Page 72 [72]
JÓZSEF ZSENGELLÉR
now he deals first of all with the question of the original language of mankind.“°
In his analysis he refers to Homer, Plato, Aristotle, Clement of Alexandria,
Ambrose, Augustine, Maimonidies, Judah Moscato, Ephodæus, Robert Bel¬
larmine, Antonius Sleidanus, William Whitaker, Johannes Buxtorf, Martin
Luther, Philip Melanchthon, Johann Heinrich Alsted, Gisbertus Voetius and
several others who demonstrate the priority and sanctity of the Hebrew lan¬
guage. Komäromi Csipkes asserted that those versed in Hebrew were ever more
learned, just as those who were immersed in scholarship were always more
profound.” For this reason, it should be noted that this work is not a philologi¬
cal analysis, rather a philosophical oration, presented on the scientific level of
the seventeenth century.
Komáromi Csipkés worked in parallel on his Hebrew grammar and his Hun¬
garian grammar which resulted in several correlations. Hungaria illustrata, his
Hungarian grammar” in Latin, was published in Utrecht in 1655, but according
to its prefacio it was finished on 17'* November 1653 in Debrecen. This grammar
did not follow the method of any previously published Hungarian grammars.”
In this work Komäromi Csipkés did not base his analyses on the previous Latin
grammars as it was customary in his time; rather he took Hebrew as paradig¬
matic for building up a Hungarian grammar. Komaromi Csipkés justifies this
method by arguing: “Concerning the similarity and kinship of our language
to other languages, Hungarian does not correspond to any other language on
Earth save to the Hebrew.”* His examples are meant to represent the corre¬
spondence of Hebrew with the ancient Hungarian cuneiform script, the system
Schola hebraica, since it is bound in the same book behind the Hebrew grammar and the page
numbers continues that of the Hebrew grammar. See 30-31.
1 KOMÁROMI CSIPKÉS, Oratio inaguralis, p. 144: “Non ob aliam proculdubio rationem, quam
quia lingua haec toti humano generi ante confusionem linguarum, teste Mose communis, in
familia Heberi filii Selach, post eandem confusionem remanserit.” (Beyond doubt that this is
the language of the whole human race before the confusion of tongues, and according to the
testimony of Moses, it was continuously used in the family of Heber, son of Selah, after the
confusion.).
#1 KoMAROMI CsIPKES, Oratio inaguralis, p. 160: “Eos qui linguam hebream calluerunt semper
doctiores fuisse, ut eos qui scholasticis incubuerunt, semper profundiores.”
12 The goal of this grammar is given in its subtitle “Brevis, sed methodice naturae & genii, linguae
Hungaricae, explicatio, anungaros in discenda lingua ista facilians, promovens, & Hungaros ef¬
ficiens.”
‘8 Apparently, he did not know the grammar of Janos Sylvester, but mentioned the books of Albert
Szenci Molnar and Istvan Geleji Katona, although he did not use them. Komáromi Csipkés,
Hungaria Illustrata, 15-16.
“4 “Quantum denique ad ejusdem, cum linguarum aliqua convenientiam & affinitatem, lingua Hun¬
garica, nulli linguarum sub coelo tam est similis, ac Hebraicae." KOMÁROMI CSIPKÉS, Hungaria
Illustrata, 23.
+ 70 +