Hungarian
Prehistory Series
Publications
of the Hungarian Prehistory Research Group
and
the Department of Medieval World History, University of Szeged
(Editor-in-chief:
István Zimonyi)
László Balogh
The
Hungarians moved to their later homeland, the Carpathian basin at the end of
the ninth century. Prior to this period they lived in the western part of the
southern Russian steppe as vassals of the Khazar Kaghanate. The ethnic
environment of the Kaghanate had a great impact on the ethnogenesis of the
Hungarians as testified by the numerous Turkic and Iranian loan words as well
as the art, the military and the political structure of the Hungarians in the
period of the conquest. Therefore, from the point of view of Hungarian
prehistory, it is crucial to be familiar with the history of the nomadic
peoples, that is, with the "oriental background." The Hungarian
Prehistory Series, launched in 1990, aimed to publish source editions,
collected papers and monographs in connection with the history of the Eurasian
steppe. It includes historical, linguistical and archaeological studies. The
Department of Medieval World History (University of Szeged) has played an
active role in the publication of the series since 1994.
The
published volumes of the series until 2000 are the following:
Vol. 1. Őstörténet és nemzettudat 1919–1931.
[Prehistory and the National Consciousness.] Ed. Éva Kincses Nagy, Szeged 1991.
Vol. 2. Sándor,
Klára, A Bolognai Rovásemlék. [The
Runic Inscription of Bologna.] Szeged 1991.
Vol. 3. Szűcs,
Jenő, A magyar nemzeti tudat kialakulása.
[The Formation of Hungarian National Consciousness.] Ed. István Zimonyi, Szeged
1992.
Vol. 4. Rovásírás a Kárpát-medencében. [Runic
Scripts in the Carpathian Basin.] Ed. Klára Sándor, Szeged 1992.
Vol. 5.
Szádeczky-Kardoss, Samu, Az avar
történelem forrásai. [Sources of Avar History.] Vol. 1. Co-workers: Márta
Borsos, et al. Szeged 1992.
Vol. 6. Bóna,
István, et al., Hunok – Gepidák –
Langobardok. [Huns, Gepids and Lombards.] Szeged 1993.
Vol. 7. Vásáry,
István, A régi Belső-Ázsia története.
[A History of Early Inner-Asia.] Szeged 1993.
Vol. 8. Bálint,
Csanád, Kelet, a korai avarok és Bizánc
kapcsolatai. [The Relation between the East, the Early Avars and
Byzantium.] Szeged 1995.
Vol. 9.
Róna-Tas, András A magyarság korai története.
[The Early History of the Hungarians.] Szeged 1995.
Vol. 10.
Kmoskó, Mihály, Mohamedán írók a steppe
népeiről. Földrajzi irodalom. [Muslim Writers on the Peoples of the Steppe.
Geographical Literature.] Vol. I/1. Ed. István Zimonyi, Budapest 1997.
Vol. 11. Rédei,
Károly, Őstörténetünk kérdései. [The
Problems of Our Prehistory.] Budapest 1998.
Vol. 12.
Szádeczky-Kardoss, Samu, Az avar
történelem forrásai 557-től 806-ig. [Sources of the Avar History.]
Co-author: Csaba Farkas, co-workers: Márta Borsos, et al. Budapest 1998.
Vol. 13.
Kmoskó, Mihály, Mohamedán írók a steppe
népeiről. Földrajzi irodalom. [Muslim Writers on the Peoples of the Steppe.
Geographical Literature.] Vol. I/2. Ed. Zimonyi István. Budapest
2000.
Professor
Samu Szádeczky-Kardoss, an outstanding Hungarian classical scholar published
his work entitled Az avar történelem
forrásai[1] in the series. Its predecessor was a
publication, published in German, that collected extracts from the sources on
the European Avars.[2] Subsequently, Professor Szádeczky-Kardoss
began to publish the Hungarian translation of the sources, with abundant
commentaries, in chronological order. The first nine chapters of this work were
published in the Archaeologiai Értesítő
between 1978 and 1986. Due to the great interest in this work, it was reprinted
in the Hungarian Prehistory Series in
1992 as the first volume of a major undertaking, completed with two chapters.
However, with the completion of the second volume, the publisher faced a
problem since, by this time, the first volume was out of print. Therefore,
instead of a reprint edition of the first volume, the two parts were published
jointly.[3] The entire work covers the history of the
Avars from 557 to 806.[4] All the sources, from this period, on the
Avars can be found in Hungarian translation. The commentaries on the excerpts
meet all scholarly standards. The accuracy of the editor is exemplified by the
corrigenda attached to the volume after its publication. The corrigenda draws
the attention of the reader to 11 (!) misprints in the 300-page book. The use
of the book is facilitated by an index divided into two parts.
The interest in the Muslim sources for
Hungarian prehistory and that of the conquest grew at the end of the nineteenth
century. At that time a mostly bilingual book was published with the title A magyar honfoglalás kútfői[5] (MHK),
comprising Muslim texts translated and commented on by Géza Kuun. In the 1950s,
Károly Czeglédy re-translated some of these sources[6] and planned to compile a six-volume
chrestomathy of Hungarian prehistory. In this undertaking he took upon himself
the task of the editing Muslim authors. The series, however, has never been
completed. It was well-known that Mihály Kmoskó (1876–1931) had compiled a
prehistorical chrestomathy of Muslim sources on the Hungarians in the period of
the conquest that remained in manuscript form.[7] Due to his ideological position, its
publication was not possible in the political situation after 1945. Its recent
publication was carried out by István Zimonyi, the editor-in-chief of the
Hungarian Prehistory Series, who evaluated the translations from scholarly a
point of view and edited the volume that had disgracefully been left
unpublished.[8] Mihály Kmoskó considered it to be important
to keep the excerpts on the Hungarians in their broader context. Thus he
translated sources concerning the different peoples who had been in touch with
the Hungarians (Khazars, Volga Bulghars, Alans, Burtas, Moravians, Russians,
etc.) Finally, he extended his research to every ethnic groups of the Eurasian
steppe zone. The selection from the works of almost forty authors comprises a
chrestomathy over a thousand pages long. There are almost 6,000 notes added to
the texts. The only imperfection of the book is that – due to non-scholarly
reasons – it could not have been published earlier as, in the case of certain
sources, some of its results needed to be corrected. Since the death of Mihály
Kmoskó, several significant manuscript have been published that are important
for Hungarian prehistorical studies (Hudūd al-cĀlam,
al-Marvazī, Ibn Hayyān, etc.). The new results are always highlighted
in the notes by István Zimonyi. The work begins with an introduction to the
authors. It is followed by the excerpts. In the first volume the relevant
passages of the accounts of Ibn Hurdādhbih, Muslim ibn Abī
Muslim al Jarmī, Qudāma, Ibn Rusta[9] and Hārūn ibn Yahyā can be
found. The second volume comprises the texts of al-Istakhrī, Ibn Hauqal,
al-Muqaddasī, al-Macsūdī and al-Bakrī. The work
published half a century after the death of Mihály Kmoskó, proved to be abiding
and unique in terms of national scholarship.
Klára Sándor produced a critical
edition of the longest extant document of the Székely runic script, known as
the Runic inscription of Bologna, discovered by Count Luigi Ferdinando
Marsigli.[10] The count, a member of the Habsburg imperial
army, discovered a stick with Runic inscription in Gyergyószentmiklós (Now:
Gheorgheni, Romania), in 1690. He copied the inscriptions and accompanied it
with the alphabet of the Székely Runic script as well as with the Latin
translation of the texts. The book begins with a philological analysis of the
Runic inscription. In the first chapter the author introduces the source,
reconstructs its history and determines the date of its origin. On the basis of
a textual analysis, Klára Sándor identified several chronological layers. Most
probably, the first step was a Hungarian Runic calendar based on the Latin
alphabet. It might have been transformed into a Hungarian Runic script around
the thirteenth–fourteenth centuries. This inscription might have been copied
several times and once – in the second half of the fifteenth century –
Franciscan friars incorporated the feast of a new saint into the saints'
calendar. The next chapter comprises the description of the content of the text
and the detailed phonetic analysis of the identification of the Runic script.
The second part of the book lists all the Runic words of the inscription,
arranged into entries. The photocopies of the Runic texts can be found in the
appendix.[11] Various studies have been published on the
enumeration of the Székely Runic script and its historical background in recent
decades.[12] This is the first study, however, carrying
out a critical edition of the Székely Runic script that claims to meet modern
scholarly standards. The study and the critical edition of the entirety of the
authentic texts should yield a corpus that can be a basis for further academic
research. The Székely Runic script would be the key to the hitherto
underciphered Eastern European (Avar, Khazar, etc.) Runic scripts.
The Department of Altaistics, together
with the Hungarian Prehistory Research Group of the József Attila University[13] organized a workshop on the Runic scripts of
the Carpathian Basin on 26th March 1992. The proceedings of the
workshop were published in the same year in the Hungarian Prehistory Series.[14] The first article of the volume by András
Róna-Tas treats the Turkic origin of the Hungarian ír 'write' and betű
'letter' words. The author reckons both expressions to be Turkic loan words
dating from prior to the Hungarian conquest. Irén Juhász reported a Runic
script found on a large strap end that was discovered in a late Avar grave in
Szarvas (County Békés, Hungary). While János Harmatta published the
transcription of Avar Runic inscriptions. István Dienes reported an inscription
discovered in a grave from the period of the Hungarian conquest near Kalocsa
(County Bács-Kiskun, Hungary), and the transcription of the script was provided
by Gábor Vékony. He identified the language of the inscription as common
Turkic. Géza Ferenczi reviewed the Székely Runic inscription. Ferenc Kósa dealt
with the methodic quest of the Runic inscriptions, while Klára Sándor treated
the issues raised concerning the origins of the Székely Runic script.
Several outstanding Hungarian
orientalists have published volumes containing their collected studies.[15] The series continued this tradition by
publishing a selection of the articles of András Róna-Tas.[16] Here we mention only a few of the fifty
papers. The preface of the book, written by the author himself, surveys the
post-World War II historiography of Hungarian prehistorical studies.[17] Among the articles of the book the
evaluation report on István Fodor's PhD thesis can be found. In this report
András Róna-Tas not only presents his own ideas concerning Hungarian
prehistory, but also makes critical remarks on Fodor's theses upon the
migration of the Hungarians from the Eastern European forest-land to the steppe
zone.[18] Some papers of the volume study the Khazar
ethnonym and others investigate their language.[19] The author's conclusion from the point of view
of Hungarian prehistory is that the idea of common Turkic etymology of the
Khazar ethnonym was not valid. Thus he invalidated one of the major pieces of
evidence of purporting to prove the common Turkic origin of the Khazar
language. There are many Turkic loan words in Hungarian from the pre-conquest
period that conform to Chuvash criteria. Scholars, however, deemed the language
of the Khazars to be of common Turkic type. Therefore, they tried to place the
Khazar–Hungarian coexistence in a very short time framework since a
long-lasting impact would not be appropriate for explaining the huge proportion
of Chuvash-type loan words to be found in the Hungarian language as against the
common Turkic ones. The studies of András Róna-Tas showed that there is not an
adequate basis for identifying the language of the Khazars as common Turkic.
Thus, one can assume longer connection between Khazars and Hungarians. This can
basically alter ideas about the migration of the Hungarians before the
conquest. In his work entitled A magyar
népnév egy 1311-es volgai bolgár sírfeliraton,[20] the author showed that the self-designation
of the Hungarians – i.e. Magyars – could be related to a Hungarian group
settled in the Volga region. The history of this separate group of Hungarians
is particularly interesting not only from the point of view of the ethnogenesis
of those Hungarians who settled in the Carpathian basin but also in the light
of ethnic changes in the Volga region during the Mongol period.[21] The volume ends with the bibliography of
András Róna-Tas up to 1994, compiled by Éva Kincses Nagy. The book comprises
substantial studies of the author that should not to be overlooked by those
studying the Hungarian prehistory, particularly, in many cases it is difficult
to have access to them.
In his work, entitled Kelet, a korai avarok és Bizánc kapcsolatai,[22] Csanád Bálint published the enlarged and
corrected version of two of his former papers in German.[23] These articles are closely connected with
each other. The first paper treats the strap mountings connected to the steppe
culture and their parallels through the analysis of a grave in Üč Tepe
(Azerbaijan). He points out that the political–cultural influence of the
Byzantine Empire was not coterminous with its borders. Certain objects deriving
from Byzantine culture reached Europe, Africa, the Southern Russian Steppe, and
Iran. This requires a reconsideration of the ethnospecific nature of several
objects. While the first article discusses a particular object type, the other
provides a new approach towards the evaluation of the findings. The author is
right in his warning that from a methodological point of view it is hazardous
and reprehensible to draw conclusions on the basis of a group of archaeological
hoards (or even on a single finding). Such “conclusions” infiltrate into
historical studies as "results of archaeology" and in many cases
produce erroneous hypotheses strengthening one another. According to Csanád
Bálint, the main objective of archaeology is to provide a solid source basis
for further research through systematic study of the finds. The article of
János Harmatta on the inscription of a Sassanian seal-ring found in a grave in
Üč Tepe is in the appendix. The practical use of the volume is facilitated by
more than sixty photos, drawings and maps.
In the Spring of 1988 a conference was organized in Szeged and its
eleven contributors tried to analyze the impact of losing World War I and the
negative effects of the peace treaties on the scholars dealing with Hungarian
prehistory.[24] Through the peace treaties, Hungary lost two
thirds of its original territory. One third of the population became citizen of
surrounding foreign countries. The reaction of the scholars of the period
differed. István Fried studied the opinions on Hungarian–Slav relations. After
the war the Slav ethnic groups, formerly belonging to Hungary, established
their autonomous nation-states. Both among the Slavs and the Hungarians there
arose a need to reappraise their history in accordance with their changed situation.
The article of Árpád Berta on the development of the first prehistorical theory
of Gyula Németh can also be found in the volume.[25] The author, who edited the enlarged and
revised work of Gyula Németh (A
honfoglaló magyarság kialakulása),[26] provides an excellent summary of the ideas
on the prehistory of the Hungarians of the young turcologist. He points out
that these ideas need to be interpreted together with the prehistorical ideas
of noted contemporary orientalists (Ármin Vámbéry, Zoltán Gombocz, Bernát
Munkácsi, István Zichy and others). Finally, Zoltán Kordé provides a summary of
several studies on the ethnogenesis of the Székelys.[27]
The work of Károly Rédei, a leading professor of the Finno-Ugric
Department at the University of Vienna, dealing with the history of the
Hungarian language was published in the Prehistory Series.[28] The democratization process of the 1990s in
Hungary made possible the publication of the works of numerous emigrant
Hungarian historians. In addition to the high standard scholarly studies, many
amateur “historians” published their so-called “works.” Their fantastic and
unscholarly ideas (about the Hun–Hungarian, the Sumer–Hungarian or the
Turkic–Hungarian relationship) unfortunately found their way to an enthusiastic
general readership. Books were also published prior to this period trying to
criticize these false theories.[29] The increasing number of amateur works led
Károly Rédei to provide a new summary in his work. He presents a detailed
historiography of these "genial discoveries" and through striking
examples shows the unscholarly nature of the methods applied by these
“historians.”
Jenő Szűcs prepared a monograph on the Hungarian ethnogenesis in the
1970s. However, until his death in 1988 this work was not published. His
historical approach, nonetheless, became well-known and popular.[30] His book on the economic and social regions
of Europe became a bestseller, and this success surprised even its publishing
house.[31] His work, entitled A magyar nemzeti tudat kialakulása,[32] proved to be a turning point in research on
Hungarian prehistory. Szűcs adapted the theory of the historian Reinhard
Wenskus to the Hungarian case. The majority of the German ethnic groups that
had settled in the western part of the Roman Empire merged into the local
population of the occupied territories. During this process their ethnonym
gradually became a territorial category. From a qualitative point of view, this
process resulted in a new phenomenon: the modern nation. Szűcs pointed out that
the transitions between the stages are not evident. The Hungarians in the
period of the conquest did not lose their national consciousness, it rather
spread among the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Hungary. After accepting
Christianity, only fragments of the ancient ethnic ideas of the Hungarians
found their way into written sources. Szűcs managed to provide a homogenous
picture out of the small pieces that had not been achieved by other Hungarian
scholars until then. At the end of the book a summary can be found of the
scholarly activity of the author written by István Zimonyi.[33] It is followed by a bibliography of Jenő
Szűcs’ work, compiled by Erzsébet Szűcs.
The medievalists of the communist countries launched a new project that
aimed at compiling a Marxist encyclopaedia of the medieval history of Eastern
Europe with the title Encyklopädie der
Frühgeschichte der europäischen Völker. In the course of the distribution
of entries, however, the editors – in a very unscholarly way – took the modern
borders of the countries as a basis. Thus the Hungarian scholars were to be
excluded from the preparation of entries discussing the history of two thirds
of Hungary that had once belonged to the medieval Kingdom of Hungary.
Therefore, they begin to launch a new project with a working title A magyar föld és nép korai történetének
enciklopédiája. The editorial work was taken by Sándor Bökönyi and Gyula
Kristó and the secretary of the editorial board was Csanád Bálint. The
entry-words would have included the Hungarian prehistory and medieval history
up to 1387, as well as the history of the Carpathian basin between the Hun and
the Hungarian conquests. In addition to the Hungarian edition, they also
planned an edition in German. A pilot booklet – containing 26 entries – of the
future encyclopaedia was published.[34] The publication of the first volume was
planned for 1992. Due to the political changes, the financial basis of the
undertaking became uncertain. Thus, on the basis of the already prepared
entries a team, led by Gyula Kristó, began to compile a new book. It was
eventually published in 1994 under the title Korai magyar történelmi lexikon (9–14. század).[35] With the shortening of the period of
investigation, the entries – imperfectly – prepared on the pre-conquest history
of the Carpathian basin were left out. Thus only 2,000 entries of the
originally scheduled 3,000 were published.
Out of the remaining entries those, concerning the Huns, the Gepids and
the Lombards were prepared in a way that they were published together in one
volume. Before the publication of the encyclopaedia, István Bóna, who had
co-ordinated the preparation of the entries dealing with the period under
study, published a volume containing these entries in a book entitled Hunok – Gepidák – Langobardok.[36] This volume of 180 entries comprises the
writings of István Bóna, János Cseh, Péter Tomka and Ágnes Tóth. There are
separate entries, besides the substantial, summarizing ones (the Huns, the
clothing of the Gepids, or the archaeology of the Lombards), on all the notable
individuals (e.g. Arikan / Erekan, Dengitzik / Dintzik, Onegesios, Orestes,
Uldin, Audomharjis / Omharius, Alboin / Albuin / Albwin, Bajan, Hildigis). The
entries on the Hun golden bows, the Gepid survival and the one on the religious
life of the Lombards were especially interesting.
The exhibition arranged for the eleven hundredth anniversary of the
Magyar conquest of Hungary was first shown to the public in Miskolc, in 1995.
The exhibition was opened to a wider public in the National Museum of Hungary in
the following year. The catalogue of this exhibition,[37] after the introductory studies, presents the
archaeological findings on the Hungarians in the period of the conquest
arranged into lexicon-like entries, well illustrated with color plates. The
three publications together, except the entries concerning the Avar period,
provide a useful summary of the history of the Carpathian basin between the
fourth and the fourteenth centuries that meets all scholarly expectations.
István Vásáry redeemed a long-lasting debt on the part of Hungarian
orientalists by publishing his work entitled A régi Belső-Ázsia története,[38] since up to this time no monograph had been
published in Hungarian on the more than a thousand-year history of the steppe.
The work of Lajos Ligeti, Az ismeretlen
Belső-Ázsia – according to the expectations of the publishing house – aimed
at a wider readership.[39] The work of Károly Czeglédy only treated the
events between the second century B.C. and the sixth century A.D. Also, he only
studied the eastern part of the steppe region. Moreover, his work was not
widely diffused, due to his extraordinarily condensed style.[40] The book of Vásáry combines a readable style
with the abundant notes required by scholarly literature. The first chapter of
the book comprises a general introduction, in which the author clarifies the
subject matter discussed, explains his sources and outlines the geographical
environment of the events. The 'Inner-Asia' term, used in the title, refers to
a cultural unity bordered by populations settled from the south and the ethnic
groups of the taiga and tundra from the north. This territory extended as far
west as the Carpathian basin and as far east as Manchuria. Besides dealing with
the Inner Asian nomadic populations (Hsiung-nu, Yüeh-chih, Hsien pi, Juan-juan,
Türk, Uyghur, Kirghiz, etc.), the book also provides a detailed discussion of
the nomadic peoples (Scythian, Hun, Onoghur, Volga Bulghar, Avar, Khazar,
Hungarian, Pecheneg, Uz, Cuman) who were in contact with Europe at any stage in
their history. István Vásáry not only examined the history of the peoples of
the steppe but also these of the nations, countries (Kitans, Jurchens,
Tibetans, Tanguts, Karakhanid Empire, Khvarezm) that ever were in contact with
them at certain stages of their history. The volume also comprises a
twenty-page annotated bibliography, a detailed chronology and indices. Together
with his book entitled Az Arany Horda
(The Golden Horde) it provides a summary of the history of the Eurasian steppe
from the Scythians to the Mongols.[41]
The thirteen volumes of the Prehistory Series published during the last
decade prove that there is a well-skilled scholarly team in Szeged, and also
that there is a palpable academic need for such publications. Finally, it
should be pointed out that, in addition to the series reviewed here,
orientalist and historical studies in Szeged are also represented by the
foreign language publication Studia
uralo-altaica series as well as by the Szegedi
Középkorász Műhely.
[1] S. Szádeczky-Kardoss, Az avar történelem forrásai. [Sources of the Avar History.] Vol. I. Co-workers: M. Borsos, et al. Szeged 1992.
[2] Ein Versuch zur Sammlung und chronologischen Anordnung der griechischen Quellen der Awarengeschichte nebst einer Auswahl von anderssprachigen Quellen. Opuscula Byzantina I. Szeged 1972. Supplemented new edition: Opuscula Byzantina Vol. 8, Szeged 1986, 3–140, 229–272. (Co-author: T. Olajos.)
[3] S. Szádeczky-Kardoss, Az avar történelem forrásai 557-től 806-ig. [Sources of Avar History from 557 to 806.] Co-author: Cs. Farkas, co-workers: M. Borsos, et al., Budapest 1998.
[4] The translations of Greek sources on the Avars after 806, prepared by Teréz Olajos, are to appear in the Szegedi Középkortörténeti Könyvtár [Szeged Medieval Library.] series.
[5] A magyar honfoglalás kútfői. [Sources of the Hungarian Conquest.] Ed. Gy. Pauler and S. Szilágyi, Budapest 1900.
[6] A magyarok elődeiről és a honfoglalásról. [On the Ancestors of the Magyars and the Conquest.] Ed. Gy. Györffy, Budapest 1958. (19752, 19863).
[7] K. Czeglédy, "Monographs on Syriac and Muhammadan Sources in the Literary Remains of M. Kmoskó," Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 4 (1954) 19–91; For Mihály Kmoskó's scholarly activity, see István Zimonyi, "Kmoskó Mihály és a magyar őstörténet," [Mihály Kmoskó and the Hungarian Prehistory], in Őstörténet és nemzettudat 1919–1931. Ed. É. Kincses Nagy, Szeged 1991, 89–93.
[8] M. Kmoskó, Mohamedán írók a steppe népeiről. Földrajzi irodalom. [Muslim Writers on the Peoples of the Steppe. Geographical Literature.] Vol. I/1–2. Ed. I. Zimonyi, Budapest 1997–2000. The publication of the forthcoming four volumes is in progress.
[9] See also H. Göckenjan und I. Zimonyi, Orientalische Berichte über die Völker Europas und Zentralasiens im Mittelalter. Die Ğayhānī-Tradition. Veröffentlichungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica, Band 54, Wiesbaden 2001.
[10] K. Sándor A Bolognai Rovásemlék. [The Runic Inscription of Bologna.] Szeged 1991.
[11] Formerly it was published by Gyula Sebestyén (A magyar rovásírás hiteles emlékei. [The Authentic Remnants of the Hungarian Runic Scripts] Budapest 1915). His work, however, can only be obtained at book auctions, moreover, the photos in the reviewed work are of much better quality.
[12] I. Vásáry, "A magyar rovásírás. A kutatás története és mai helyzete. [The Hungarian Runic Scripts. The History and the Present State of Research]," Keletkutatás (1974) 159–171; K. Sándor, "A székely rovásírás. [The Székely Runic Script]," Néprajz és Nyelvtudomány 33 (1989–1990) 65–81; A. Róna-Tas, "A magyar rovásírás és a Mátyás-kori humanizmus. [The Hungarian Runic Script and Humanism in the Age of King Matthias]," Néprajz és Nyelvtudomány 29–30 (1985–1986) 173–179; Idem, in A. Róna-Tas, A magyarság korai története. [The Early History of the Hungarians] Szeged 1995, 139–145; A. Róna-Tas, "On the Development and Origin of the East Turkic 'Runic' Script," Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 41 (1987) 7–14; A. Róna-Tas, "Problems of the East European Scripts with Special Regard to the Newly Found Inscriptions of Szarvas" in Popoli delle Steppe: Unni, Avari, Ungari. Spoleto 23–29 aprile 1987. Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi sull'alto medioevo 35. Spoleto 1988, 483–511.
[13] Since 1 January 2000 the name of the institution has been “University of Szeged.”
[14] Rovásírás a Kárpát-medencében. [Runic Script in the Carpathian Basin.] Ed. K. Sándor, Szeged 1992.
[15] L. Ligeti, A magyar nyelv török kapcsolatai és ami körülöttük van. [The Turkic Connection of the Hungarian Language and Other Related Issues.] 2 vols. Budapest Oriental Reprints A1–2. Budapest 1977–1979; K. Czeglédy, Magyar őstörténeti tanulmányok. [Studies on Hungarian Prehistory.] Budapest Oriental Reprints A3, Budapest 1985; Gy. Németh, Törökök és magyarok. [Turks and Hungarians.] 2 vols. Budapest Oriental Reprints A4-5, Budapest 1990.
[16] A. Róna-Tas, A magyarság korai története. [The Early History of the Hungarians.] Szeged 1995.
[17] A. Róna-Tas, A honfoglaló magyar nép. [The Magyars of the Conquest.] Budapest 1996, 305–321; Its English edition: Idem, Hungarians and Europe in the Early Middle Ages, Budapest, 1999.
[18] I. Fodor, Verecke híres útján... [On the Famous Pass of Verecke...] Budapest 1975; Its English edition: Idem, In Search of a New Homeland. The Prehistory of the Hungarian People and the Conquest. Budapest 1982.
[19] A. Róna-Tas, "A kazár népnévről. [On the Khazar Ethnonym]," Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 84 (1982) 349–380; Idem, "Újabb adatok a kazár népnév történetéhez. [New Data on the History of the Khazar Ethnonym]," Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 85 (1983) 126–133.
[20] The 'Magyar' Ethnonym on a Volga Bulghar Grave Inscription from 1311.
[21] See I. Vásáry, "A jezsuita Cseles Márton és a Julianus-jelentés (A Magna Hungaria- és a Jugria-kérdés történetéhez). [The Jesuit Márton Cseles and the Julianus Report (On the History of the Question on Magna Hungaria and Yugria)]," in Középkori kútfőink kritikus kérdései. Ed. J. Horváth, and Gy. Székely, Budapest 1974, 261–275; Idem,"The Hungarians or Možars and the Meščers/Mišers of the Middle Volga region," Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi 1 (1975) 237–275; Idem, "A Volga-vidéki magyar töredékek a mongol kor után. [Groups of Magyars in the Volga Region after the Mongol Era]," in Magyar őstörténeti tanulmányok. Ed. A. Bartha, K. Czeglédy, and A. Róna-Tas, Budapest 1977, 283–290; L. Tardy, A tatárországi rabszolgakereskedelem és a magyarok a XIII–XV. században. [The Slave-Trade of the Golden Horde and the Hungarians in the Thirteenth–Fifteenth Centuries.] Kőrösi Csoma Kiskönyvtár 17. Budapest 1980; Idem, Sklavenhandel in der Tartarei. Studia uralo-altaica 20. Szeged 1983.
[22] Cs. Bálint, Kelet, a korai avarok és Bizánc kapcsolatai. [The Relation between the East, the Early Avars and Byzantium.] Szeged 1995.
[23] Cs. Bálint, "Kontakte zwischen Iran, Byzanz und der Steppe. Das Grab von Üč Tepe (Sowj. Azerbajdžan) und der beschlagverzierte Gürtel im 6. und Jahrhundert," in Awarenforschungen Vol. 1, 309–496; Idem, "Probleme der archäologischen Forschung zur awarischen Landnahme," in Ausgewählte Probleme der europäischen Landnahmen des Früh- und Hochmittelalters. Hrsg. M. Müller-Wille und R. Schneider, Vorträge und Forschungen 41, Sigmaringen 1993, 195–273.
[24] Őstörténet és nemzettudat 1919–1931. [Prehistory and the National Consciousness.] Ed. É. Kincses Nagy, Szeged 1991.
[25] For the Gyula Németh's work, see A. Róna-Tas, "Julius Németh. Life and Work" Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 32 (1978) 261–284; A. Róna-Tas, Németh Gyula. Budapest 1991; For Gyula Németh's bibliography, see G. Uray, "A Bibliography of the Works of Prof. J. Németh (up to 1960)," Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 11 (1960) 11–28; His complete bibliography: Gy. Németh, Törökök és magyarok. [Turks and Hungarians.] Vol. 2, Budapest Oriental Reprints A5. Budapest 1990, 287–312.
[26] Gy. Németh, A honfoglaló magyarság kialakulása. [The Formation of the Conquesting Magyars.] 2nd enlarged and revised edition. Ed. Á. Berta, Budapest 1991.
[27] For the relevant secondary literature, see Gy. Kristó, A székelyek eredetéről. [On the Origin of the Szeklers.] Szegedi Középkortörténeti Könyvtár, 10. Szeged 1996.
[28] K. Rédei, Őstörténetünk kérdései. [The Problems of Our Prehistory.] Budapest 1998.
[29] M. Zsirai, "Őstörténeti csodabogarak," [Queer cards of the Hungarian Prehistory] in A magyarság őstörténete, ed. L. Ligeti, Budapest 1943, 266–289; G. Komoróczy, Sumer és magyar? [Sumer and Hungarian?] Budapest 1976; J. Pusztay, Az "ugor-török háború" után. [The Aftermath of the "Ugor–Turkic War."] Budapest 1977.
[30] His selected studies (J. Szűcs, Nemzet és történelem. [Nation and History.] Budapest 1974) were reprinted in 1984. Its German edition: Idem, Nation und Geschichte. Budapest 1981.
[31] J. Szűcs, Vázlat Európa három történeti régiójáról. [The Three Historical Regions of Europe.] Budapest 1983; Die drei historischen Regionen Europas. Übersetzt von B. Rásky, Frankfurt am Main 1990.
[32] J. Szűcs, A magyar nemzeti tudat kialakulása. [The Formation of the Hungarian National Consciousness.] Szeged 1992. New edition: Budapest 1997.
[33] See also I. Zimonyi, "The Concept of Nation as Interpreted by Jenő Szűcs" in Forms of Identity. Ed. L. Löb, I. Petrovics, Gy. E. Szőnyi, Szeged 1994, 1–8.
[34] A magyar föld és nép korai történetének enciklopédiája. [Encyclopaedia of the Early History of the Hungarian Land and People.] Editor-in-chief: S. Bökönyi and Gy. Kristó, Budapest 1987. In a booklet as a manuscript.
[35] Korai magyar történelmi lexikon (9–14. század). [Lexicon of Early Hungarian History, 9th–14th Century.] Editor-in-chief: Gy. Kristó, ed. P. Engel and F. Makk, Budapest 1994.
[36] I. Bóna, et al., Hunok – Gepidák – Langobardok. [Huns, Gepids and Lombards.] Szeged 1993.
[37] „Őseinket felhozád...”A honfoglaló magyarság. [''Bringing Our Ancestors..." The Conquering Magyars.] Ed. I. Fodor, co-workers: L. Révész, M. Wolf, and I. M. Nepper, Budapest 1996.
[38] I. Vásáry, A régi Belső-Ázsia története. [A History of Early Inner-Asia.] Szeged 1993; Its German edition: Geschichte des frühen Innerasiens. Herne 1999.
[39] L. Ligeti, Az ismeretlen Belső-Ázsia. [The Unknown Inner-Asia.] Budapest 1940.
[40] K. Czeglédy, Nomád népek vándorlása Napkelettől Napnyugatig. [Migration of Nomadic People from East to the West.] Kőrösi Csoma Kiskönyvtár 8, Budapest 1969; English version: K. Czeglédy, "From East to the West: The Age of Nomadic Migrations in Eurasia," Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi 3 (1983) 25–125.
[41] I. Vásáry, Az Arany Horda. [The Golden Horde.] Budapest 1986.