IS IS

ICO

=OJ

IS

IS

FOR COLLECTING

AND

PRINTING

RELICS OF POPULAR ANTIQUITIES, ^&c.

ESTABLISHEDIN

THE YEAR MDCCCLXXVIII.

Alter^etIdem.

PUBLICATIONS

OF

THE FOLK-LORE

^SOCIETY.

XIII. (1886).

3Kt m

1888-1889.

PRESIDENT.

ANDREW LANG,

ESQ., M.A.

VICE-PRESIDENTS.

W.

R. S.

RALSTON,

^M.A.

THE RIGHT HON. THE EARL OF STRAFFORD.

EDWARD

^B.

TYLOR,

LL.D.,^F.R.S.

DIRECTOR.

G. L.

GOMME,

F.S.A., 1,BeverleyVillas,BarnesCommon,^S.W.

COUNCIL.

HON. JOHN ABERCROMBY.

THE EARL BEAUCHAMP,

^F.S.A.

EDWARD BRABROOK,

^F.S.A.

LOYS BRUEYRE.

MISS

C. S.

BURNE.

EDWARD CLODD.

J.G.

FRAZER,

^M.A.

G. L.

GOMME,

^F.S.A.

S.

HARTLAND,

^F.S.A.

A.

GRANGER HUTT,

^F.S.A.

W.

F. KIRBY.

SIR

JOHN LUBBOCK,

BT., F.R.S.

REV.

DR.

RICHARD MORRIS.

ALFRED NUTT.

T. F.

ORDISH.

LT.-GEN. PITT-RIVERS, ^D.C.L.

F.R.S., F.S.A., ETC.

PROFESSOR

^A. H.

SAYCE, M.A CAPTAIN

R. C.

TEMPLE.

J. S.

UDAL.

HENRY

B.

WHEATLEY,

^F.S.A.

HON. TREASURER.

EDWARD CLODD,

19, CarletonRoad,^Tufnell Park, N.

AUDITORS.

G. L.

APPERSON.

JOHN _TOLHURST,

F.S.A.

LOCAL SECRETARIES.

IRELAND: G. H.

KIN AH AN.

SOUTHSCOTLAND:

WILLIAM GEORGE BLACK.

NORTH

SCOTLAND: REV.

WALTER GREGOR.

INDIA: CAPTAINR. C.

TEMPLE.

CHINA: J.

STEWART LOCKHART.

HONORARY

SECRETARY.

J. J.

FOSTER,

36,Alma _Square,St.John'sWood, N.W.

THE FOLK-TALES

OF

THE MAGYARS.

COLLECTED BY KRIZA, ERDELYI, PAP, AND OTHERS.

TRANSLATED AND EDITED, WITH COMPARATIVE

NOTES, BY

THE REV. W. HENRY JONES

AND

LEWIS L. KROPF.

LONDON

^:

PUBLISHED FOR THE ^{FOLK-LORE SOCIETY}

BY

ELLIOT STOCK,

62, PATERNOSTER Row.

1889.

J5/3

WESTMINSTER:

PRINTEDBYNICHOLS

AND

SONS, 26,PARLIAMENTSTREET.

TO

PROFESSOR ARMINIUS VAMBERY,

WHOSE

INDEFATIGABLE LABOUES

AND

INDOMITABLE ZEAL

HAVE DONE

^SO

MUCH

TO

ADVANCE OUR KNOWLEDGE

OF

MANKIND

AND WHOSE

ILLUSTRIOUSLIFE IS SO BRIGHT

AN EXAMPLE

TO

EVERY

_STUDENT,

ON THE

STORIES OF

THE FATHERLAND

HE

LOVES SO

WELL AND

SERVES SO FAITHFULLY

PREFACE.

A VAST and _precious

store of

Eolk-Lore

is to

be found amongst ^the Magyars

^as

yet but

little

known

to

English readers, and

so it is

hoped ^that

^this

work on the _subject may prove ^of some value

to

the student of Comparative ^Eolk-Lore. The

_difficulty

of the language

^is

one which makes

^it

well nigh impossible ^for the unaided _foreigner

to

do anything

like

justice

^to

the

stories.

We ^laboured _together

often

^till

dawn to make the translation

as literal as possible,

that the reader might have as true a render- ing ^of the Magyar

story-teller's

method and manner

as

so different

a tongue

^as

English would _permit.

Whilst engaged on the Finnish,

stories

we received the _greatest help from Einnish

_friends, especially

Mr. A. NiemineD, ^Dr. Eagerlund, Dr. Krohn, ^Dr.

Rancken, ^Professor Ereudenthal, Mr. Halleen, and Mr. Walter von Bonsdorff. In the Lapp

^stories

b

Vi

PREFACE.

Professor Friis of Christiania has ever been a true helper. Amongst ^{numerous kindly helpers} we tender thanks

to

Dr. _Retzius, Stockholm; Professor Gittee, Charleroi; the Rev. Henry ^{Jebb, of} Pirbeck Hall;

Mr. _Quigstad, of Troms; Mr. Nordlander; Mr. ^0.

P. Petersson, Hernosand

;

Mr. Lindholm

;

Dr. R

Kohler; Baron _Nordenskj old

_;

and the Rev. Walter H. _James, rector of Meet.

We _regret that we cannot do more than acknow- ledge the _courtesy of the

late

Dr. Greguss (Buda

Pest), whose lamented death removed a scholar and

friend to Englishmen.

If

this

collection adds a mite

to

the knowledge ^of man, ^{our labours}

^will

^not have been in vain.*

W. H.

J.

L.

L.

K.

* Mr.

Kropf

^{desiresifctobe}stated,that lie isnot responsiblefor the Introduction

and

Notes

beyond

supplyingcertain portions^of the materialfor their compilation.]

INTRODUCTION.

BEFOKE

the arrival of the Magyars,

Hungary

^{was the}

"

cock-pit of eastern

Europe;"

^its history one incessant struggle

between

nation

and

_nation,

which

either perished or

was

driven out

by some more

powerful neighbour. ^First

we

hear of the subjection of

what was known

as Pannonia,

by

^the

Eomans

; then,

when

that great

power began

^to wane, ^a motley hordeunder the great Attila swept

down and

founded _{a king-}

dom. "

Attila died in

Pannonia

in453.

Almost

immediately afterwards the empire

he had

amassed rather thanconsolidated

felltopieces. Histoo-numeroussons

began

^to quarrel abouttheir inheritance_; while _Ardaric, the

King

of the Gepidae, placed himselfat thehead ofa general revolt of the dependent ^nations.

The

inevitable struggle

came

toa crisis near the river Netad, ⁱⁿ Pannonia,^{in a battle in} which' 30,000 ^{of the}

Huns and

^their confederates, including ^{Ellak,* Attila's eldest son,} were slain.

The

nation thus broken _{rapidly dispersed.}

One

hordesettled

under Koman

_protection in Little Scythia (the Dobrudsha)^; others in Dacia _Kipensis (on ^{the confines of Servia} and Bul- garia), or

on

the southern borders of Pannonia." f

A

tradition asserts that the

Magyars

^are descendants of those

Huns, who,

after their _defeat., returned to their

homes

in Asia.

On

the other hand, one of their most learned

men

_says,

we

cannot

* "Aladar."inHungarian^tradition, f ^{Enc.Britt."Huns."}

1)2

viii

INTRODUCTION.

"form an accurate idea as to the part the

Hungarians

^{took in} the irruption of the

Huns,

^with

which

_{event they} ^{are associated}

in national tradition."

But

_yet

he

_adds, ^"

we

_fairlyclaim that the ancestors of the Hungarians took part in the great devas- tating campaigns

which

Attila carried on _against

Rome and

the Christian West, ^{as far as} France."

Legend

^{carries us still} further back, sayingthat the giant

Kimrod ^{had two}

^sons

named Hunyor ^and Magyar,

^from

whom

^the

Huns and Magyars

descended.*

Leaving

^{legend, in history}

we

^{find that the}

Magyars

appeared ⁱⁿ

Europe

^{about 884, first}

on

the Ural, later on the banks of the middle

Volga

^;

and

then,

marching

westward, passed over the

Danube and

the

Bug,

^{crossing the} Carpathians

between 888 and

900, under

Almos,

^{the father of}

Arpad,t

^{the founder of}

modern Hungary, who

^is said to

have

claimedthecountry ^{as his} inheritancefrom Attila.

The

_Magyars,

then, are part of the

numerous

hordes of

Turco-T

artar origin which, impelled

by some mighty

^{impulse,lefttheir}

home amid

the

* See "

Rege ^a csoda-szarvasrol, by Arany ^Janos, an _English translation ofwhich has been_publishedby^Mr.Butler in hisLegends,FolkSongs, ^'c.,from theHungarian." ^Cf.Hungary,by^ProfessorVambery,cap.^iii.

t According^toHungarianhistory,Arpad^foundnumeroussmall nationalities inheriting ^Attila's realm,with each^of

whom

hehadtosettle separately. The numberof nationalitieshas beenfurther increased by^{fresh arrivals}from_Asia, andimmigrants from"Western Europe during ^the past ten centuries: thuswe hear of the continuous _irruption of Besseni (Petchenegs) during the reign of Stephen ^{the Saint} (first King ^of Hungary, ^A.D. 1000); ofCumani in the time ofSalamon_{(A.D. 1060)} and his successors; and of Tartars underBatu Khan_(A.D.1285)inthetimeofBela IV. During^{this last}invasion large^tracts oflandbecamedepopulated, the inhabitantshaving either perished or^fled; so that thekingwas_{obliged to} invite immigrantsfrom WesternEurope, and ^this wasthe origin of theSaxon settlements in Transylvania. Thiswill to some extentshowthedifficultieswhichbeset the writerwho _attemptstogive a sketch ofthe races inhabiting modern Hungary.

A

further difficulty, in tracing the origin of such _races, is due to the variety of spelling adopted by ^different writers in describing the same _race,and the unscrupulous ^{use of the} names Huns, Scythae, &c.when _{writing about} tribes inhabiting regions beyond ^the borders of the thenknowncivilisedworld. Vide_infra,p.x.

INTRODUCTION.

ix Altai mountains, _and, conquering ^{the divided forces} on the rich plains of

Hungary,

^settled

down,

^{and so foundedthe race}

whose

tales form the

body

^{ofthis work.*}

Another

_people, the Szekely,f speak ^{a dialect of} Magyar, which, ^{like other}

Magyar

dialects, differs but _slightlyfrom the written language. This race claims to be descendants of those

Hunnish

tribes that remained in

Europe

^{after the defeats.}

They

say, that

when

the

Magyars

^{arrived in}

modern Hungary

they

found

a Magyar-speaking people (the Szekely) inhabiting parts of Transylvania. Thisis confirmed to

some

extent

by

^the statement of Constantinus Porphyrogenitus, who, writingabout 950, asserted ^that,

amongst

^others,

some Magyar

^{tribes lived on}

the banksof the rivers

Maros

and Koros(Transylvania). Kriza, too, quotes ^several Szekely sayings referring to the Szekely-

Magyar

relationship, e.g. ^:

"

A

Szekely ^has borne the

Magyar."

"

If there

were no

_Szekelys inthe world, there

would

not be

any Magyars."

"

There

is the

same

difference between a Szekely and a

Magyar

^{as there is}

^between

^{a man'sson andhis} grandson."

"Let

the

Magyar

^{be thankful, that the Szekely is his} acquaintance."

With

_regard to the alleged descent of the Szekelysfrom the

*

We

have attempted^togive but a^brief sketch of theMagyars,feeling that

whenthereissolucid aworkas "

Hungary," by^sowell-known anauthority as ProfessorVambery,^{withinthereach of all,and dealingwith this subjectin a} way^{thatitwouldbefollyfor ustoattempt,we}maycontent ourselveswithrefer- ing ^all readerstothatwork,and to Der _Ursprung ^derMagyarenby^thesame author.

t TheSzekely(inGerman^"Szekler,"ⁱⁿLatin "Siculus")inhabit the eastern parts of Transylvania, the territoryoccupied bythem forming an oblong^strip between theSaxonsettlement of Besztercze andBrasso (Kronstadt), with two branchestothewestknownasMarosszek andUdvarhelyszek. Another ^district (szek) inhabited by them, Aranyos-szek,^{lies in the} western part of Transyl- vaniabetweenthedistrictsofTordaandAlso-Fejer.

X INTRODUCTION.

Huns,

^the evidence in proof of sucha pedigree ^is very meagre.

First, ^it has not as yet with

any

degree ^of accuracy been determined

who

the

Huns

were. Prof.

Vambery

has,with infi- nite pains, collected

and

_analysed

some

seventy words, mostly proper

names

^all that has

come down

tousof the old

Hunnish

language

and come

^to the conclusion that the

Huns and Avars

forthe

greater part belonged ^tothe Turco-Tartar branch of the Ural-Altaic race; yet he is

bound

to

acknowledge

^{that he}

would

_gladly

welcome

a fewhistorical facts to support

him

in his conclusions,

which

are built

upon

^{an almost} entirelyphilo- logicalbasis.* Indeed,^itseemsas

though

^{the term}

" Hun

^"

was

a sort of conventional designation, ^like "

Scythian," ^or "Bar- barian^5' with the ancient Greeks

and Romans

; or

"Frenghi"

withthe

modern

Turks. Attilaand the various raceshe _pressed into his service were, of course, the

Huns _par

excellence. After his death

and

the fatal battle near the river

Netad

his hordes appear ^to have _well-nigh vanished from

Europe;

^{but their}

terrible deeds left an indelible impression

upon

^the people

who were

unfortunate

enough

^to

have

been brought ^{into contact}with the "scourge ^of

God" and

his fierce warriors.

In

the

lapse of time allkinds ofweird traditionsgathered

round

their names, ⁱⁿ the usual

way, when

_great

names

pass into the possession of the

Folk

Historian;f

and

sothey ^drifted through legends of saints into the region of myths.

Thus we

find the

name

Hiine (Heune,

Hewne, Huyne) becomes synonymous

^with

"giant/

3

and

to this

day

^the Westphalian

and Dutch

peasant speaks of the great tumuli as

"

Hiinen graber

"

graves ^{of the} giants, or

Huns.J To add

to the confusion, ^it

would

_appear that

* TheNationality of the Huns and Avars, a paper read before theHun- garianAcademy^{of Sciences, Oct.}4, 1881. Cf^. also "The Origin ^of theMa-

gyars,"by^thesameauthor.

f See_p.380,infra.

J Kozma_says,that in the two above-mentioned countries theword^"Huns^"

wasused,up^tothe thirteenthcentury,amongthe people as equivalent^togiants,

INTRODUCTION.

xi there

were some German

tribes

who

were

known

as Hunes.

Mr.

Karl Blind has pointed out ⁱⁿthe Gentleman's Magazine,*

that our

own

Venerable

Bede

_{speaks of}

Hunes

asbeing

among

the tribes of

Germany

^that

^came

^{over to Britain} together with the Saxons. Else

where

f

he

_explains

"the

tribal

origin of Siegfried (of the

Nibelungen

lied) as a

German

Hiine_;" a

word which

has nothing whatever ^to do with the Mongolian

Huns. We know

mediaaval writers were not very particular about _facts,

and

the licentia poetica

was

claimed not only

by

poets, but also

by

historiographers,^as an indisputable privilege.

Thus,

Joao

Barros, ^{in his} chronicle of Clarimundus,J calmly

tells us that

Count Henry

^of Portugal, the Navigator, was of

Hungarian

^descent,

and

that he found the statement in a

Magyar

^{book. This} alleged pedigree

was

the cause of afierce controversy

amongst Hungarian

savants,

and was

_fullythreshed out in the early part ofthe present century.^||

Vigfusson^T remarks that the northern _poet,

whom

he designates the

"

Tapestry poet," uses

Hunar

_(Huns),

_Hynske (Hunnish)

^{as a}

vague word

for "

foreign." Probably ^the East Baltic folk

would

have been

Huns

^to the earlier poets.

With

_regard to the

German ^and

Scandinavian

Huns,

^{it is}

noteworthy what

Olaus

Magnus

^{writes with regard to the}

u Huns

^" of his time.

The

learned _{prelate says} that "

in who _figured in fairy ^tales. Simrock and Grimm are inclined to see real persons inthem,andsaythey were^theHuns,andⁱⁿlaterhistory theMagyars.

* 1883,^vol.i.pp. 466,467.

f CornUll_Magazine,May,^1882.

J The^firsteditionappeared^{in 1520. Cf.} Diccionario BiWograpUco ^Por- tuguez(Lisboa,1859) sub^voce"Barros."

Heassertsthat his chronicle^is a translation of"exlinguaUngara." So^far asone knows,the originalremainsundiscoveredand unknown!

|| Cf. Geo. _Fejer, Henricus Portagulliae Comes_origine Burgundus non Hungarus, ^{Budce 1830,} and other dissertations by M. _Holeczy, &c. in the BritishMuseum. PressMark .10632 ^.

^

Corpus Poeticum Boreale, by VigfussonandPowell. Oxford,^1883,p.Ixi.

vol.i.

Xii

INTRODUCTION.

provincia Middelpadensi ^{versus Boreales partes Suetise su-} perioris, ubi fere major pars

virorum Huni nomine

appellantur

tamquam

^{populi clarius contra}

Hunos

olirn belligerantes ac triumphantes."^* His statement ^is borne out

by

^his colleague, Joannes

Magnus,f who

asserts that

" non

desunt_qui dicant

ipsos

Hunnos

^a Septentrionale parte Scandiae utra Hel- singorum ^terras ex Medelphatia

primum

^{erupisse: in}

qua

^etiam hodie _plurimi praestantissimse fortitudinis

homines

inveniuntur, qui

Hunni

_proprio

nomine

appellantur, quique

magna

^{et prae-}

clara opera ⁱⁿ tyrannos, qui patriaa libertatem vexaverat, pere- gerunt."

Inthe face of ^all _this, it is quite evident

how

difficult a task awaits those

who

_attempt to

identify the lineal descendants of the

Huns

:

and

those

who _uphold

the

Hunnish

descent of the Szekelys do not appear, ^as yet, to have advanced sufficient historical grounds ^{to establish the} connection of the

modern

Szekelys with the

Huns

of_Attila.J

* Historia de Gentium Septentrionalium ^variis conditionibus Sfc. (Ba-

silese,1567). Lib.ii.cap.^xviii.

f De Hunnis etHerulis Libri Sex. Joannes Magnus ^{died in 1544. His}

chronicleappearedinterspersedwith OlausMagnus'^{work.Cf. Lib.viii.}cap.xiii.

J Cf^.Paul Hunfalvy's polemic work,

A

Szeltelyelt.Budapest,^1880. Thesame learned writer in hiswell-known EtlvnographyofHungary,disputes the sepa- rate origin of the Szekelys, and maintains that they^{are not adistinct}people fromtheMagyars, butthat they areMagyarswhohave migratedfrom Hungary Proper ^{into their} modernTransylvanian homes. This assertion gave ^{rise to} severe criticismonthe part of the defenders of the old tradition^likeDr.John Nagy,Farkas Deak, andothers; andtheabovementioned pamphlet was^areply, whereintheauthorfurtherdefends his _assertion,on thetestimony^of compara- tivephilologyand_history. One _{powerful argument} infavourof the separate origin is,that for centuries the Szekely population has kept^{distinct not}only fromtheSaxons, but ^alsofrom theMagyars ⁱⁿTransylvania; theyhad _privi- legeswhich were deniedtotheMagyars. Theiradministrationuntilrecentlywas quite^distinct. Theirnamefirstoccurs ina deed _signed byWilliam, Bishop^of Transylvania, dated 1213, inwhichtheBishop renounces his right of collecting tithesfromsettlersintheBarczasag "_awasteanduninhabited"

track of land, ifthose settlersbe neitherMagyars^norSzekelys.

INTRODUCTION.

Xlii It is well

known

that the

Hun

descent of the

Magyars

^and Szekelys hasequally been questioned. Savants of such authority as

Budenz and Hunfalvy

disclaim the

Him

relationship, and en- deavour to prove ^the

Finn-Ugrian

origin of the Magyars.

Whereas

Professor

Vambery,

^{in his}

work

on the "

Origin of the Magyars,"

which

received so favourable a reception ^at the hands of the

whole

learned world, defends, ^as

we

saw _above, a Turco-Tartar descent.

It lies far

beyond

^{the limits of this}

work

to give even abrief outline of the history of the Szekelys: yet a few data

may

not be out of

place ^to

show

that, although they ^{are at the} present time,

and mayhap

always have^{been, a} Magyar-speaking people, yet they ^{are in}

many

respects distinct from the race

known

^as the Magyars. Ibn _Dasta, an

Arab

writer,* at the end of the ninth century,informsus that in histime

some

_Bulgarians lived

on

the banksof the River Itil (Volga); and that theycon sisted of three tribes, viz.^: the Berzuls, the Esseghels, and the

Uz. He

further says that "

the first territory of the

Magyars

^lies

between

the countryof the Bisseniand the Esseghel Bulgarians."

Another Arab

_writer, Ibn Muhalhal, about ^themiddle of the tenth century, mentions a people

named

^"Jikil,"

who

lived next to the "

Bajnak." ^{If the writers}

who would

_identify in this Ashkal,Esseghel, ^{or Jikil} people, the parents of the Szekely race, be_right in their conclusions, then the Siculi _(as they^are called in Latindeeds) are of Bulgarian ^descent.f

But we know

* Abu-Ali Achmed ben Omar ibn Dastas. Information regarding ^tlie Kozars, Burtas, Bulgarians. Magyars, ^Slavs and Russ. Edited by^D.A.

Chvolson,^S.Petersburg,1869_(in Russian); quoted by Hunfalvy^inhis Ethno- graphyof Hungary.

f

Abn

Dolif Misaris ben Mohalhal De IntinereAsiatico Studio Kurd de Schloezer. Berolini, 1845. ^Cf. Defremery Fragments dc Geograplics, $c. ⁱⁿ Journ.Asiat.ser. iv.torn. xiii. 4G6. Bothquoted by^ColonelYulein Cathay andthe

Way

^{Thither. London,1866. Vol.i.pp.cxi.andclxxxvii.}

xiv

INTRODUCTION.

full well

how

_dangerous ^{it is to} build

up

^{theories on a}

mere

similarity of

names amongst

^{barbarous or} semi-barbarous races.

The

^{firstreliable}information

we have

about

them

is that about the year

1116

A.D. Bisseni

and

Siculi formed thebody-guard of the

Magyar King

Stephen ^{II. in his}

war

against the Czechs.

They

supplied the

vanguard

^{of the}

army

^of

King

Gejzaagainst

Henry

^ofAustria about 1146.

More

thanhalfacentury^{later, i.e.}

A.D. 1211,

Andreas

^II. _presented

some

uninhabited _territory in Transylvania^totheTeutonic_{knights; and, in a} deed dated 1213, William, Bishop of Transylvania, granted ^{the tithes of his terri-} tory ^to the

same

_order, but reserved to himself the

right of collecting

them

from all

Magyar

^or

Szkely

immigrants

who might

^settle

on

^{the lands in} _question.*

King

^Bela IV. ordered the Szekelysf ^to supply

him

withone

hundred mounted

warriors in war; and ^later on, ^to

show them

hisgratitude for their faithful services,he created

them

military nobles:J

"

Quod ^non

^subcerto

numero

_(in a

body

^as hitherto) sed eo

modo

sicut servientes regales, per^{se et} personaliter armata

nobiscum

exercituare tene- antur."

The

_Szekelys of

Hungary

Proper graduallydisappear, but the Siculi of Transylvania figure throughout ^the pages of

Hungarian

history ^as a separate people, with institutions

and

privileges of their

own, and

acting ^as a sort of border-fencibles in the

numerous

wars with the enemies of the Magyars.

They

furnished a separate ^{title to} the Prince of Transylvania,[|

and, although ^recent reforms

have

_swept

away

^old barriers,

yet one still hears people speaking ^{of the three nations} of

*

On

the riverVag(in theNorthofHungaryProper).

f Hunfalvy TheSzeMys,pp. 40-42.

J Ib. p. 41.

Cf. Republica Hungarica, ex ^off.Elzeviriana, 1634,p. 12.

"Nemo

_apud

illos (Ciculos) ignobilis ^esse censetur,etiam si manu aratrum _tractet,ant ca- prino gregi praesit."

|| Georgius Rakoczy. Dei GratiaPrinceps Transylvania ^et Siculorum Comes,&c,

INTRODUCTION. xv

Transylvania, ^viz. the Magyars, ^the Szekelys, and the Saxons.*

Whether

_they ever spoke ^alanguage ^oftheir

own we

areunable to say; they speak ^{several dialects,}

which

_{have been}

carefully studied

by

Kriza,f himself a Szekely

by

^{birth, and which}

possess peculiarities not to be found

amongst

^the _Magyars, or

any

other part of the realm of St. Stephen.

A

_passageJ in a

work

entitled

"

Hungaria

^et Attiia,"

by

^Nicolaus Olah, Arch- bishop of

Esztergom

(died 1568), might, perhaps, be quoted ^to prove^that an independent Szekely language had existed once, but there is an ambiguity about ^the statement of the learned prelate

which makes

it useless to thephilologist.

At

_{any rate,}

we

do not_possess a _single scrap of the old language, ^{if it}ever existed.

Having

^thus

made

ourselves acquainted with ^the Szekelys,

we may

proceed ^to consider the other Magyar-speakingnationalities.

The

_Csangos are

Hungarian

^{settlers in} Moldavia; ^{there are} so

many

similarities in theirtongue ^tothe Szekely^{dialects that}

Hunfalvy

appears ^to be quite confident that they ^{are a} people of Szekely origin.^||

Of

lateyears an attempt^has been

made

to resettle

them

in theless populous

crown

lands in

Hungary;

^the

result, as one

might

expect, ^is, that

some

are content, whilst otherslust after the flesh-pots ofMoldavia.

Next come

the

Kuns

(Cumanians).

The _non-Magyar

_writers,1F

who

have

made

the old language ^{of this} people ^their study, declare_it,with almost

unanimous

consent,^tobeaTurkish_dialect, whereasthe

Magyar

^writers, with very few exceptions, staunchly defendthe

Magyar

origin of the Cumanians.**

* Prior to 1876, the Szekelys administered their own _affairs, and were divided intofive"szeks"

(scdes).

f Hisessay, entitled "

A

few words on the Szekely Dialects,"was _published attheendof hiswork, Vadrozsak,^vol.i.

% Quotedinfra,p.xix. Vide_Infra,p.380.

|| Opuscitatum,p. 34.

^

^Suchas Klaproth.

** _Cf.

HunfalvyEtJmograpfty,p. 408,

XVI

INTRODUCTION.

Foremost

in theranks of the latter party

was

the late Stephen Gydrfas,

who

denied that a lingua

Cumenesca had

ever _existed, and thatthe various extant specimens ^{are the} remnants of the languageof a people of

Magyar

^descent,

who had become Turks

during ^the lapse of centuries.* His most powerful antagonist

is

Count

_Gejza

Kuun,

^thelearned editor ofthe

Codex Cumani-

cws,t

who

espouses the cause of the Turkish _party. Besides the valuable Glossary preserved in the Codex, ^{several versions of} the Lord'sPrayer

and

other scraps of the

Cumanian

_tongue are in existence,

and

have been

examined by competent

scholars,

and pronounced

^{to be of}

undoubted

Turkish _origin.J

Jazygo-Cumanians

have been quoted ^{in the} note,

and

so

we

* Cf. The Historyof theCumanians, and^alsoTheNationalityand_Language

of theJazygo-Cumanians,by StephenGyarfas. Budapest, ^1882.

fBudapest, ^1880. The _original MS. is in the Bibliotheca Marciana in Venice. Itwasdiscoveredby^{Cornides in 1770.} Klaproth^firstmade itknown

in his^"Memoirsrelatifsa 1'Asie,"III.andKoesler published ^aspecimen^{of its} grammar^{in his"}RomanischeStudien," pp. 352-356.

J Count GejzaKuun has,we _{are gladto say,not yet spoken} his lastword;

forthat indefatigable scholar ^is busilyengaged on a largeworkonhis favorite subject,which, judging by ^{the extracts} he read (June 1st, 1885)^{before the} Hungarian Academy^of Sciences, promises ^to rank with the best writings of modernphilologists.

Itmay^{be ofinterest hereto}quote one^{of the}Cumanianchildren'srhymes^: Heli,heli,jadeuziirmeny

iizbeher!

Zeboralle,sarmamamile, Alobizon sasarma, Diizusztiirmo ducsiirmo Hej^{ala hilala} Zeborallediicsiirmo.

(Wolan,wolan, ich^losedas Geliibde, Der LenzistdaI

'

MitGebeten, Zauberzeichen Macheichden Zauber Unschadlich. Ich_preisedich!

Esistnurein Gott.

MitGebeten_preiseich_dich).

Vide UngarlscUe Rente,^{viii.-ix., Heft,} 1885,p. 644.

INTRODUCTION.

_xvii proceed ^{to consider the} next race if one

may

^{uec the}

^word

viz.: the Jazyges, formerly ^a military ^tribe, who, _together with the

Cumanians,

^{live in central}

Hungary,

^{in the} _vicinity of the capital,

and occupy

^aterritory

on

thebanksof theriversDanube, Zagyva, Sarret, Tisza,

and

Kurds.

From

time immemorial, ^until quite recent times, they enjoyed certain privileges

and

administered their

own

affairs in three districts the Jaszsag, Kis-Kunsag,

and Nagy-Kuns&g,

entirely separate

from

the surrounding population, thus forming ^{a state} within a state.

They had however

to surrender

some

of their old rights ⁱⁿ 1848,

and by

^{thelaw of}

1876

(cap. xxxiii.),

which

readjusted the political divisions of the

kingdom,

^{the limits of}

their territorydisappeared altogether fromthe

map

^of

Hungary.*

With

regard, then, ^to the nationality of the Jasz people, they^are found at all

periods of history ⁱⁿ

company

^with the Ctnnanians,

and

_so, as their institutions are the

same

as their fellow armige-

*

How

dangerous apractice ^{it is to} build up historyupon ^{no other}ground thanthemere_similarityinthesound^ofthenamesofnationalitiesisshewnin the history of themodern _Jazyges. This name has led many^{a chronicler}astray.

TheirMagyarpropername is "

Jasz," which, according ^toHunfalvy (Ethno- graphyofHungary,p. 376)^isderivedfromtheword^"ijasz,"^i.e."anarcher,"

or^"bowman,"^anamedescribing their original occupation. Insomeold deeds ofthexivthandxvthcenturies, they are^called"Jassones"_and"

Pharetrarii,"

and _{things kept straight} untilRanzanus thePapal Nuncio at the Court of Matthias Corvinus appeared onthe scene, and, struckby^thesoundof thename

"

Jassones^"andrinding that they lived on _{the veryterritorywhich,according}

to Ptolemy, was _occupied by ^the Jazyges: Metanastae in his time, ^at once jumped^tothe conclusion that theywere linealdescendants of the wild horse-

menmentioned by^{theclassicauthor.}

We

knowhowhard anything^false dies,

andsowe^{find this}statement copiedby subsequentwriters,and even disfiguring thepagesof so excellent awork asSmith's Dictionary ofGrecU and lloman

Geography,^{sub. art.}"

Jazyges."

A

^still wilder mistake wasmade_byascribe of KingSigismund,who re-christened the Jasz folk "

Philistrci,"which after- wards appears ⁱⁿ many ^{deeds. Itwould} appear ^to be reasoned out thus; a

"

Jasz," or"

bowman," mustnaturallyhandle a bowand arrow; butan arrow

iscalled ^"_pfeil^"inGerman,which comes from ^{the old} German^"phil,"hence Jasz-Philistaei,Q.^E.

D

^{! Cf.}Hunfalvy'sEthnographyloco citato.

XVlli

INTRODUCTION.

rents,

we may

safely assume with

Hunfalvy

^that they ^{are a} branch of the

Cumans,

^if they be not offspring of the

same

mother-stock.

Next come

the Palocz _folk,*

who

live scattered

among

^the

otherraces in several of the northern counties of

Hungary, and

speak ^{a dialect of their}

own. Hunfalvy

^{asserts that}they ^are the

same

_people as the "Poiovczi ^"

mentioned by

early Russian

and

Slavonic writers.

And

as Jerney, ^{in his}paper

The

Palocz

Nation and The

Palocz _Chronicle, has proved

beyond

^doubt

that, whatever the

Magyar

^Chronicles

^and

Byzantine ^writers relateanent the

Cumans

can be _traced, statement forstatement, in Russian

and

Polish _writers, with reference to the Poiovczi,

Hunfalvy

^{draws the conclusion that the Pal6cz} people ^are

Cumans.f

Their

name

firstoccurs in Russian

Annals

A.D. 1061,

and

the

Magyar

^savantto

^whose

^{rich store} of learning ^this

work

is so deeply indebtedthinks that the migration ^{of the}

Cumans

into

Hungary

^took place ⁱⁿ

two

distinct streams, one.

an

earlier one, from the North, ^{via the} Slave countries across the Northern Carpathians,

and

_another, later one

from

the south-east, through the_passes

and

defilesof the south-eastern extension of the

same

range ^ofmountains.

Before _leaving this

part of the _subject,the reader

must

be

reminded

that all the foregoing ^races or nationalities at the present time speak one ^{or other}

Magyar

^dialect,J

^and

^{that the}

* Vide_infra,p.412, &c.

t EthnographyofHungary,p. 362.

J ThetruebornMagyarrepudiateswithscorn the idea that thereisany such thing as a _dialect, boasting that rich and_{poor speak} the same _tongue.

Ct

Galcotl Martii,de Matthice_egregie,sapicnter,fortiter^ctjocose dictisac fact^is libdlus.ed. Cassovirc, 1(511. "Unde^fitutcarmen_linguaHungaricacompositum rusticis et civibus,mediisetextremis,eodemtenore intelligatur." Galeotiwas anItalianbybirth,and PapalNuncio at the Courtof MatthiasI, (Coryinus), King^ofHungary.

INTRODUCTION.

_xix

old

Cuman

_tongue is the only ^other language^of

which we know

anything.*

Having, we

_hope,

somewhat

cleared the

way

^astopeople

amongst

whom

thestorieshave been_collected,

we may ^now

proceed^tosay a few

words

aboutthetalesthemselves.

Of

_course,thestorieswillbe found to bear a strongresemblanceto other collections, asindeed they

must

_do; the very ^{fact of the}_striking

way

ⁱⁿ

^which

^not only tales,but even little

superstitions,reappear ^inall

manner

of strange places,f ^is ofitselfa fact

which

isof the deepest^interest tothose

who

_study the

history of

man. We

have attempted ^to give

some

few variants to the tales in this work, _chiefly ^con- fining ourselves ^to

Lapp

and Finnish _tales,

which

are but little

known

in England,

and

of which, ^{as of the}

Magyar,

^thereisa rich store.

The more

one considers comparative folk-lore, the

more

oneis convinced that

many

^{of these taleswere the}

common

property ^of

mankind

before they migrated from ^{their Asiatic}

* Thereisa passagein the writings of Nicolaus Olah Hungaria ^ctAttila, cap. xix. 3)whichatfirstsightseems to ascribe a separatelanguage^to each of the peoplesnamedin thetext. According^tohim,^"thewholeofHungaryⁱⁿ our days (xvith century) contains various nations, viz., Magyars, Germans, Czechs, Slovaks, Croats, Saxons, _Szekelys, Wallachs, Servians, Cumans, Jazyges,Ruthens,and_{finallyTurks,}and allthese (nations)^"different! inter se utuntur lingua,"except^thatsomeof thewordsmayappearsomewhatsimilarand identicalinsoundinconsequence^of (their)protracted useand(the continuous) contact _(of the said nationswith each other)." Against ^this, we may urge, thatif the language of the Szekelys, for example,^differed no more from the Magyar ^thantheGerman_speechfrom that of the Saxons,theycanscarcely be described as two different languages. Moreover, another^writer says, that the

"Hungari^nobilesejusdemregionis (Transylvanite)passim ^intermixti Saxoni- bus,cumCiculispropemodum^tarnsermone,quam^{vestitu etarmis}conveniunt."

SeeRespiiblicaHungarica,^1634.

We

_{have good}reasons for believing that the passage has beencopied by^{theElzevirian} compiler from the Chronigrapliica Transylvania)^ofGeorgeReijchersdorffer, 1550.

f ^Cf.Simpleton^storiesand_{lyingstories,} many^{ofwhichas told in}Hungary, Finland,and_Flanders,andeven amongst^the Lapps,^{areidenticalwith those}we hearin Yorkshire, Lincolnshire,Northumberland, and^Norfolk,

XX INTRODUCTION.

home.* Of

courselocalcircumstances often colour the_stories,but do not change ^the theme.

Amidst

thestories from

Hungary we

find, as

we _might

_presume, the Szekely ^stories telling of

snow-

clad mountains, ^{whilst those} from the

banks

of the

Danube

dwell

on

the beauties of the

Hungarian

^plains.

The

fierce con- flicts of the_{past, too,} have lefttheir

marks on

^the stories,

and

so

we

find the Turkish Sultanf

and

the

Dog-headed

^{TartarJ as the} tyrants of thetale;

and

even, in one _{case, so}

modern

a fact as the

French

invasion is used to frighten an old -world witch.

We

see later on the influence of

Mohammedanism, ^and

^{also the}

marks

ofChristianity,] in

some

tales

which become

as itwere, ^a folk-lore palimpsest.

Kor must we

omit other

ways by which

the taleshave been modified.

Many

^{of the}

^medieval

^romances

were, of course, translated into

Hungarian

^;

and

even to this

day

the

penny

^{bookstall is} always present ^{at fairs}

and

_popular gatherings

where "

yards of ^literature

"

are to be obtained ^for a nominal sum.

The

vendor cannot afford a booth or

stall, so a

* ProfessorVamberysays^: there aremanyfeatures in Hungarian^Folk-Tales whichcanbefound in the talesof China,and other Asiatic countries, ancient andmodern. Thecharacteristics of the chiefpersonages^inthetalesshow that thetales have been imported by^the Magyars from ^{their oldAsiatic} homes, althougha Slavonic influencecannot bedenied.

f ^P.239_infra. Seealsoremains of theTurkish occupation and their bar- barousdoings in the childrens'rhyme ^:

"

Ladybird,ladybird,flyaway,flyaway, FortheTurksarecoming^!

They^willthrow you^intoawellfullofsaltwater:

They^willtakeyou^out,andbreakyou^onthewheel."

Darkwine produced^atEger(Erlau)^iscalled"Turk'sblood."

% Pp.70,^118.

P. 5,infra.

||

"

Stephen^theMurderer,"^"Fisher Joe," and the"Baa Lambs^"in this col- lection. Cf. "Die Engel-lammer^"

Am

^der iin Aitftrage dcr Kisfaludy- GeselUcJiaft vonLad Arany^iindPaul Gyulai lesorgtcn. Ungarische Revue

viii. ix. Heft, 1885, p. 640, and note, which _says: ^"Eines der wenigen un- garischenVolkmarchen,ⁱⁿwelchediechristlicheMythologiehineinspielt."

INTRODUCTION.

_XXI

mat

or tarpaulin ^is spread on the ground,

and

_weighted atthe four corners with brickbats or pavingstones, hence the

Hun-

garian

name

^"ponyva-irodalom"

(tarpaulin literature).

Here we

find mediaeval romances, ^bitsof national

history, biographies

and

panegyrics of famous robbers, the wicked doings ^{of the} mistress of

some

castle

and

her punishment, ^the exploits of

Magyar

heroes, the chronicles of

Noodledom,

ⁱⁿprose, orversi- fied

by some

^{such favourite} poet of the people ^as Peter_Tatar;

and by

^this

means

certain tales

have

been imported, ^others modified.

Then

_{again, the}

_wandering

students were entertained

by

^the country ^folk during^theirperegrinations,

and

no doubt in return

amused

the old folks with the latest

news

fromthe town,

and

the

young

^{ones with tales from the Greek and}

Eoman

Mythologies.*

Another mode

of dissemination

and

modification

was

the soldiers.

When

the

Hapsburgs

^{were at} the height ^{of their} glory the emperor-king's ^soldiers were scattered far

and wide

over Europe; ^{arid, after} long years of service in an _infantryregiment

and

absencefrom

home,

^{the old} private returned to his native _village,

and

at eventide in the village inn related

how

_he, as

"

Sergeant of Hussars," caught with his

own hand

the

Emperor

Napoleon, and only ^let

him go

^{at the earnest entreaties of his} wife, and

upon

receiving a rich bribe in gold.f

The

old soldier

was

well received in every family,

and

_enjoyed great authority ^as a

man who had

seen the world.

The

children sat

upon

^hisknee, or stood round about

him

open-mouthed,

and

listened to hismarvellous yarns.!

In

Hungary,

^{as in other} countries, until the labours of the Brothers

Grimm

directed attention ^to the importance ^{of the} Folk-tales,nothing

was done

in the

way

^ofcollecting

^them

^{; and,}

* Cf. Suchstoriesas HandsomePaul,"p.29infract scq.

t Seeallthisbeautifully sketchedbyC/uczor, in^hispoem^JoannesUary.

% ThattheMagyar ^{soldiercan tell stories} may^{be seen inGaal'stales,most}

ofwhich Arany^{tells us haveamost} undesirable flavour of the barracks about them.

XX11

INTRODUCTION.

even after

Grimm's work

_appeared,

no move was made

in

Hungary

^until

^Henszlman

^{read his} paper ⁱⁿ 1847 before the Kisfaludy Society

on

the "

Popular ^{Tales of}

Hungary,"

ⁱⁿ

which

_paper he

examined some

14 tales

which

afterwards appeared ⁱⁿ Erdelyi's Collection, ^{vols. 1} and 2. Ladislaus

Arany

ⁱⁿ

May ¹⁸⁶⁷

read another paper ^{before the}

same

_society

and

_according to his calculation

some 240

tales

had

been col- lected

up

^{to that date: the} collections quoted

by him were

as follows:

John

_{Erdelyi,*Folk-Songs}

and Popular

Tales, 3vols.

George

^Gaal,f

Hungarian

Folk-Tales, 3 vols.

John

_Erdelyi,

Hungarian Popular

^Tales,

1 vol.

Ladislaus Merenyi, Original

Popular

Tales, 2 vols.

Ladislaus Merenyi,

Popular

^Tales

from

^the

Valleyof^theSajo, 2 vols.

LadislausMerenyi,

Popular

^Tales

from

^the

Banks

_ofthe

Danube,

^{2 vols.}

Ladislaus Arany, Original

Popular

Tales, 1 vol.

John

_Kriza,J

Wild

_{Roses, 1} vol.

Julius Pap, Palocz Folk-Poetry, ^{1 vol.}

containing

34

talcs

53

13

65

35 20

6

226

* John_Erdelyi (born 1814, died 1868),Hungarian poet and author, elected

Memberof the HungarianAcademyof Science, 1839.

t These^taleswerecollectedfromsoldiers: andarefullofunnecessary^flourishes andcoarsebarrack-room_jokes.

% JohnKriza (born 1812, died 1875), born in a small village of Szckely parents. Unitarianminister, professor, poet,andauthor, electedMemberof the Academy,^1841.

A

secondvolumehas,I believe,since appeared.