary has ostensibly opened up?  I'm 
>constructing an analytical paper on Hungarian and how political and 
>social issues are affecting the language.  Any response would be well 
>Koszonom,  Nikolaj Nielsen

I am a Japanese speaker who is studying Magyar for personal interest.
I heard that Japanese is loosely related to Finnish and Hugarian. 
I have looked at a few Hungarian words but so far I haven't been
able to see any similarity. Is this claim a total false one? Does
anyone know any good examples to prove the connection? As far as 
the intonation of the two languages are concerned, Magyar does
resemble Japanese. It's really flat and monotonical without much
stress. So Japanese is not for shouting or swearing.

Any comment?

Jun Miyamoto
Dept. of Nuclear Engineering
U of Michigan
+ - Re: Magyar (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article > Jun Miyamoto,
>It's really flat and monotonical without much
>stress. So Japanese is not for shouting or swearing.
>Any comment?

I've heard the same for French. I was watching
an interview on CNN with Sophie Marceau (?) who
made a historical Hollywood movie overthere and
she exactly said this, that if someone wants to
emphasize something in French has to press those
words heavily  and she loves English because of
its plasticity for that purpose.  

The flatness of Hungarian is true especially the
flatness of the 'high Hungarian' Budapest accent
which I believe the ugliest of all Hungarian ac-
cents. The reason behind (my privat explanation)
is that at the beginning of this century our capital
would have been  hardly called Hungarian because
large portions of German lived there. Actually
more German newspeapers were published than Hun-
garians and their ciculation were bigger. Then came
the almost 1 milion of Jewish immigration from
Galicia and their Yiddish (German accent) did not
help the language especialy because they fast
obtained monopoly in  publication of newspapers
and monopoly of *newswriting*. The majority
of newswriter were Jewish.

Did not help that Hungarians are not proud of
their accents. The accents from the country are
considered 'peasant accents' by the intelligentsia
of the capital.

If you go to the country the people speak slower
and sing,  intonate stronger and press the words
more inequally. 

+ - Bathory csalad ( elotte: Re: Hungarian and Sumerian? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article > CLARY Olivier,
>Ez a Báthory család ugyanaz, mint akik olyan szép templomot építtettek
>Nyírbátorban? Láttam tavaly és volt némi magyarázat, hogy milyen szerepük
>volt a magyar történelemben és mikor, de már alig emlékszem rá, mesélnél
>egy picit erről?

A családot Salamon király kora óta (XI. sz.)tartják számon, az ő
uralkodása alatt említenek a krónikák először meg egy Báthor
Opos nevü, bajvívásokban jeleskedő  vitézt.

Politikai működésüket a történetírás az 1310-es évek óta,
Károly Róbert uralkodása óta követi.

Mátyás alatt már a hatalmasok közé tartoztak, lásd Bonfini
magyar történetét.

1526-ban több Báthory is viselt magas méltóságot, példá-
ul maga az ispán, István. Azon az iraton pedig, amelyen fel-
sorolják, hogy Habsburg Ferdinánd királlyá választása ér-
dekében kikhez kell levelet intézni, három Báthori szerepel.
Egyetlen famíliából sem tartottak számon akkor a legbefo-
lyásosabbak között ennyi családtagot.

A XV. sz. idejére a család már két ágra szakadt, a Szatmár
megyei Ecsed után az ecsedi Báthoriak, és a Kraszna me-
gyei Somlyó után a somlyói  Báthoriak. Az ecsediek a há-
rom részre szakadt ország nyugati felében, a Habsburgok
uralkodása alatt viseltek magas méltóságokat, a somlyó-
iak Erdélyben a fejedelmi székig jutottak.

Báthory Erzsébet szüleiben egyesült a két ág. Anyja Anna
volt az, aki az első magyar protestáns zsinatot, a Szatmár
megyei Erdődön összehívta.  Egyházszervező szerepében
egyedül nő a magyar történelemben.  Erzsébet Apja György
nem volt jelentős személyiség.
Báthory Anna fivére, somlyai Báthory István 1571-ben er-
délyi fejedelem, majd később legyel király lett. Az ő fia
ecsedi Báthory István 1586-ban országbírói kinevezést ka-
pott, erről azonban 1605-ben lemondott, es ecsedi várába
visszavonulva a tudományoknak és művészeteknek élt. Lelki
önvallomásnak is beillő imádságaival irodalmi színvonalú
alkotásokat hozott létre.

A Báthoryak lököttebb tagjai között nem állt egyedül
Báthory Erzsébet. Egyik nagynénje, Klára egy íródeákba
lett szerelmes, akivel meggyilkoltatta izületi bántalmak
miatt ágyhoz szegezett férjét, majd hozzáment feleségül.
Báthory Gábor fejedelemnek , aki dilettánsként szeszélyes-
kedett Erdélyben , nőügyeit a fél ország leste lélegzetvisz-
szafolytva. Zsigmond fejedelem 1588-tól uralkodott Er-
délyben, politikai gyilkosságai miatt vált hírhedtté.

forrás: A csejtei várúrnő, Báthory Erzsébet

A könyv itt megáll a család történetének leírásaval.

+ - Re:Nestor & Vlachs I (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Jeliko writes:

>[...] It is also fairly evident from the text that
>for dates prior to 943, it is following Byzantine
>texts (or their Slavic translations)

As the editors have clearly stated, pre-943 events,
their chronology, and the name of the people involved
in these events were borrowed, from Byzantine sources.

          For example, the Chronicle of Georgius
          Hamartolus is specifically referred to as a
          source in the discussion of the various alien
          races (page 57): "Georgius says in his
          Chronicle [...]"

I think it is safely to assume that Nestor learned
about Vlakhs and their whereabouts from these Greek
sources. I am not aware of any Byzantine chronicler
that referring to the Franks used the name Vlakhs. At
the same time, starting with the 8th century, numerous
Byzantine documents have used the name Vlakhs for the
romance-speaking shepherds of the Balkans, that is, for
the ancestors of the Romanians, Aromanians, Istro-
Romanians, and Megleno-Romanians.

Therefore, the fact that Nestor's primary source is
Byzantine strongly supports the assertion that his
Vlakhs are not the Franks but rather the ancient

This is one of the issues you have eluded in your
replay: Can you think of any Byzantine document that
referring to the Franks calls them Vlakhs? As a matter
of fact, can you quote ONE SINGLE document that
unmistakably uses Vlakhs for the Franks?

>there is a "combination" of areas in the Tales for
>later Hungarian and Bulgarian occupied territories of
>previous Slav areas. As far as the Byzantines were

Do you really suggest that is Hamartolus, or any other
pre-896 Byzantine chronicler, the "voice"  that
describes the areas where the Slaves had previously
settled as "where the Hungarian and Bulgarian lands NOW

The false underlying assumption here, a weakness I have
already pointed to in my previous post, is that the
geographical locations are copied literally from the
Byzantine chroniclers and, therefore, these
descriptions actually reflect late 9th century statal
boundaries. If necessary, I'll rephrase the reasoning
that proves this assumption is groundless and that the
late 11th century compiler of the Russian Chronicle,
Nestor, uses HIS OWN Present Tense in the above

>the Tales writer inserted the *Slavs* into Hamartolus'
>text between "Illyria" and "Lychnitis and Adriaca".
>then following the text "and territory to the north
>extending as far as the Pontus and including the
>Danube, the Dniester, and the Carpathian Mountains,
>which are called Hungarian, and thence even to the
>Dnieper" (page 52) Thus this area clearly does not
>refer only to the lower reaches of the Danube.

Well, it describes 1/3 from the known biblical Earth.
However, in my opinion, of relevance is the fact that
it is further strengthened the assertion that the
comment on the alternative name of the Carpathians
belongs to Nestor and not to Hamartolus.

Nestor uses historical facts from Hamartolus (e.g., "as
is written in the Greek chronicle" or "Georgius says in
his Chronicle"), but for the geographical location of
these events he uses late 11th century toponymy (e.g.
"which are called Hungarian" or "where the Hungarian
and Bulgarian lands now lie", and even more "from that
time this territory was called Hungarian")

>[I am told that in this same page the translations
>list *current* names for the French while the original
>does not,

Actually, it was you who claimed that earlier
translators were puzzled because the Vlakhs were
mentioned as living next to the land of the English
and, therefore, someone replaced "the Vlakhs" with "the
French" but omitted to use the same translation for the
rest of the events that involving the Vlakhs.

>On the same page is the text "Over a long period the
>Slavs settled beside the Danube, where the Hungarian
>and Bulgarian lands now lie." All the extant records
>indicate that this was not only on lower Danube,

At that time, when the Russian Chronicle was written,
the boundary between the Hungarians and Bulgarians was
along the lower Danube. The above description pertains
not to the 9th but to the 12th century statal

>but from the borders of Charlemagne's domain to the
>lower reaches of the Danube,

At the time when the Russian Chronicle was written
(i.e., NOW in the previous quote) Charlemagne was dead
for almost 300 yr.

>The Bulgarians ruled Transylvania

Although Krum ruled at least over the southern part of
Transylvania, Simeon I had to give up the land north of
the Danube and from that time on, Nestor's epoch
included, lower Danube was the northern boundary of

>The Tales are clear in discussing for example the
>Czechs for this area who have never been on the lower

The "Tale" mentions the Danubian Slavs (i.e., not the
Czechs or Moravians)as suffering violence from the
Vlakhs. Also, the "Tale" indicates that the Slavs
(again, not the Czechs or Moravians) had settled there
first, but the Vlakhs had seized the territory (also,
see below the comments on Nestor's clear distinction
between Danubian Slavs, Moravians, and Czechs)

>Please note that there is no mention in any of these
>sources of Vlachs for these early days.

Ooooops! But the Franks were present, right? How were
they called? Is there any document that calls them

In Byzantine documents from the epoch, Bulgarians are
named "Moesians" or "Vlachs". This is considered as an
indication that there must have been a considerable
number of Vlachs living among Bulgarians, a fact that
rises a very interesting possibility: Had Krum's
Bulgarians once ruled over Transylvania, it follows
that the Vlakhs ....:-)

to be continued

Liviu Iordache
+ - Want to locat any reletives still residing in Hungary (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)


Albert Tershansy original spelling:  Bala Trsztyanszky
Home town: Kegzthelyen on "Main St." was still standing
 as of three years ago

They immigrated to US in 1908.

Grandmother: maiden name:  Julia Kazy
Her father was a Head Master at a school for boys
in a town that is now part of Romania
Aunt does not recall the actual name of the town but that
 translated into Eglish it meant:"Body of Water"

Last know relative still in Hungary was:
Lajos Trsztyanszky  1825-1899

Thank for your help.

Oliver S. Tershansy
Executive Director
"The Finest Gift - Your Time"
43 State Street
Lawrenceville, Pennsylvania
Phone, Fax, Modem: (717) 827-3402

---------------Original Message---------------
 The original spelling may have been Tersanszy or Tersanszky.

 Zoli  (note my old full address @bcuxs2 is retired)
"For my assured failures and derelictions, I ask pardon beforehand 
of my
betters and my equals in my calling." - Rudyard Kipling

On 22 Jun 1995, Oliver Tershansy wrote:

> 	Looking for my "roots"/ Paternal grand parents both 
>  to US in late 1800's.
> Grandmothers' name was "Julia" and supposedly the daughter of 
> reigning "queen" at the time and was sent to US as an 
>  to the US. At least that is what I had been told.
> Grandmother met grandfather here in the US, married him and 
> somwhere in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. They later moved to Plant 
> Florida where they raised strawberries for a time.
> Both are now deceased.as well as my father.
> The speeling of the last name was changed to Tershansy. Don't 
> the original spelling. but a photo of a "Great great Uncle" use to
> hang in the hall way of the home ion Plant City, FL.
> Grandfater was supposedly smuck out of Hungary by friends after 
> had reportedly be insolent to a superior officer and under a death
> sentance. The infraction was that he had stepped on the toes of a 
> superior officer. I don't know if this was intentional or not.
> His full name was: Albert A. Tershansy.
> If you know of any information about either of them (agood or bad)
> I would like to hear from you,.
> Mailing Address:
> 	Oliver S. Tershansy
> 	Executive Director
> 	43 State Street
> 	Lawrenceville, Pennsylvania 16929-9759
> 		USA
> OR
> Send E-Mail to: 
> OR Post an article on this news group
> Phone, Fax, Modem: (717) 827-3402.

----------End of Original Message----------
+ - Re:Nestor & Vlachs II (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Jeliko writes:

>"The Magyars (note modernization of name!)

The original manuscript reads "The Ugri..." and
"...this territory was called Ugor'ska. Cross' initial
translation was incorrect because instead of "Ugri" he
used "Huns".  Dvornik  corrected the  mistake but his
translation "The Ugri (Magyars)..."was later on
simplified to "The Magyars..." Can you provide
evidence for a similar, although suspiciously
selective, Vlakhs-->French metamorphosis?

>passed by Kiev over the hill now called Hungarian, and
>on arriving at the Dnieper, they pitched camp. They
>were nomads like the Polovcians. Coming out of the
>east, they struggled across the great mountains
>(See previous quote where the mountains are already
>referred to as *Hungarian*)

Nestor simply meant to be very precise in his
geographical descriptions. He used the Byzantine
description of the lands of Iaphet as an opportunity to
stress the 12th century toponymy. The Carps had already
vanished sometime in the 4th or 5th centuries. However,
Hamartolus didn't know of any Hungarian Mountains
because in his epoch the Ugri (Magyars) still dwell on
the upper waters of Volga and Kamna rivers. Hence,
Nestor felt necessary to anticipate a bit and included
the Hungarian Mountains (12th century name for the
Carpathians) among Iaphet's biblical estates.

>and began to fight against the neighboring Vlakhs and
>Slavs. For the Slavs had settled there first, but the
>Vlakhs had seized the territory of the Slavs. The
>Magyars subsequently expelled the Vlakhs, took their
>land, and settled among the Slavs, whom they reduced
>to submission. From that time this territory was
>called Hungarian.
>covering a large area known to have been occupied by
>Slavs at that time, but it is not correct to restrict
>this area to the lower Danube,

In my previous post I specifically stressed your
misinterpretation of my statements. However, it is
obvious that  my message didn't get through. Let's make
another attempt:

For the area depicted above (p.62 in Cross'
translation) my guess was Transylvania, if the Nestor's
Vlakhs are Romanians (as all the scholars suspect), or
Moravia, if the Vlakhs are Jeliko's Franks. I have
pointed to the lower Danube as a possible location for
the area where the Vlakhs did violence to the Danubian
Slavs (p.53 not 62). This is why I agree with
Winnifrith (1987) that Nestor vaguely suggests a
northward movement for his Vlakhs, a fact that has made
the Romanian historians not very enthusiastic to cite

>it is clearly stated that the Vlakhs were "expelled"
>from the area and to where would they have been
>expelled if the Hungarians took Thrace and Macedonia

Nestor is very ambiguous when he stresses that the
Vlakhs were SUBSEQUENTLY expelled. Practically, there
is no way one can say if the Hungarian expedition in
Thrace took place before or after the Magyars expelled
the Vlakhs, whatever "expel" means in this context.

Formation of the Hungarian state was not part of
Nestor's main concerns and, for this reason, the brief
summary of its beginnings is certainly misleading. You
suggest that all the events described at page 62 fit
within a lousy 10 years time period (888-898) and that
the history of this short time period is presented as a
very rigorously ordered sequence of events. A short
analysis proves that your assumption is at least

If Nestor is taken literally, one should note the
multitude of events in which the Ugri are involved
between the years 888-898. In 889, driven by the
Pechenegs, they pitched camp at the Dnieper and lived
there until 892 when Arnulf, king of the East Franks,
hired their services in the fight against Sviatopluk,
the Moravian duke. However, only after the band sent to
Arnulf reported back two years later, carrying the good
news about the suitable new homeland, the Magyars
struggled en masse across the great mountains
(Carpathians), probably in 896.

The events which led to the permanent settlement of the
Hungarians in the Danube basin toward the end of the
9th century are particularly associated with the
relations between the Byzantine Empire and Bulgarians.
In 895 the Emperor Leo VI invited the nomadic Magyars
to enter in alliance with the empire and invaded
Bulgarian territory [Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De
Administrando Imperio]
          Note that the Hungarians were then situated
          in the lowlands between the Carpathians and
          the lower Danube (Urbanski, 1968)

They accepted the offer and, after crossing the Danube
in Byzantine ships, attacked and defeated the
Bulgarians in several battles. Simeon, the Bulgarian
tsar who had invaded Byzantine territory in Macedonia
and Thrace, won over to his side the Pechenegs, who
were the eastern neighbors of the Hungarians. With
their aid, he inflicted a severe defeat on the Magyars,
who eventually abandoned their settlements on the lower
Danube and, in their retreat before the Pechenegs,
crossed the Carpathians at several points.

Thus, if the Tale is read literally, in only two years
(896-898) the Magyars fought against the Vlakhs and
Slavs, reduced the Slavs to submission, expelled the
Vlakhs, made war against the Greeks, Czechs, and
Moravians, and  grabbed a huge land area, extending
from Bohemia to Salonika. Sounds unbelievable,
especially because for a century following the conquest
of their new land the Hungarians remained pagans and
maintained a predominantly loose tribal organization.

According to your interpretation of Nestor's text, the
Magyars seized Thracian and Macedonian territory
sometime between 896 and 898. In reality the only
Magyar expedition in Thrace and Macedonia that somehow
fits within these time limits was the 895 war against
the Bulgarian tsar Simeon. However, in 895 the Magyars
fought the Bulgarians not the Greeks, they had not yet
entered the Carpathian basin, and they had not yet
expelled any Vlakhs. Actually, the Magyars never
literally "seized" Thrace and Macedonia. Only in the
10th century, marauding expeditions of Hungarian troops
repeatedly ravaged Byzantine territory, and in 958 they
were defeated by imperial troops in Thrace. However,
these events are post 898.

Also, let's add here that the attack against the
Moravians took place in 906 not between 896 and 898.

One can safely conclude that 898 is, according to
Nestor, just the year when the Magyars BEGAN to fight
against the Vlakhs and Slavs and that all the other
events, expelling of the Vlakhs, the reducing to
submission of the Slavs, and the marauding expeditions
against other people took place SUBSEQUENTLY (also, see
below my comments on the date of Methodius' designation
as Archbishop of Sirmium)

Furthermore, Nestor is generally vague about the order
of these events.

....to be continued...
Liviu Iordache
+ - newest hungarian-faq, plusz HUNGROUPS on HIX (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

I submitted the updated version to the autoposter, it should appear soon 
in the s.c.m and the *.answer groups, as well as in Usenet archives such as
or <ftp://mirrors.aol.com:/pub/rtfm/usenet/news.answers/hungarian-faq> 
(it will not get posted to hun.news). Notice that for those adorned with 
WWW-browsers the best place to look is the hypertext archive shown above - 
while the FAQ is not completely HTML-ized (yet), the converted version there 
should allow any readers to follow all the embedded URLs (so should Netscape 
from reading the news-post, too - but others don't recognize all types).

 Just afterwards I found out that since 30-May-95 the hun.* groups have 
been digested and archived on HIX in the HUNGROUPS collection, see eg.
<http://hix.mit.edu/hix/hixcore/senddoc/arch/>;. I don't want to re-submit 
yet another update for the sake of this late-breaking (to me anyways ;-() 
info, but thought some others may be interested to learn of this, too. 
Thanks to Barna Bozoki for bringing this matter to my attention!

 Zoli  (note my old full address @bcuxs2 is retired)
"For my assured failures and derelictions, I ask pardon beforehand of my
betters and my equals in my calling." - Rudyard Kipling
+ - Re:Nestor & Vlachs III (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Jeliko writes:

>(besides there is no directional information for the

I don't see how this lack of precision helps the Frank
case. Moreover, if one persists in a literally
interpretation of Nestor's text, no other historical
document records the expelling of the Franks from
Moravia between 896 and 898. Actually, a pre-898
expelling of the Franks is extremely improbable because
in 898 the Magyars are the allies of the Franks during
the Arnulf's expedition against the ruler of the Po
valley. Moreover, at the time of the Magyar arrival
Moravia was not under Frankish rule.

>"There was at that time
>but one Slavic race including the Slavs who settled
>along the Danube, and were subjugated by the Magyars,
>as well as the Moravians, the Czechs, the Lyakhs...."

The Slavic race included, according to Nestor, the
Danubian Slavs, the Moravians, the Czechs, the Lyakhs,
and the Polyanians (Russ). You suggest that the
Danubian Slavs were actually living not on the lower
Danube but in the central Danubian basin. One should
note that the Moravians where living in the same area.
If Nestor states that there was at that time but one
Slavic race why is he using two different names,
Danubian Slavs and Moravians, for the same people,
living in the same area? Moreover, why he ignores
completely the Slavs settled in the lower Danubian

>Further on page 63 "Prince Kotsel appointed
>Methodius Bishop of Pannonia..." Again not on the
>lower Danube!

This event is not directly related to the Vlakh issue
(more relevant is, I think, the fact that Nestor uses
interchangeably  the names Danubian Slavs and Danubian
Bulgarians) Anyhow, the event is incorrectly dated
(read Introduction: Chronology) and you misinterpret
its significance. I'll comment on this issue only
because it strengthens my assertion that Nestor
includes in this time period (888-898) events that
actually took place both before 888 and after 898 (see
above my comments on the dating of the Magyar
expedition in Thrace).

In 869-870 Methodius was consecrated Archbishop of
Sirmium. The decision to restore the ancient
Metropolitan See belonged to Pope Hadrian II. What
motivated Hadrian was the news that the Bulgarians, who
had accepted  the jurisdiction of Rome in 866, had now
returned to that of Byzantium. Thus, especially viewed
from Rome or Sirmium, the main target of this religious
operation was the lower Danubian people. Kocel (or
Kotsel) sent a special messenger to Rome requesting the
Pope to join Pannonia to the new diocese.

Methodius died in April 6, 884. Therefore, even if one
assumes that Kocel had the power to appoint bishops, at
the time indicated by Nestor (888-898) Methodius'
nomination was an impossibility. Not only that
Methodius was already dead but Kocel himself had
already lost his life in 876 in a battle against the
Croat prince Domagoj.

>where this "original"
>Slavic land is placed in the Tales is not what is
>currently Romania, but mainly Pannonia and the
>Carpathian basin.

Present-day Romania includes a big chunk of the
Carpathian basin. Sirmium, now Metrovica (or Srem in
modern Croatia), on the Save, some 37 mi from the
confluence of that river with the Danube, is at the
southernmost corner of Pannonia. During the Roman times
Sirmium was at the boundary between Pannonia Inferior
and Moesia Superior. Around 890 was at the boundary
between the Moravian and Bulgarian empires. Anyhow,
stressing that the "original" Slavic land was Illyricum
doesn't help the Frank case. Let's summarize Nestor's
information and keep in mind that his primary source is

          "Over a long period the Slavs settled beside
          the Danube, where the Hungarian and Bulgarian
          lands now lie. From among these Slavs parties
          scattered..."(p.52-53) and "For in that
          region is Illyricum [...]where the Slavs
          originally lived." (p.63)

It is known that in modern Croatia between the rivers
Drava and Sava and in the so-called Banat on the Danube
certain places (Vuka, Vrbas, Vucica) have borne Slavic
names from the 2nd century onwards. These occurrences
are probably related to a sporadic and isolated initial
Slavic penetration.  However, during the 5th century
and the beginning of the 6th, a new wave of Slavs
started to push toward the lower course of the Danube.
According to Byzantine historians they started to cross
the river after 517 and these Byzantine writers have
placed on record many impressions of numerous Slavic
incursions into the imperial territories during the
reign of the Emperor Justin (518-527).

It seems clear now, I hope, that what Nestor suggests
as the "original" Slavic land is just the area where
the 6th century penetration of the SOUTH Slavic branch
into Illyricum was recorded by the Byzantine

The geographical distribution of the oldest Slavic
toponyms in the Balkan Peninsula presents a picture of
the 6th century penetration of the Slavs. These
toponyms are to be found mainly in the region of the
rivers Timok and Morava, and in the territory of Nis-
Sofia. This means that these two regions constituted
the main gates of the Slavic infiltration into the
Byzantine territory (Georgiev, V., 1965, The Genesis of
the Balkan People, Slavonic Review, 285-297)

Therefore, the "original" land (present-day Croatia,
Banat, and northeast Bulgaria), where the Vlakhs
attacked the Danubian Slavs and did them violence, is
mainly on the lower Danube.

A small part of this area, Pannonian Croatia was under
Charlemagne's influence but there was no violent
encounter between Franks and Slavs because in 788 the
prince Vojnomir, delighted to escape the Avar danger
forever, recognized Frankish sovereignty. There was no
attack and no violence when the Franks took over the
Pannonian Croatia. Moreover it was not the Magyars but
the Bulgarians that "expelled" the Franks from this

Although the Franks continued to exercise for a while
their supremacy in Dalmatian Croatia,  from 803 onwards
the Bulgarians  ruled over a large part of Illyricum
including Macedonia, Pannonian Croatia, and the city of
Sirmium. Also, neither Croatia nor Moravia were under
Frankish rule when the Magyars arrive in the Carpathian

>For the year 899-902 "The Emperor Leo
>incited the Magyars against the Bulgarians, so that
>they attacked and subjugated the whole Bulgarian

As a matter of fact, this event took place BEFORE the
Magyars entered the Carpathian basin (see above or
check  Urbansky,A.B., 1968, Byzantium and the Danube
Frontier: A study of the relations between Byzantium,
Hungary, and the Balkans during the period of the
Comneni. Twayne Publishers, New York, pp.174)


Liviu Iordache
+ - Re: BBS, Internet, Fidonet In Budapest? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

TRG ) wrote:
: If someone could provide me this information, I would be greatful.

: I'm looking for a BBS with Fidonet access, or an Internet Provider in 
: Budapest, such that the user has at least e-mail capabilities.
Try this: Internet Hungary Ltd.
H-1027, Budapest, Csalogany u. 23-25

: thank you
: tonyG.