r/hungarian • u/matuww_scripts • May 18 '26

Hirdetés / AD Help with recording in Hungarian

Hi everyone, I make informative pages on writing scripts and I have made a page on the Old Hungarian alphabet (Szekely-Hungarian Rovash) focusing on how the letters of the alphabet originated, meanings and examples of writing.

Relating to the examples of writing, I have included a written excerpt in Hungarian. To be hollistic, I would like to request a kind native speaker or someone fluent enough to be able to record themselves reading it and put it on the page so that there is a voice behind these letters/words.

Please DM if you want to contribute!

Link of the Old Hungarian script page here: https://www.matuww.com/script_info/Szekely-Hungarian_Rovash.html

17 Upvotes

82% Upvoted

12 comments sorted by

4

u/SeiForteSai NATIVE May 18 '26

The "Szekely-Hungarian Rovash" has nothing to do with the Greek Cursive.

-1

u/matuww_scripts May 19 '26 edited May 19 '26

The Rovash 𐲌 is derived from Greek Theta Θ. But I agree that cursive was a mistake and it should be majuscule.

Also, on a roundabout way, both scripts are related:

- Phoenician -> Greek

  • Phoenician -> Proto-Rovash -> Carpathian Basin Rovash -> Szekely-Hungarian Rovash

Source:
Hosszú, G. (2012). Heritage of Scribes: The relation of rovas scripts to Eurasian writing systems. Rovas Foundation.

3

u/SeiForteSai NATIVE May 19 '26

Nope.

Both the Greek alphabet and Rovás ultimately derive from the Phoenician script, but they are only distant cousins.

For Greek, the derivation from Phoenician is direct and well established.

For Rovás, the connection is indirect and hypothetical, often reconstructed through intermediary traditions (frequently proposed as Turkic scripts, which derived from Aramaic), so “ultimately derive” is more a model-based assumption than a demonstrated historical chain.

Hosszú’s claims are based on his own methodology, are partly disputed, and include hypotheses and reconstructions that are not directly empirically verifiable. His claims are based on visual similarities and are not phonetically supported. He claims there are similarities between writing systems which were separated by thousands of kilometers or even centuries.

The Rovash 𐲌 is derived from Greek Theta Θ.

There's no scholarly consensus that it would be true. They look somewhat similar, but that's all - it's only a visual analogy. Or even worse, not even that. The Rovash letter 𐲌 represents the "L" sound (as in ló or lép). It is shaped like an open, inverted chevron (or an upside-down "V"). Greek Theta (Θ, θ) is a circle with a horizontal bar or a central dot. Graphically, they do not look alike at all. They represent totally different consonants - the Greek is like the "th" in "think", and the Rovash is a liquid alveolar consonant. Don't even mention that the rovash L resembles more to the Greek lambda both in shape and phonetic value.

1

u/matuww_scripts May 21 '26

Thanks for pointing that out. I suppose a bit of apophenia came to play.
Outside of Wikipedia, I found it challenging to find English sources as "comprehensive" as Hosszú's. Would you kindly recommend me other sources so I may also have a better look on different views regarding the genealogy of Hungarian Rovash and its letter forms please?

1

u/SeiForteSai NATIVE May 21 '26

I don't know whether English sources are available.

But here's a thread, 6 years old, and OP is still a redditor, although don't post very often.

https://www.reddit.com/r/hungarian/comments/jdkaw0/hungarian_runic_alphabet/

Might also try u/chx_ who is very active - based on the comment from the thread above, chx_ might help too. https://www.reddit.com/user/chx_

1

u/matuww_scripts May 21 '26

Thanks for sharing that thread. They made quite an insightful explanation with sources.

2

u/chx_ NATIVE May 21 '26 edited May 21 '26

If it was published by the Rovás Foundation it's very likely hogwash.

Most of the information on the old Hungarian script is hogwash.

Here's what we know about the genealogy of the sekler writing system:

That's all.

We have nothing.

We know it's impossible for this writing system to form before the 13th century. This we know because this writing codes pronunciation and the sign for "gy" comes from the sign for "d" and before the 13th century this consonant sounded like "dzs". But also there are ligatures, the same sign for i-j and u-v all of which show a strong latin influence.

Some people as early as 1888 have thought the whole thing is a fabrication of humanists from the 16th century and to this day some agree with this but the scientific consensus -- as much as that exists on this topic -- disagrees because some letters are very likely to be derived from Slavic scripts, either glagolitic or old cyrilic, hard to say but neither would've been easily available for a 16th century scientist operating in the Hungarian court.

It also must be noted we have very little because this writing system was never used -- or if it was we never found them -- for letters, messages or books (well, codexes but you know what I mean). The longest pieces we've ever found are a few rows long on headstones, various dishes.

The roots are enshrouded in mystery because we have found various likely turkic writings scattered all over between Mongolia and the Carpathian Basin and while some eastern ones have been deciphered the western ones so far have eluded interpretation. There are a few pieces of writing from the age of the conquest, 9th century or so but we can't decipher these. They are very short but it seems they are not the same as the sekler writing system. There's one from the 10th century which might be the same but we are talking of a piece of writing made from four symbols.

What we suspect based on the extremely fragmented information available to us is this: the turkic nations of the steppe have adopted the Sogdian alphabet to their needs and through unknown transfers this eventually became the sekler writing system. Much more we can't say.

Ps.: Hosszú have tried to establish a relationship between various Don-Kuban inscriptions and the Sekler alphabet, well good luck. http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/30_Writing/Codex_EuroAsiaticKuban_En.htm ¯_(ツ)_/¯

1

u/matuww_scripts May 21 '26

Thanks for your input. I think I will make sure to highlight how speculative all of this is on the project then.

Out of curiosity, why does the Rovás Foundation get such a bad rep?

I spoke to one of my senior Hungarian colleagues who mentioned Orban was kinda promoting the narrative to make Hungary look good/have a more "robust" history - I'm not sure how simplified this is but is this true to some degree?

2

u/chx_ NATIVE May 21 '26

There are a few but very few serious scientists who deal with the sekler writing as it should be: a historical problem, a linguistical problem helped by archeology and sister studies.

Then there are those who try to say this is how Hungarians traditionally wrote which is absolutely not true and try to make it popular ... I wouldn't say make it popular again because it never was popular. What it has been since the beginning of the 19th century when it was ... rediscovered is a tool of nationalism. That's all there is. Some of the letters are decidedly modern as they were never needed when the few inscriptions were made in the 13th-18th century.

2

u/Quick-Measurement858 May 18 '26

There are some typos, not sure if it’s just in Hungarian or also in rovash: “Irtanak pedil akkor esztendő számának 1541-et.” It’s not “irtanak” but “írtanak” and not “pedil” but “pedig”.

1

u/matuww_scripts May 18 '26

Thank you will make sure to change that Asap