No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 July 2011
The papers of Sir Edward Denison Ross (1871–1940) at the Archives of the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) include a series of letters from Hungary, which thank him for his contribution in bringing the world's attention to Alexander Csoma de Kőrös (1784–1842). Some of these letters were produced collectively by learned societies and signed by dozens of male and female members, but many were also written by ordinary people expressing their admiration for Csoma, the scholar who had walked most of the way from Transylvania to India in search of the roots of the Hungarian language and people. This lively response was a result of a lecture that Ross delivered on 5 January 1910 at the Asiatic Society of Bengal in Calcutta which became a sensation in Hungary in a matter of weeks. This article therefore looks at the phenomenon of how Ross's purely academic research, to use Albert von Le Coq's words, “touched a nation's heart” and earned him a celebrity status in Csoma's homeland. It is particularly interesting to uncover the motives behind this great publicity and show how it was orchestrated by two young Hungarians in Calcutta for not entirely unselfish purposes.
1 I would like to thank the Library of SOAS for giving me access to see the papers of Denison Ross. I am also grateful to Ursula Sims-Williams from the British Library for her interest in this study from its very inception, and also for sharing her own knowledge of the historical background. My special thanks to Ágnes Kelecsényi from the Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences for showing me the relevant letters from the Stein and Goldziher Collections, and for also sharing with me her research on the history of the Csoma bust created in 1910 and the correspondence surrounding it. She also kindly provided two of the photographs appended as illustrations to this paper. E-mail: [email protected]
2 Csoma's name is written in a variety of ways and not always correctly. In Hungarian, where the surname is placed before the ‘first’ name, he was originally Csoma Sándor, to which the name of his native village Kőrös had been added as a modifier, producing Kőrösi Csoma Sándor. This simply means Sándor (i.e. Alexander) Csoma from Kőrös, which became more commonly written in the French manner as Alexander Csoma de Kőrös. Furthermore, although today this toponym is spelled as “Kőrös” (with a double acute accent over the first vowel, standing for a protracted “ö” sound), back in Csoma's times, and even in 1910, it was commonly spelled “Körös” (with identical umlaut over both vowels). I shall use the modern standard spelling, unless quoting from earlier sources.
3 Louis Ligeti identified Csoma's Yugars as the Yögurs of the Gansu region in Northwest China, also known as the Yellow Uighurs, see Ligeti, Lajos, “A jugarok földje”, Magyar Nyelv XXVII, 1930, pp. 300–314Google Scholar; Ligeti, , “Les pérégrinations de Csoma de Körös et le pays des Yugar”, Revue des études hongroises XII, 1934, pp. 233–253Google Scholar.
4 Duka, Tivadar, Life and Works of Alexander Csoma de Körös (London, Trübner and Co., 1885), pp. 82–84Google Scholar.
5 de Körös, Alexander Csoma, Essay towards a Dictionary, Tibetan and English (Calcutta, Baptist Mission Press, 1834)Google Scholar.
6 This is not to say, of course, that Csoma's accomplishments went unrecognized or unappreciated back home during his lifetime. There were several publications informing the public of his activities. In 1820, shortly after his departure, the Tudományos Gyűjtemény (Scientific Collection) announced the plans of this “renowned Hungarian traveller”. Six years later the same journal published the happy news that “Our Körösi is still alive!” etc.
7 For Ross’ cooperation with Stein, see Sims-Williams, Ursula, “Behind the scenes: some notes on the decipherment of the Sogdian manuscripts in the Stein collection”, in Exegisti monumenta: Festschrift in Honour of Nicholas Sims-Williams, (ed.) Sundermann, Werner, Hintze, Almut and de Blois, François (Wiesbaden, 2009), pp. 469–478Google Scholar.
8 Ross, Denison, Both ends of the candle: The autobiography of Sir E. Denison Ross (London, 1943), p. 166Google Scholar.
9 For a more detailed account of his life, see “Obituary: Sir Edward Denison Ross”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 10, No. 3 (1940), pp. 832–836.
10 Denison Ross, “Kőrösi Csoma Sándor”, Kőrösi Csoma-Archívum, p. 335.
11 Ross remembers the lama the following way: “Lobzang was the most lovable of men, charming and full of character. Besides Tibetan, he knew just enough Hindustani to make his lessons intelligible, and his translations absurd. His year was divided into two periods. The period he enjoyed most were the months when he was an opium-eater. When reduced again to poverty, he would deliver himself up to the missionaries at Darjeeling, making full profession of the Christian faith, or, as he put it, ‘Jesus ko biswas karta’ (‘I believe in Jesus’). It was at those times of comparative sobriety and virtue that he turned again to teaching” (Both ends of the candle, p. 115).
12 Ross also visited the grave of Csoma and resolved to have a new English tablet cut on a piece of marble, since the old one contained some errors. The new tablet was later ordered by the Society (Ibid., p. 113).
13 Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (LHAS), Stein-Ross, No. 136.
14 Csoma, Sándor Kőrösi, Gupta, Anil, Ross, Edward Denison, Vidyabhusana, Satis Chandra, Chatterjee, Durga Charan, Sanskrit, Tibetan-English Vocabulary (Calcutta, Baptist Mission Press, 1910–14)Google Scholar.
15 Duka, Theodore, Life and Works of Alexander Csoma de Körös (London, Trübner and Co., 1885)Google Scholar.
16 “Csoma de Koros: A famous Tibetan scholar and his work”, The Statesman, 9 January 1910; “Dr. Denison Ross's lecture on Csoma de Körös, the famous Tibetan scholar”, The Empress, January 1910, No. 1, pp. 13–15.
17 Budapesti Hírlap, 2 February 1910 (No. 27), p. 8.
18 Ibid., 4 February 1910 (No. 29), p. 12; 13 February 1910 (No. 37), pp. 34–35.
19 Vasárnapi Újság, 13 February 1910 (Vol. 57, No. 7), pp. 137–140.
20 Akadémiai Értesítő, No. 241, January 1910, pp. 438–451.
21 The Papers of Sir E. Denison Ross, 2, SOAS Archives.
22 The Countess was the widow of Count Lajos Batthyány (1807–1849) who had been the Prime Minister of Hungary for a short period following the 1848 anti-Hapsburg uprising and who was executed in 1849.
23 LHAS, Stein-Ross, No. 202 (Calcutta, April 21 1910).
24 Letter dated Berlin, 17 June 1910 (Both ends of the candle, p. 107). Le Coq continues this letter with the following comment on Hungarian nationalism: “Generous they are, and ever were and patriotic to a degree! ‘Teddy’ has been saying nice things about them, but I fear their pride of race does not require much encouragement–when I was amongst them, I rather thought they were too well pleased with themselves”.
25 LHAS, Stein-Ross, No. 136 (Calcutta, January 13 1910).
26 LHAS, Stein-Ross, No. 198 (Calcutta, February10 1910).
27 Both ends of the candle, p. 114.
28 Ibid.
29 Pogány, István, “Magyar kutató Kőrösi Csoma Sándor nyomában: Dr. Tóth Jenő emlékezete” (A Hungarian researcher of Alexander Csoma de Kőrösi: In memory of Dr. Eugene Tóth), Turán, Vol. XXV., No. III., October 1942, pp. 110–115Google Scholar.
30 Ibid., p. 113. Letter dated October 12 1909.
31 Budapest Hírlap, 9 January 1910 (No. 7), p. 9.
32 “List of Ordinary Members” of the Society, Journal & Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. VIII, No. 1, January 1910. Tóth joined the Society over a year later, on 1 December 1910.
33 Kálmán, Mikszáth, Mikszáth Kálmán összes művei (Budapest, Akadémia Kiadó, 1956), Vol. 9, p. 80Google Scholar.
34 Székely Nép, 22 December 1910, p. 1. Ross's other letter ostensibly written in Hungarian was sent to Csoma's alma mater, the Bethlen College, and it was published in the school's annual bulletin (A Nagyenyedi református Bethlen-Kollégium értesítője az 1909–1910-ik iskolai évről, Nagyenyed, 1910, pp. 99–100).
35 The myth that Ross learned Hungarian as a token of his admiration for Csoma prevails in Hungarian publications to this very day. One researcher, for example, with admiration for Ross's enthusiasm refers to one of the letter's “touching foreignness and ornate eruditeness” (Ferenc Szilágyi, “A zarándok”, Nyelvünk és kultúránk 54 [1984], p. 11). In reality, however, this was Löffler's literary style, as he generally used an ornate and overly polite tone in his letters, with strings of complicated clauses at times resulting in grammatical mishaps.
36 Most of the related correspondence is kept at the Department of Manuscripts and Rare Books of the Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MLHAS), with a few related items at the Manuscript Collection of the National Széchenyi Library (MCNSzL).
37 Letter dated December 22 1909 (MLHAS, RAL 22/1910).
38 Letter dated December 30 1909 (MLHAS, RAL 47/1910).
39 Letter dated January 29 1910 (MLHAS, RAL 62/1910).
40 See, for example, letter dated March 21 1910 (MLHAS, 254/1910), in which he informed the Academy that the Asiatic Society decided to decorate its Grand Hall with an oil painting of Csoma. He was also growing impatient for a reply regarding his marble plate project. Of course, he did not know at that time that the Academy had already decided at its 31 January meeting to sponsor the marble plate and have it installed with the help of the Asiatic Society; perhaps a letter had been lost or delayed. (Akadémiai Értesítő Budapest: MTA, 1910, p. 110.)
41 Letter dated February 29 1910 (MCNSzL, Levelestár, Löffler, E.M. ismeretlenhez, 1910).
42 Letter dated May 5 1910 (MCNSzL, Levelestár, Löffler, E.M. ismeretlenhez, 1910). This letter describes that a Russian officer had recently arrived from Chinese Central Asia and brought with him five manuscripts in an unknown language from the vicinity of Khotan, similar to the documents discovered earlier by Stein. Allegedly, the Russian officer was willing to sell them at 350 rupees a piece but Löffler claimed that it might be possible to buy them for 275. If the Academy was interested in purchasing them, he was willing “to keep their owner in check, lest these rare copies were bought by a foreign society”.
43 Two letters from 21 June (MLHAS, RAL 359/1910) and 15 July (MCNSzL, Levelestár, Löffler, E.M. Ballagi Aladárhoz, 1910) discuss the ordering of the plate and preparations for the installation ceremony. Finally, a telegram received from Calcutta on November 19 (MLHAS, RAL 501/1910) said, “Wire sixty pounds sharp Laffler”.
44 Letter dated November 29 1910 (MLHAS, RAL 561/1910).
45 Letter dated December 22 1910 (MLHAS, RAL 584/1910).
46 Letter dated February 14 1911 (MLHAS, RAL 100/1911).
47 Letter draft dated February 25 1911 (MLHAS, RAL 100/1911).
48 Letter draft dated March 12 1911 (MLHAS, RAL 137/1911). This letter in the archives of the Academy is a draft, written in Hungarian. An English translation, obviously in somewhat different wording from my own rendition here, must have been made from this and sent to the Asiatic Society where it presumably remains to this day.
49 Letter dated April 11 1911 (LHAS, Goldziher-Ross).
50 The person proposing Ross's nomination in fact was Goldziher, and Ross had specifically thanked him for this in a letter written almost a year earlier (letter dated June 1, 1910; LHAS, Goldziher-Ross).
51 This is not to say that further archival research, perhaps including the diplomatic archives of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, would not reveal additional information about Löffler and the funds he misappropriated. However, such an enquiry would lead beyond the scope of this incident and, considering the young man's significance, can hardly be justified.
52 It is also worth pointing out that the Academy was only one of the institutions with which Löffler kept in close contact during these months. To be sure, this is the most extensive correspondence but, for example, a couple of his letters are at the Hungarian Museum of Ethnography, as well as a set of seventy photographs of Indian artefacts he had given to the Museum in exchange for photos of Hungarian folk art.
53 The English original of his 1928 talk was published two years later in the Kőrösi Csoma-Archívum, Vol. 2, No. 5 (1930), pp. 333–345.