Folia archeologica 27.

István Fodor: Az uráli és finnugor őshaza kérdése (Régészeti áttekintés)

152 I. FODOR achieved the position, where it partakes on equal terms in solving the problems of Uralian prehistory, achievable by none of the disciplines interested as a singlehanded job."

1

8 2. Archaeology is, notwithstanding, also in the future primarily dependent on linguistics in the course of this extremely intricate and responsible investigation, endeavouring to identify the uncovered find material as the material remains of a certain ancient population. In investigating the problem of an original home, the biogeographical words have a special importance. Botanical, resp. zoological names from the Uralian, resp. Finno-Ugrian periods are characteristic for the biogeographical relations of the original home. In former times recent floral and faunal conditions were considered when defining the confines of this ancient biogeographical environment. Presently we are able to reconstruct, on the ground of flower pollens, preserved in peat sediments, the vegetation of a certain area back to several thousand years. Conditions before 4 to 6 thousand years, reflected in ancient Finno-Ugrian or Uralian period words, are to be sought not on recent but on synchronous plant maps. Results yielded in this way are naturally much more exact than those of former investigations, when data about the ancient vegetation were not known, the flora having been subject to extremely great changes during the past millennia.

1

9 It is on results drawn from bio-geographical words that the theory of a Kama or Volga-Kama original home, having still a fair number of adherents is based. The beginnings of this notion go back, as mentioned, to F. Th. Köppen, whose attention was drawn to the fact that the words "bee" and "honey" have common roots in Finno-Ugrian and Indo-European languages.

2

0 (They are presumably Indo-European loan-words in Finno-Ugrian languages.

2

1) Based on this identity Köppen presumed, on the one hand, an Indo-European - Finno-Ugrian kinship, which later proved false; on the other hand he drew the attention to the circumstance that in ancient times bees and apiculture were unknown in Siberia, he first bee swarms having been transported by Russian settlers in the late 18th century.

2

2 From this he drew the deduction, according to which the Finno-Ugrian original home must have been in Europe and by no means east of the Ural.

2

3 l

s Hajdú, P., Néprajz és Nyelvtud. 12(1968) 10. 1

9 This method was applied first in the research of the original home by Gy. László: Őstörténetünk. . . 2

0 Köppen, F. Th., op. cit. 1003-1004. 2

1 See: MSzFE II. 429-430, 443-444. - A. J. Joki is, though, of the opinion that IndoEuropean words may come from Finno-Ugrians as well: Uralier und Indogermanen. Die ältere Berührungen zwischen den uralischen und indogermanischen Sprachen. MSFOu 151. (Helsinki 1973) 284, 373-374. 2

2 The military surgeon Behrens sent during the winter of 1776-1777 for 30 swarms of bees from the land of the Bashkirs, Government of Orenburg, to Usty-Kamenogorsk. (

Köppen

, F. Tb., op. cit. 1005.) - Köppen considers the earlier data of Pallas, according to which he found an apiculturist in Tobolsk, not essential. [Ibid. 1006. Cf. Pallas, P. S., Reise durch verschiedene Provinzen des russischen Reichs. Teil II. (St. Petersburg 1773) 99.] 2

3 Köppen, F. Th., op. cit. 1007. - Köppen surmised the common Indo-European and Finno-Ugrian original home about the central section of the Volga. (Ibid.)