What do you mean, The Celtic cross?

[Robert Vermaat]

Source: Mesterházy Zsolt: The Ancient Hungary The Great Ancient World War and The Rome-Syndrome
" This book the ancient hystory of Hungary provides many surprises for the western European reader. The Europian ancient history begins today with the Greeks and Romans.
[..]
This book visualises a much more ancient European history when the continent had yet a single language or closely related languages with its rather uniform civilisation and culture.

Well, may be this is news for mr. Zsolt, but in all event, future European history will remain the same.
Why? Because history can only be based on written sources. I know of no earlier written sources, earlier than Greek or Roman ones. Inscriptions alone can’t be a basis for rewriting Roman history, nor can medieval sources.

He presents proofs for the relations between Sumerian, Celtic and Hungarian languages.

Is he a linguist? I understood that Hungarian was from an altogether different language Group than Celtic, which is closely related to Germanic and Latin…

He shows on a vast tableau the living presence of the Sumerian , Celtic and Hungarian languages in the todays languages of Europe.

Same question – I hope this has even some basis in linguistic studies..

Through the contradictions linguistic material he documents the statement that the linguistic development of the Western European languages does not correspond with the historic description and in several instances leads to contradictions.

Hmm. What contradictions? When people contact me with news that they have found startling revelations in Late Roman and early medieval history, it’s usually based on denying either contemporary evidence, or a complete re-interpretation of such sources, usually without any scientific method. From what I read here (and I realise it’s just a short description) I must say I’m not filled with trust that this is not the case here…

Especially great changed are suggested in the Latin and Etruscan fusion. To study this problem the decding of Etruscan texts is suggested with the helpof the Hungarian language. This could be realised on the basis of related Sumerian, Hungaryan, Hurritic, and Celtic languages but for this a large-scale study of the Ural-Altaian language family should be evaluated.

Sumeric, Hurritic, Celtic and Hungarian languages are supposedly all related???

He present examples that Etruscan text become understandable with the help of the Hungarian and related language.

Well, I have a book that claims that Etruscan and Illyrian languages are related to modern Slovenian, a Slavic language. That book claims that the Veneti were a Slavic people, and that the Slavic peoples always lived in Eastern and South-eastern Europe. That book also claims that it is proven that Celts and Romans only visited, and later left, and that the modern Slavs are descendants of a people that always lived where they live now.

So what can I say? Are all the scholars idiots?

The changes severely influence the present wiew of the Roman history shorten significantly its duration and influence also its in role European history.

Shorten Roman history???? HOW?? I suppose it was the Hungarians that really conquered Europe?