This video was supposed to be 24 minutes long. But the more research I conducted, there more excited I got about Magyar history. So here it is, with 47 minutes runtime my longest video since 2021. Still I was forced to cut out a part about the Sarmatians and their connections to the Magyars - a remnant of that topic can be seen in the first world map at the beginning of the video. Forgive me, Magyar friends. I hope that you, especially, enjoy this one nonetheless. I might have missed an event or important person here and there. Tell me in the comments below, and I'll consider it for a follow-up video in the future. On this occasion, please consider joining my revived Discord server. Over there, we like to discuss history about the steppe and Turkic peoples, ancient primary sources, DNA research and so on. There's even a "Research" group where you can, if you feel like it, contribute to one of the future projects. --> discord.gg/mwqE8dTcFq
@@janosszentpeteri1922< igen , yes , ők a mai bosnyákok - bosnians .-> P-B= same : pecsenyegs : magyarul "becses nyék" néptörzsűnk , hátunk mögött követő " hátvédők " . -> több nyék törzsből vannak , mint mi [ 107+ 3-5 ] pesenyek -> besenyek -> bosonyákok -> bosnyákok : bősz-nyék : " bosnyákok - egyik néptörzsűk . Stb...
16:00= the very original belief of us - hungarians : cosmology: within the sun as good-"god" with respect , and the eartly made fire worship , sun who give life to every living thing , to live ! Not realy the side effect tengriism . This come from the other branch , when the iceage hit europe , one original carpatian basin people went to south to africa ( nilus river statue on it : makari people ) from there they went to middle east - sumeria , the are the s(z)aburians asfaloids branch people , those who went trought the cau( kő ) casus montains to reunite with in altai - altáj ( al talaji - not mountainious ) place with their relatives . Together they came back to the original place where they use to live before the iceage , the nowdays called carpatian basin . Etc...
17:18= not truth ! Even today folks tale clearly say = ördögűzők - ördűnglők- ördög döngölők . That's exactly the opposite of worshiping the devil - ördög ! Need to know why ? Because we present and show the evil , the devil to fight against him and his spirit , we don't hidding the represent the enemy , just like the natives in north and south america , and other continent .So this is clearly an other misconseption . Etc...
Érdekes, hogy a kárpát medencében a dél dunántúli avar kori temetőkben fellelt emberanyag genetikája 80% ban megegyezik a mai székely emberek genetikájával. Ma is élnek avarok Dagesztánban, Kaukázusban, saját nyelvükön maglarülal "магларулал" ami highlander hegyi embert jelent. Hangzásban a "magyar" és a "магларулал" hasonló.
There is a tradition in Hungary. It is called "komaság" it can be vary. Those who have no blood in common may be familiar. I think so blood oath makes a similar connection between nations on the steppe.
Thank you for this absolutely amazing video. A little fun fact to add: in Hungary we use the Eastern name order. Family name comes first, and the given name after that. This is the official way. As far as I know, no other European country uses it. Another fun fact: the word Táltos (the Hungarian name for the "shaman") also means "a horse, that runs very fast" (in some folk tales they also can fly - like the shamans souls while beeing in trans). And the name Emese (the mother of prince Álmos) is still popular here. :)
Another fun fact: the Hungarian date order is year - month - day, opposite to most other European countries, even Eastern European ones. Which is pretty logical - but only for us 😂. Now imagine a British, for example, who travels to Egypt and sees the front page of a newspaper with the date on it. He thinks: it is not strange, it is the same as ours: day - month - year. But he is dead wrong! Because the Arabic writing goes from right to left, therefore it is year - month - day for an Arabic speaker 🙂. And whom did we get the numbers we use from ? 😉
Very good, but then you will tell me why your ancestors attacked the eastern half of the Hungarian kingdom for more than five hundred years and killed hundreds of thousands of Hungarians, which is why we then lost Transylvania and Partium to the Romanians?! Did they know anything about this ancient kinship?
@@szakaattila7899 Ezt én is elmondhatom. A mongolok meghódították, és kötelezték a közös harcra őket. Aki nem engedelmeskedett, azokat megölték. A tatár nevet később vehették fel, korábban (XIX. század) volgai bolgárok voltak. A volgai tatárok nem azonosak a krími tatárokkal.
True Volga Bolgars ans Hungarians were neighbors there and closely related. Both did fight aganist the Mongol invasion and the Hungarians there were completly eliminated.
@@Goratrix66 All right, except that they were not Hungarians, but Mogyerians - Magyars, and this is where everyone is wrong about this, because, unfortunately, anti-Hungarian historians also feed this misconception!
Thank you for taking the time to make this video! The whole truth would probably require a time machine,and even if there were, some details would probably be left out! Tengri be with you !
thank you for making a video about us, it is always nice to see someone putting energy into this topic. there are a couple of things which are still up to debate, but it would not be fair to pick apart the perceived inaccuracies due to the tentative nature of the finer details and the obscurity of the studies and knowledge supporting those details. all in all a well put together work with logical consistency and generally in a good direction. especially the take on türk vs ugric origins: well it can be both. lastly, i am pretty sure there will be rude comments from some of my compatriots who have lower impulse-control, but don't let those comments take away your curiosity and enthusiasm about the subject. thanks again, cheers! :)
Under a recent openings of some Hun cemeteries, located in the Northern Mongolian region, the DNA blood relationship between the deceased Huns and the Hungarians living in Central Europe today, has been confirmed as being the same. This confirms a long believed relationship between this two brother nations.
Thanks to the science of Archaeogenetics the old political denial of Hun-Avar-Magyar continuity can be proven genetically! Magyarságkutató Intézet - The Origin of the Hungarians video ruclips.net/video/mV3v3rvPRfE/видео.htmlsi=_9_VZrtXEnsSw8I1
I have been waiting for the Magyars to be covered for some time now. As a Hungarian wanting to learn more of my roots I am Greatful that u took the time to talk about us. 🎉🇭🇺🔥
They always forget that among Hungarians marrige with a relative was and is a taboo. The further away your spouse from is the better. So mixing was suppoerted.
I didn't know that. It is also a characteristic that I found in sources about the Kyrgyz and Göktürk people, and virtually all other Turkic peoples to this very day. So I am not surprised that it would be the same with the Magyars. Thanks for the info.
This is true. A recent genetic study of 4 Avar age cemetary did total family trees of the skeletons of the graves and it showed that almost everyone of those communities were relatives to eachother, but only in father line. Their society was based on paternal heritage and clan structure based on the father line heritage, while the women in the cemetaries were of totally different communities genetically. There were barely any female descenant which shows us that the girls married to different communities and the wives came from also different communities. They even payed attention to not to marry someone who had even a little distant family realtivity. Also the genetical connections proved the existance of 'Leviarty' which is a steppe turkic tradition, if the husband of a woman died, she was kept in the family by marrying her to the brother, uncle, or to a close male relative of the deceased husband. So in Father line there was a huge blood based structure of these sociaties, but they paid high attention to marry such women who had totally no blood relativness to them.
You know who loves to marry their first cousins? The Pakistanis! In England they have a real serious problem because of stale blood......the British doctors are trying to talk them out of marrying their cousins to no avail. Their parents are making the decision for them. They can't go against family decision. Very backward.
In 2020, new research on the genetics of the Huns appeared, which collected significantly more material on this people. French and Mongolian scientists published the results of their research in one of the most popular genetic journals in the world - Human Genetics. According to research, the Huns were a mixed Eurasian population of Siberian Scythians (originally the Andronovo archaeological culture), which included the descendants of the Aryan (R1a) and Proto-Turkic peoples (Q), as well as haplotypes that were directly related to the Hungarian conquerors - the Magyars (N ). That is, the Huns who invaded Europe united three different tribal formations of Eurasian steppe nomads.
Only a small part of Mgyars DNA is N1 haplotype. Magyars are Fino-Ugric people like Estonians, like Livonians, like Finland, and like Northwest Russians. They are Not Turkic. N1 is a haplotype originally from China that spread into Siberia and then through Samoyedic people intermarried into Fino-Ugric people, but a haplotype of Someone with N1 could easily after a couple thousand years be a blonde person with blue eyes and the only evidence of the N1 is the DNA.
Strangely, the "Dream of Emese" is represented on a golden vessel of the Avar age in Hungary from Nagyszentmiklós (8th-beginning of 9th century), not from the Magyar age (10th century).
on one hand we will never know what is on those vessels since there is no written record. on the other hand the woman grabed by a hawk like bird could be interpreted as a Emese and the Turul. The avar state fell under the Frank attack but the avar population certainly lived through and they became subjects of Hungary. Some historians like Gyula Laszlo mentiones thet avars were much more numerous then the conquering magyars. He suggest that Hungarian may be the language of the avars or the majority of avars. The conquering magyars might spoke turkish according to the names of tribes and leaders. But Isaac Newton was not jewish neither spoke hebrew even if he had hebrew name. So this is all just speculation. We have no idea about the linguistic situation in Hungary in the X. c. Khazar jews, iranian muslims from Choresm called Kalasz and Pomaz, iranian speaking jasz (iasi), türkic speaking besenyős (petchenegs), varang and kölpény vikings came with the magyars and found slavic tribes, probably türkic and uralic speaking avars, and slavic-turkic-uralic speaking bolgars in Hungary. So using an avar age vesel to picture a magyar myth is appropriate in this quiet wide range of ethnic situation of that age.
@@ciszegebe Τhe double conquest theory of Gyula László has widely been discredited among Avar and Conquest period Magyar researchers of the end of the 20th century, it is interesting but rather a marginal idea: among historians only László really professed it, but it is indeed a highly popular idea in the "popular history" or national mythology, still attached to Hungarians being Altaic instead of Uralic. I am not sure why is this, but if you look at the little evidence there is, the only readible inscriptions of the late Avars are clearly in a Turcic language, whereas nothing suggests that the Hungarians weren't actually speaking Hungarian when they arrived into the basin (they certainly did have a Turcic and a more ancient Iranic component though). The territorial theoris of László have largely been rejected by later researchers. The archaeological origins of the Conquering Hungarians point to the southern Ural region which is also in concordence with a Finno-Ugric population, the region being right in the heart of the Uralic languages, between its three branches of Samoyedic, Finnic and Ugric. Also the conquering population seems to have been much larger than previously thought, as we know now that Hungarians were already partly cultivators well before their arrival, living on the northern boundary between the steppe and forest ecosystems and could sustain a much larger population than pure nomads.
@@ciszegebe the same scene is represented on Indian and Iranian vessels and may have referred to any other myth. The idea the it represents the dream of Emese comes from László Gyula's book on the treasure of Nagyszentmiklós in which he partially dates it to the time of the Hungarian kings on quite ridiculous grounds. For the correct dating and cultural situation of the hoard, see the more recent Bálint Csanád's A Nagyszentmiklósi kincs at Balassa editions (also a vulgarized version and another one in German) or that of Szenthe György at the National Museum (Budapest).
Turk ve Macar Kardes! Not all Huns where Hungarian, but all Hungarians where Hun. Our greatest King Dynasty, the Árpád House was from the Hun dynasty of Tugrul. Basicly the Huns where arround: 60% Turk; 25% Sarmatian; 10% Hungarian; 5% Mongolian. When we ruled the Goth-Germans, they join to our army.
@@ronaldgrove3283 King Stephen (St. Stephen) was the first King of Hungary. However he was not the first King in Pannonia from his family line. Before King Stephen it was the Magyar confederacy. The title was something like Grand Prince. His ancestor Arpad was the first ruler in Pannonia (modern Hungary).
@@norakssolucani videonun beş on dakikasını baktıktan sonra destek yorumumu yazarım Artı Emre yaptığı videoların hepisi kaliteli Yorum yazmam sizi rahatsızmı etti?
@@norakssolucaniEmrenin kanalını uzun zamandır takip ediyorum Yayınladığı kitabıda aldım Kaliteli iş yaptığını çoktan ispatlamış benim için Ben gönül rahatlığıyla destek yorumumu video bitmeden yazıyorum
As a Hungarian I'm surprised how accurate and well informed this video was. You really did put in a lot of time to research. Our origin is a mystery and we have many theories even more than you presented here but these you presented were the ones most supported by historical evidences. This was a quality presentation. This is a sensitive topic. There are cult-like groups spreading misinformation about this and it is hard to find real historical facts. Hobby historians creating novels and some people believe everything they read. You did a great job trying to not hurt anyone's feelings.
Extract from Neparáczki archaeogenetics: Based on Neparáczki, the following genetic distribution emerges from the 89 "occupier" graves excavated in Hungary: Scandinavian Germanic 39 (43.82%), Asian Hun 37 (41.57%), Caucasian 5 (5.61%), Slavic 2 (2 .25%), Other European 6 (6.75%). "The groups closest to the population of Karos are the early European farmers who lived 6000-3000 years ago (STR=Starcevo), the Middle Eastern Neolithic (MEN), the Szakálhát culture of the Carpathian basin (SZA), the Yamnayas (YAM, 3500-2300 BC Black steppe above the sea), the population of the Scythian kurgans of the Iron Age (KIK, 800-600 BC) and the Asian Bronze Age Scythians from the Tagar-Tachtyk culture (TAG, 800 BC - AD 400). The Central Asian Bronze Age is also close Sintastha culture (SIA, the first steppe nomads) and the population of the Iron Age Baraba steppe (BB3, southern Siberia)."
@@erikakatona4356 Hát igen. Nagy vonalakban csak europid gén van, de Neparáczkival nem mernék vitatkozni ezen. Biztos találtak valami apró különbséget ami populációkra jellemző és az alapján tudják felaprózni az europid génállományt.
Well, it is not so simple to say that Hungarians have only marginal connections with the Huns. But, as I will show you in the followings, the Hungarians are the direct descendants of the Huns! First of all, what were the Huns? Turks? Are there any linguistic proofs of this? Until we find a text written by the Huns, that proves what language they spoke, we cannot say that they were Turks or any other nationality. That some Hunnic names can sound Turkic, do not prove anything, because it could be a matter of fashion to give such names to some of people. Today the Turks from Turkey have mostly Arabic names, and the Hungarians mostly have Indo-European or Hebrew names, because of their religion and the cultural influence to which they were subjected in the last centuries. I. Genetically, the question is more interesting, and this can shed light on the Hungarian origin too. Archeogenetical mitocondrial studies of the Hunnic graves in Mongolia showed that the Huns originated from two major groups: 1. In the East, until the line of Ulan Bator, they were mostly of East Asian, Mongoloid type, 2. West from Ulan Bator they were Europid types, of the Scythian people originating from the Northern shores of the Black Sea. So the Western part of the Huns were Scythians, while the eastern part were of Mongolic or Turkic origin. The Western Huns (Xiongnu) were the descendants of the Yamnaya Pre-Scythian culture, which founded the Scythian empire, as a result of which many Scythians from the Black Sea region migrated to the East, and established themselves in Western Mongolia and the Altay mountains. Their rich archaeological finds, and great artistic creations (gold objects, rugs, etc.) were excavated from Altay, Tuva, and Mongolia, together with the mummies of Europoid, blond or red-haired people. In 48-49 AD, the Chinese chased away the Western Huns (those of Scythian origin), which migrated, after a short period of dwelling around Lake Balkash, in two directions: 1. The region which today is Bashkortostan, or in the past was Magna Hungaria. And there they remained for many centuries. From there the Huns which in the 4th century formed the European Hunnic empire, migrated to today's Hungary, then from the same region 500 years later the 7 Magyar tribes migrated to retake the Hunnic lands in the Carpathian Basin. 2. To the south: Bactria, Northern Afghanistan, and Northern India, where they founded the White Hunnic (or Hephtalite) Empire. So, the place where the Huns settled East from Ural, was the same place from where the Hungarians migrated in the 9th century, to found Hungary. And in the same place, in the 13th century, the Hungarian priest Julianus found Hungarians and called that place Magna Hungaria. So the Hungarians and the Huns lived in the same place for 800 years. But both Attila's Huns and the Hephtalites have connections with the Hungarians of today. Actually, the Avars who settled in the Carpathian Basin were not mostly of East Asian Mongol-Turkic origin, but of Hephtalite White Hun origin. Their ethnic name Var-Chunni shows this. When the Gök Türks in alliance with the Iranians, destroyed the White Hun Empire, the White Huns joined the Avars (Rourans) in the region of the Caucasus, after crossing the whole Persia and the Caucasus mountains from the South, as the Byzantine chronicler Corippus writes in his book In Laudem Iustini III. After that the Var-Chunni empire, called Avars, established itself in the Carpathian Basin. But the majority of the Avars seem to be the White Huns, but because the kaghan was Avar, the empire was called Avar Empire. When, in 895, the 7 tribes of the Magyars came, they found there huge masses of Avars, and, we can say, they reunited for the first time since the Chinese chase away their ancestors from Mongolia. An interesting thing about the Hephtalites, is that, it seems that some of them remained in the East, are the Maghar people from Nepal, who claim that their ancestors came from Central Asia, and this is proven also by the Shamanism and the wooden pillars that they put on the graves of their dead, which are similar to the funerary wooden pillars of the Székelys and Hungarians called kopjafa. This means that actually, the White Huns had among them a tribe called Magyar, which retreated in the Southern Himalayas after the Whites Huns were chased away from Bactria. III. And now, lets look at the language. It is really peculiar how this isolated language exist in Central Europe. It is told by some researchers that this language was spoken by the 7 tribes of the Magyars, when they came in 895. It is proven that these 7 tribes were not very numerous in comparation with the peoples they found in the Carpathian Basin. But if only they would have spoken this language, regarding the fact that they found a huge mass of people of other origins in the Carpathian Basin (as some say, mostly Slavs), then their fate would have been the same as the Bulgarians, who despite conquering the lands South to the Danube, they lost their language and Turkic culture, and became Slavs. Or the Viking (Varangian) Russian troops that conquered the East Slavs, became Slavs. Or the Germanic Longobards who conquered Italy, they became Italians. And the examples can go on and on, with the Visigoths, Vandals, Franks, Sveves, etc. This shows that if a nation conquers a region on which another nations live, which are more than the conquerors, the conquerors finally assimilate in the conquered peoples, and disappear completely, only their name remaining in some cases (France, Bulgaria, Russia)... But nothing else. So why only the Magyars could survive without loosing their language and culture, and, furthermore, “impose” it on the peoples they conquered, although these peoples were in majority? The only plausible explanation is, that a huge part of the people the Magyars found there, were speaking also Hungarian! So, it seems, that a part of the Avars, and mostly probably the descendants of the White Huns (Hephtalites) spoke Hungarian! And as these two people speaking the same language met, they became majority in the Carpathian Basin, and this is how the Hungarian language survived until today. Even in the Hungarian Chronicles there is proof about this: the Székelys which is said that they were waiting for the Magyars of Árpád, and united with them in the Carpathian Basin. And what is this showing? That the Huns, who departed from Mongolia in 48-49 AD, spoke a form of ancient Hungarian, and when in 895 the Magyar tribes arrived in Pannonia, their descendants still spoke it. Probably the Eastern Xiongnu, who remained in Mongolia after 49 AD, who were mostly of Mongoloid ancestry, they spoke Turkic. So, in conclusion, the Xiongnu (Asian Huns) were composed by two major components: Proto-Hungarians and Turks. The Proto-Hungarians departed in 49 AD from Mongolia and founded the European Hun and the White Hun Empires. The White Huns, after being defeated by the Gök-Türks (former Eastern Xiongnu) and the Persians, fled, together with the Avars (Rourans) to the West Later, and established themselves in the Carpathian Basin in 568. And the two branches of the Xiongnu, which fled to the West in 49 AD reunited in the Carpathian Basin in 895. As I showed, the only explanation how the Hungarian language survived in the Carpathian Basin, and did not disappeared after 895, is that the Hungarians are direct descendant of both the Huns of Attila and the White Huns (Hephtalites). Other proofs that the Hungarians are the direct descendants of the Huns. Of course the ancient legends about the origin of the Hungarians. No other nation in the world in its legends about its origin, says that it comes from the Huns, only the Hungarians! Is this just a coincidence? Today you can go at any Hungarian village and ask the people who live there, who are your ancestors, and he will respond: the Huns! And another, which in my oppinion, is the most important. The archaeological research of the graves of nomadic peoples, starting with the Scythians and ending with the Mongols, showed that from all nomadic horse-archer peoples only two burried their dead by partial horse burial: the Huns and the Hungarians.What is that meaning? While all the other nomadic people burried their dead with the whole horse, the Huns and the Hungarians burried only the horse’s head and leg bones together with the dead. This is called partial horse burrial. While we can find such kind of burials very sporadicly also among other peoples (which can be explaned that some Huns or Hungarians lived among them), but as the whole people, only the Huns and Hungarians burried their people in this way. All Hunnic and Hungarian burials are partial horse burrials, while among Turks, Mongols, Rourans, Kitans, Mandjus, etc, you can find one or two such burrials. What is that if not the decissive proof that the Hungarians of today are the direct descendants of the Huns?
We could divide this into 3 components: 1.0. Xiognu ulus. - Huns. (Mongolia to Europe) 2.0. Gokturk ulus. - Mamluks. (Irak to Egypt) - Seljuk Turks (Persia) -> Sultanate of Rum (Anatolia) -> House of Osman (Anatolia). - Khazar Khaganate. - Other? 3.0. Mongol ulus. - Chagatai Khanate. - Ilkhanate. - Golden horde. - Yuan dynasty. - Timurids - Mughal Empire. - Other? All of the 3 empires were once organised towards one place namely Otuken wich was the center for all the Nomads and had as well the same religion namely Tengrism. Migrations resulted to mixing with other races and change of religions of course. Also the national monument of Mongolia illustrates this very well.
4 месяца назад+10
Magyars were and still much larger in numbers than all of the others all together put into the so called "Finno-Ugric" group. Scientifically this should be called the "Magyar" group. The culture was moving from the south to the less developed and more harsh north, from the more numerous people to the less. Not the reverse way. That would be quite illogical. This movement explains the relationships, but not that the Magyars learned from Finnish as the political wrong name suggests. The northen people mixed and learned from the southern neighbors who were also militarily clearly superiors. The movement is also simple to see if you look at the rivers coming from the Mongolian plateu and flowing to the north, as the cold weather slowly improved after the ice age. Rivers were used as the best roads for moving. This is the direction how people moved, cultural transition faded, and the number of people diminished. There is a clear natural arrow. If someone ignores this arrow, then I will not believe whatever crazy theory is presented...
As a Hungarian American I appreciate your very informative and logical explanation of the Hungarians origin. It is refreshing to hear the logic and fact based history where the Hungarians came from especially in this day and age where political bias and anti Hungarian theories on this subject are endless and nonsensical. I have heard dozens of theories about the origin of the Hungarians from multiple interests and sources and non of them made too much sense to me. More often than not I sensed deliberate antagonistic viewpoints toward the Hungarian history depicting the Hungarians as uncultured, primitive, non white, non European tribes who don't belong in the European community despite the fact, that they've been in that country for over a thousand year..
This video is amazing, but I wish you guys talked about only surviving oghur Turkic language : Chuvash ! and ironicly high amount of similarities that it shares with Hungarian (and other ugric languages which are claimed to be related to Hungarian) There are MANY words in Hungarian and Chuvash languages which are exclusive to these two. Not to mention Chuvash people STILL are living at the region what is called "Magna Hungaria" today place where Hungarians originated or at least initialy arrived Whole Chuvash Hungarian linguistic relation can serve as a explanarion for : 1-) Where did app. %30 of Hungarian vocabulary with Unknown origin comes from ? (Today mostly extinct Oghur Turkic lanuage family) 2-) Why Hungarian is mutualy uninteligable with other Turkic languages ? (Just like Chuvash, which is also COMPLETELY uninteligable with every other existing Turkic language, they are a part of a Subbranch of Turkic languages that has specialised from other 5 main subbranch of Turkic languages when Oghur Turks (Huns, Avars, Khazars, Sabars, Bolgars, Chuvashs and Hungarians) begun to imigrate to west at the 1century BC.) This ALSO proofs Hungarian-Hunnic relation : Hungarians too were a part of Oghur tribes that made up Hunnic empire of Atilla alongside fellow Chuvashs, and when empire collapsed and raidings into europe were no more these Turkic peoples had to imigrate back to volga basin where they initialy gained a footfold (magna hungaria, where chuvashes still live today) as invading gepid, quad and scribi germanic tribes seized pannonia
1. The Hungarian legends also state the conquest of the Carpathian Basin was a RETURN to their original homeland. 2. Hungarian legends claim the leaders of the Hungarians were of Scythian descends and not Huns 3. The legend of Hunor and Magor states they were BROTHERS, thus, the Hungarians cannot be DESCENDANTS of the Huns 4. There is no historical and archeological proof of Finnic people migration, therefore, the common homeland in the Urals is absolutely baseless. Even more the Lapps (Saami) have been residing in Scandinavial for a good 10 000 years. If they are related to the Hungarians, their common homeland could be anywhere in Central-Europe as well (taking into account the last galcial age) 5. All European peoples who lived in Europe before the Indo-European invasion spoke agglutinative langauges: the Basques, the Etruscan, the Minans etc. etc. They are all considered language isolates as such an ancient connection to langauges existing today cannot be proven linguistically but on the same account it cannot be refuted either. As a conclusion from the above I have a strong belief that Hungarian is either a missing ancient link between the Finno-Ugric and Turkic people or even they are ancestral to both of them (so there is no borrowing of any kind) and further back in time they are related to the ancent extinct people of Europe predating both the Greeks and the Romans. It is certain that Hungarian langauge separeted from its closest Ugric relatives in the Iron age a good 3000 years ago, so there is a specific Hungarian langauge since then, therefore, it is more ancient than Latin, not to mention any exsiting spoken European languages.
@@CocoSon-we2rg< YES ! FROM THE EUROPIAN ICEAGE THEY MOVED SOUTH AND EAST AND NORTH , AND AFTER ICE AGE THE ALL MOVED BACK THEY ORIGINAL TERITORY . SOME SMALL GROUPS NEVER LEFT WITH EACH RACES AND GROUPS , RIGHT NOW MORE AND MORE PROOF THEY FIND AND FOUND . Etc...
@@Baso-samaA litle mistake there. The Huns were Scythians. This information also pointed those Chronicles . Also Priscos retor call Atilla King of Scythians
@@Baso-sama Paul Lendvai among others says: Folklore research and modern philology recognize the popularlegends, in any case, a historical kernel: a close connection with a Bulgarian-Turanic people and with the Alans. While the name Magyar "Hungarian" that the Hungarians give themselves dates back to the Ugric era, the name of hungarus, Hungarian "Hungarian", has its origin in the Turanian tribal organization of the honor to which the Hungarians belonged for a long time. honor in- means "ten arrows", i.e. tribes. But it is also possible that the name that became common in the West from the early 9th century to remind of the union of the seven initial tribes, weakly connected them, of the old Hungarians with the three perjured Khazar tribes, with the Kabaris. In any case, it is certain that the Hungarians belonged to near the Turanic Khazar empire between the Middle Volga and the Infe river of the Danube. The old Hungarians, however, were never a "people Mongolian", as it has often been said. Beginning in 830, the Hungarians they lived together in Etelköz, in the "land between the waters", on a vast territory between Don, Danube and Black Sea, with different nomadic Turanian peoples, with Alans and Slavs. In the Byzantine and Eastern sources, they are given by those several times the name "Turks". About 200 words of original Bulgarian-Turkish give us even today the possibility to identify in becoming the tribal union of the old Turkish component Hungarians very significant." However, the Turks do not claim to have returned to Anatolia, nor do they ally themselves with the Etruscans like the Albanians or now like the Hungarians.
In fact, the Hungarians were also related to the Pannonians and the predecessors of the Roman Empire, the Etruscans. Not only the Hungarians came from Asia, but the whole of Europe, which was resettled from Asia after the ice age. Central Asia used to be white.
I am a Turk, and we have never been a racist nation in our history, and we have mixed with all the peoples we have taken in. That's why we are so diverse.
Horizontal 77 < I keep writting to this channel the same thing , but they always errised that , what you wrote as same , you must have better connection with them . He or they don't like me , for my shocking truth comments . Etc...
@@latakicsi2183We are know bro. Chill! We are just love Attila and he is Turk. The now hungarians not Turks. We see and love Attila the Hun as a Turk. We love you because you love Attila...
@@NationalistTurk.-nq1sb "We are just love Attila and he is Turk" zero proof of that...he just used turks tribes in his army but even the second one in command was goth/german so the turks were his underdogs/vasals... he was just hun
You can see below that until the 18th century, the Hungarians and the whole of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and the Scythians. The Hungarian chronicles also confirm this. Chronicles are made for kings and lying to a king is dangerous. The chronicler can easily lose his head. So the chronicler wrote the truth. (But they did not yet know the Finno-Ugric theory or the Turkic-Onoguric theory.)
@@erikakatona4356 I agree, like the Gesta Hungarorum was written to embellish the deeds of the King. All over Europe, the scribes wrote to make Kings and Kingdoms seen in a better light, beaver, bigger. That is not to say all of it is a lie, but to take it with a grain of salt. That's all.
Hehe. I do not think I have to refer to recent Hungarian scientific researches. I think the creator of this video should do this. Two well known results from the last few yeas : 1. There is genetic link between the so called `Hun` people in the Carpathian Basin and the so called old Magyar people ceturies later in the same area. Shortly those so called `Hun` are partly ancestors of the later Magyar. 2. There are evidences for Avar-Magyar continuity and the usage of the ancient Magyar or very similar language in the Avar Empire. The Hungarian tribal confederation which entered the Carpathian Basin in the late 9th century took ten tribes, seven Magyar (about four of them had name with Turkic origin) and three Kabar (by Hungarian name). There are two theories about the language of the Kabar : They spoke Iranian language or they spoke Turkic language. It seems like that the so called Magyar people continuously appeared in the Avar territory or late Avar lands in the Carphatian Basin far before 895 (probably even in the 8th century) and there is no any sign of fight. Yes it was tribal confederation and it was far before the fake 19th century nationalism so in the Hungarian tribal confedaration people probably spoke at least two different languages (and it woukd not be surprising if even 3-4 languages) because these nomad tribal confederations were political pacts regarless the native language. Also there are opinions that the old Magyar language was present among the Pechegen so there was no such thing that the so called Hungarian `nation` entered the Carphatian Basin. I am really sick of such narrative. Before 900 AD there was no such thing as Hungarian nation. It is the fake 19th century ideology about nations. But in the ninth century there was no such ideology. OK, these sound strange, but again, these are scientific results and facts.
Kedves Gábor! Örülök, hogy említed az avar magyar folytonosságot! Az avarság minden bizonnyal nemzet alkotó népcsoport a magyarságban! A nemzet nation szavakhoz lenne egy észrevételem! A szó mai értelmében, hogy magyar nemzet a 9. században ahogy említed nem beszélhetünk, viszont törzsi szinten már létező dolog volt! Nemzettségfők fogtak össze kisebb törzseket, majd képezte a sokaság a törzset élükön a törzsfőkkel. Adott területen adott nyelven beszélő népcsoportokról volt és van szó, amely viszont a mai nemzet szónak is megfelel. Az már hab a tortán, hogy nekünk magyaroknak a nemzet és nemzetiség szavunk a nemzésből, a nemzeni igéből ered teljesen egyértelműen magyar jelentés és eredet. Ugyanakkor más nemzeteknél a nation szó a latin natio szóra vezethető vissza ami a nascor, születni szülni jelentésből ered. Nekünk nem kellett ez a szó kölcsönzés. Amúgy az sem elvetendő, hogy a magyar nyelv egy linga franca szerepet is betölthetett, pont azért mert pl az avarok saját nyelvükön megérthettek bennünket, mert volt egy közös korábbi alapnyelv, hasonlóan mint a szláv, ahol az ukrán megérti az oroszt, vagy részben a szerbet. A szlávok is kb 1500 évvel ezelőtt nyelvileg közelebb voltak egymáshoz.
@@volcsiorion Ezek mind féligazságok, de a legnagyobb hülyítés amit egyes történészek is propagálnak, hogy nem létezett a nemzet fogalma a középkorban! Akkor a Werbőczy István jogtudós "Unio Trium Nationum" törvénye miről szólt szerinted? Az Unio Trium Nationum azt jelenti, hogy a három nemzet egyesülése, ez volt a kápolnai unió kölcsönös szövetségi egyezmény, amelyet az erdélyi magyar nemesek, a székely lófők és az erdélyi szászok vezetői kötöttek Csicsókápolnán 1437. szeptember 16-án, válaszként az az év nyarán kitört erdélyi parasztfelkelésre. A szövetség hivatalosan az Erdélyt fenyegető mongol és oszmán veszély ellen, ténylegesen azonban a parasztok ellen irányult. De hozhatnék korábbi példákat is, például már a rómaiak is írtak a "nation" - nemzetekről, mint például Dio Cassius római író, aki ezt írta a 2. században: „Dacos Scythicam quodammodo nationem suisse", ami azt jelenti, hogy a dákok egy szkíta nemzetből valók! De Thuróczy János vagy Oláh Miklós és sok más korabeli író a magyar nemességről úgy írnak mint "Hungarica natio" - a magyar nemzet! Tehát latinul a nationum = nemzet! Akkor minek mind nyomjátok ezt kommunista mesét, hogy a nemzet az csak egy 18. századi fogalom? Ez csakis azért lehet mert valamelyik nagyokos történész kitalálta, hogy a francia forradalommal alakult ki a nemzet mint modern fogalom. De ebben csak annyi volt az igaz, hogy akkor lett a francia parasztság és a polgárság is jogilag része a francia nemzetnek, de már a középkorban is a nemesség mindig is nation - nemzetnek tartotta magát mindenhol Európában! Ezért is a történelmet nem lehet mindig a mai korhoz hasonlítani, hiszen akkor ugyanúgy mondhatnánk azt is, hogy az ókori Hellászban a görögök csak azok voltak akik szavazati joggal rendelkeztek! De akkoriban csak a városokban élő férfiak egy részének volt joga szavazni, és akkor ilyen logikával mondhatnánk, hogy akik a városon kívül éltek, vagy akár a városokban élő nők és gyermekeik sem voltak görögök, nem igaz?!
@@Nicky220 There was no magyarisation, this is one of the biggest anti-Hungarian lies invented by Ceausist historians and securitatea officers from the media! And I say this from Romania, as someone who has seen these documents and I find it outrageous that propagandists like the charlatan Daniel Roxin continue to push this dangerous lie! These liars, knowing that the Romanians don't know Hungarian anyway and won't look into it, refer to the Apponyi Law, which required Hungarian public schools and institutions to learn the Hungarian language, which was the official language of the Hungarian kingdom! And this happened because it turned out that, for example, more than 80% of Transylvanian Romanians did not know the Hungarian language as citizens of the Hungarian state! Where in the world today is it not compulsory to learn the state's language in schools? And it is precisely the Romanians who, starting in the 20s, took away and Romanized the Transylvanian Hungarian universities, theaters and schools? They romanized the ancient Hungarian place names and geographical names, and there is evidence that they romanized the Hungarian first names and even the names of Hungarian historical figures, one by one, as if they had always been Romanian! That's why I think Romanians are the meanest people in the world, because they do exactly what they accuse other people of doing, a liar and plagiarist people who steal other people's history and living space! That's why these scumbags constantly accuse the Hungarians of something in order to hide their own misdeeds from the world! And then it's no coincidence that only the Romanians have the saying, I quote: Hoţul strigă: „Hoţii!”!
@@Nicky220 You mean was forced magyarization hundreds of years ago, just like is forced romanization and slovakization today , hundred years later ? Gabor Czirjak USA
This is the Finno-Ugric concept, which cannot be reconciled with archaeogenetic and recent results. The Hungarians are the descendants of Proto-Europeans who were superimposed on a population with a steppe culture that was mixed from the Scythian-Hunavar populations. These ancient Europeans are the inhabitants of the Carpathian Basin and the Balkans since the Paleolithic, who survived the Ice Age and continue to inhabit their homeland. An integral part of Scythia is the Bronze Age Carpathian Basin, where the very first written signs appear (Tordos - Vinča culture, Tatárlaka). Here they found the first cart model (Budakalász) proving the use of wheels, and ancient smelters for smelting ores. The Hungarian language is idioma primogenitum, i.e. the oldest language of Europe. It is not Finno-Ugric based, but self-developed like Turkish, Finnish, Basque, Japanese, and Korean languages. These languages were still in contact with each other during the Hunnic era.
I agree with you brother. Eurasiatic language macrofamily includes all dene-caucasian, uralic-altaic, indo-european language families. According to related Jäger (2005) study, closest languages to indoeuropean languages are uralic languages. Also mitochondrial dna shows similarity of finnougric, western turkic, iranic, european people in addition to paternal ydna lineages. (We can also find these west eurasian mitochondrial + east eurasian paternal mixture in elder eurasians.) Why finnougric people may not have been the ancestors of europeans?
@@Samanyolu-ov1yk Evet, benim anladığım kadarıyla binlerce yıl önce ural-altay sibirya bölgesinden güney asya, avrupa, orta doğu yönüne göçler başlamış. Ural-altay halkları, bölgesel halklarla zaman içinde karışarak yeni hint-avrupa dillerini keşfetmişler. Macarlar, avrupanın en eski dillerinden demiş arkadaş, bence de öyle ve hint-avrupa dilleri ural dillerinden türemiş olabilir.
This was EXTREMELY interesting. I've been obsessed with the steppe peoples for a LONG time! It's interesting just how HUGE the legacy of the turkic and mongolic peoples actually is! They influnced pretty much ALL of Eurasia, even Europe, or maybe ESPECIALLY Europe would be more appropriate. In conclusion: The huns and hungarians DO have a strong connection, but not in the way most probably think and it's VERY complicated. As a swede I really appreciate the connection between the germanic peoples and the huns. There is no direct genetic connection between the huns and germanics, but I do feel some kind of kinship with them just from being INFLUENCED by hunnic culture. Greetings from Sweden.
Saint Isidore (around 630) also mentions it with the following introductory lines: "The Hungarians, who before that were called Huns..." [The Latin Patrologia, volume 82, book nine, chapter two, article 66. Migne Patrologia latina Tomus 82. page 334. S. Isidori: Originum sive Etymologiarum liber. IX. chapter II § 66.], then Rubruk (circa 1254) writes the following referring to Isidorus "Isidorus says ... the Huns, who were later called Hungarians ...
Hungarians are not descendents of Huns. Hungarians barely have 2% of Magyar blood in them. Hungarians are just Magyarized Slavs, Germans, Romanians, Cumans, etc.
@@aiziszizis2536 What are Magyarized Slavs? The Hungarians are the Huns and the Scythians. The Hungarian chronicles are divided below. It is worth looking at the medieval reviews. Until the 18th century, the whole of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and the Scythians. But we also know that the Hungarian language is the Nostratic language, the original language of Eurasia. The Hungarian language must be spoken with 39 sounds and 44 letters are the Hungarian ABC.
@@aiziszizis2536 Until the 18th century, no one was interested in the Scythians. Until then, all of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and Scythians (plus Sarmatians). When the first Scythian gold treasures were found, the Hungarians were sent to Jugra, behind the Urals, and since then everyone wants to be Scythian. Since then, Germans, Bulgarians, Turks, and Persians have wanted to be Scythians.
@@childabductioninitaly8946 _The Hungarians are the Huns and the Scythians_ 😂 Huns had a spot on their asses. Hungarians don't have it. The real descendants of Huns who live in Europe (in a remote valley in Switzerland) do have this genetic trait. _Until the 18th century, the whole of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and the Scythians._ It was a Magyar claim used since they arrived in Europe and started to grab lands from their rightful owners. They claimed, "we are descendents of Huns, give us your land!" _we also know that the Hungarian language is the Nostratic language_ Hungarian language is a Finno-Ugric language. *Nostratic is a hypothetical language macrofamily including many of the language families of northern Eurasia first proposed in 1903. Though a historically important proposal, it is now generally considered a fringe theory.* (A fringe theory is an idea or a viewpoint which differs significantly from the accepted scholarship of the time within its field.)
9 stanko < BULG ( BOLG B= V ) BULG ÚR - VU(O)LGÚR'S = VOLGA RIVERS PLACE - ÚRAI : LEAREDS - OWNERS OF THAT TERITORY . -> " FROM THE MIDDLE DOWN TO SEA OF THE VOLGA RIVER " . Etc...
This is not news. We Hungarians have known this for a long time. Bulgarians are not Slavs, they just lost their original language and became Slavified. Hello brother!
A cemetery was found in Valkány, where Hungarians and Avars were buried together in the 7th - 13th centuries. The later Hungarians respected the graves of the Avars and did not loot them. The Avars could not be enemies of the Hungarians, but rather a related people. 🙂🙂🙂 Archeology does not lie.
@@the_white_rabbit Nyilván nincsenek szabályok, csak szokások. Én különbséget tennék a helybeliek által évszázadokon át használt temető, és egy hadjárat során elesett katonák eltemetése között. A valkányi temető bizonyítottan avar és magyar temető. Ezért ritkaság, hogy ilyet találtak.
@@attilasipos2968 Miuán igen valószínű hogy az avar lakosság innen nem ment sehová, tehát asszimilálódtak nincs ebben semmi különös. Épp az lenne különös hogy az eleinte bizonyosan kisebb létszámú magyarok elkezdtek volna vadi új temetőkbe temetkezni egy avar lakta településen.
Madjars and Magyars genetically not similar, as the people of Angola are not related to the people of Anglia (England) The Madjars have sometimes been linked onomastically to the Magyars (Hungarians); proponents of this view include supporters of "Hungarian Turanism", such as András Zsolt Bíró, who noticed the high frequency of Y-DNA Haplogroup G-M201 among Madiyars and the presence of Haplogroup G amongst Hungarians.[3] However, it is not supported by any strong material evidence. In fact, haplogroup G is rare in Hungary (at a rate around 3%) and has much higher rates in parts of Western and Southern Europe (e.g. Italy and France). Southern German populations also have a higher rate of Haplogroup G than the Hungarian population. Furthermore, Turkologist Imre Baski concluded that the Kazakh clan name Madi-yar "cannot possibly be linked to the Magyar ethnonym and thus cannot serve as proof for a relationship between Madiyar and Magyar."[4]
Isn't "turanism" coming from an urban legend involving a story about a man travelling to east and finding ancient documents but noone knows where this person exactly was and noone saw this document besides him?
common sense bunch of false information that was spread about us on the ineternet. This is why we dont like foreigners AKA outsiders making videos about us. Scythian-Hun Magyars same folks ;9)
Great video. A suggestion for future topics, you can talk about the Crimean Khanate, it has an interesting but little-known history, and it had an important relationship with the Ottoman Empire.
The stag motive is pretty common in scythian art and steppe cultures in general, so the story of Hunor and Magor is possibly an original one from the old Hungarian mythology, not a later addition.
Both of my parents were Hungarian refugees. ( my surname is through marriage.) My father was from Sopron, my mother, from Dunabogdany/ Budapest. I am very interested in history as was my father. I understand that in previous generations, the Finno- Ugric origin theory was popular, to be replaced by the northern/ Siberian/ taiga ancestry theory, and the Black Sea area steppe one. Although this is a complex issue, it is fascinating - I have read many accounts where links are made with Turkic people, Mongolians, Sumerians, even, Ural/ Altai etc. I still don't quite know what to make of all this, but am open to, and interested in all well presented information. ( such as this one.) It is interesting to know that among present day people, our closest relatives are the Kanti and Mansi - both of these people are obviously Asian. Strong ties have also been made with Scythians - but I wonder if the Scythians were Turkic, were they forerunners of the Huns? were they Mongolian? So many questions, even with modern DNA and genetic research, this all seems like a huge mystery - Where did Magyars come from?
The question 'Where did Magyars come from' is all intriguing and important especially for people of Magyar descent. 🙂 My answer is follow the origin of the Hungarian language for it satisfies my curiosity above all else. I am pleased to say that there are quite a few thorough and reliable studies now on the subject (also plenty of of good substantial comments here). I give you a short extract from a detailed study by Ferenc Cser (written in Hungarian in Melbourne around 2000) to get you interested so as to delve into that field of research. "The Hungarian language culture cannot be derived from the culture of the herder steppe people. The structure, system, and complexity of the Hungarian language cannot be explained either by the Finno-Ugric theory or by its origins in the steppes of Central Asia, because the creation of a developed language requires a long-term, enclosed (practically monolingual!), high-density, settled lifestyle, which these theories do not prove. However, all of this can be explained without fear of contradiction if we assume that the origin of the Hungarian language and culture is the Carpathian Basin. The archaeological analysis of the Carpathian Basin attests a long-time settled high-density culture, which requires a corresponding successor language, of which Hungarian is the only one of the modern languages of the Carpathian Basin to satisfy. Therefore, we can rightly claim that the two phenomena, the long-established sedentary culture and the advanced, subjunctive agglutinative language are connected. The characteristics of that ancient culture can still be found in Hungarian culture today, so we can conclude that the successor language of that culture is Hungarian, thus the origin of the Hungarian language is the Carpathian Basin."
Yeah, still not the Norwegians sacked Troy just because they speak indo european as the greeks do, but not even all of their tribes at the time did.@@the_white_rabbit
Thanks for this wonderful video, maybe it isn't directly related to this video but I want to share a few things. According to the DNA test performed on Saka remains, the peoples they are most closely related to are generally Saka (Tian Shan)- Bashkir (Miyakinsky), Lipka Tatar, Besermyan / Saka (Central Steppe)- Bashkir (Baimaksky), Siberian Tatar (Yalutorovsky) / Khotanese Saka- Pamiri (Sarikoli) etc... More Turkic influence than indoeuropean influence. There is only one Gandhara (Saka-Parthian Period) sample related with iranic- hindu. most of other samples are Turkic related dna. Languages can't directly prove certain relation inbetween nations. Most people continue to believe in the same story about scythians, they aren't indoeuropean either. The closest people in the Scythian (Pazyryk Culture) dna samples are; Bashkir (Baimaksky), Siberian Tatar (Yalutorovsky) / for Scythian (Western Steppe), Mishar Tatar, Balkan Turk (Deliorman) etc... I don't understand what the authorities are waiting for to update history, there is the evidence based on DNA results.
@@attilatasciko4817I guess, szekelys are real descents of Attila or magyars. They even have cresent and star in their flag. I didn't know that but i heard this székely name before. I wonder about their dna components.
@@LuthienwithoutBeren< My ansistery have part of saka = székely hun too , great great father was a "lófő" ( checked out 😏)-> "kitari" saka huns = kétúri huns ( two leaders they had ) of the " red " huns , does who went down to p(h)unjab - india . Here , in hungary , mostly from all huns are here = " black huns ": north huns ( above lived the mongoloid races ) ; the "blue huns " : east huns , including the rüans : alan avars ; " red huns " : south huns - saka huns ; and the " white huns : west huns , they was leading back to the original homeland , after the europian iceage : bastards ( bask ! - car+patian ) basin . Well known ready , all europian 95% left from iceage , and moved back to their original place after iceage . Etc...
@@LuthienwithoutBeren< székelys , just like pannons ( panhuns - med branch ) and palóc , úz people of huns , and the "jazigs" jász people = all relative branches of one race . Etc...
The next article deals with the 10th century conquerors and the medieval population of the Southern Urals. "Long shared haplotypes identify the Southern Urals as a primary source for the 10th century Hungarians" The admixture analysis showed that they are mainly descendants of the Yamnaya culture.
One explanation is for the Magyars traveling to the west is the explosion of the Crakatau volcano what changed the weather and by knowing the digestion system difference between the horse and the cow explain the horse keeping population was forced to move to the west for greener pasture. That is one explanation.
In order to understand who the real Hungarians were, it is important to know the real data about the population of the Carpathian Basin and the military people of Árpád! I quote from scientific publications of recent years, from the website of the Hungarian Research Institute: "The presence of the ancestors of today's Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin has been continuous for thousands of years" "A new database of 16,000 mitogenomes of 172 ancient and living populations has been created and investigated their connection system based on artificial intelligence method. The new algorithm recognizes all haplogroup correlations, regardless of the time of the process behind the correlation. A new methodological article (1) has been published in the journal Molecular Genetics and Genomics by the researchers of the Archaeogenetic Research Center of the Hungarian Research Institute, the Department of Genetics of the University of Szeged, the Institute of Technical Physics and Materials Science." "The Carpathian Basin is an unbreakable unit / Applying the method to the investigation of the former and present-day populations of the Carpathian Basin, the authors found that the vast majority of the present-day population is from a Copper Age (4500 BC-2800 BC) - Bronze Age (2800 BC-700 BC) can be traced back to a basic population, while immigration from the eastern steppe region seems to have had a smaller genetic impact on the population in the tenth-eleventh centuries. This result coincides with the result of the previous communication written by the researchers of the Hungarian Research Institute, in which they found that the population of the 10th -11th centuries were mostly indigenous locals. In our previous publication, we established that in the 10th-11th centuries even the vast majority of the common nobility came from the indigenous population of the Carpathian Basin, who naturally mixed with groups coming (returned) from the east, including the Hungarians of Árpád, and the tribes that came with them." These are the real scientific data about the true origin of the Hungarians, the rest are all politically created data compiled by the enemies of the Hungarians in the past two centuries, and thus this video also belongs to the same category!
@@lba6859 Turkic Hungarians never existed, this was a huge mistake, which was clearly proven by the archaeogenetic data! The Hungarians who came with Árpád made up only ten percent of the Hungarians here, from whom most of the later Hungarians came! But the majority of the Hungarians of Árpád were not of Turkic origin either, mainly because the Turkic were formed from a much later ethnic group or tribe long after the Huns and the Magors, from where the ancestors of the Huns had moved a long time ago, which is why they couldn't even be related! Today's nationalist and brainwashed Turks are looking for ancient peoples to whom they can relate, just like the Romanians, but they are all young nations whose roots only go back to the Middle Ages! And have nothing to do with the Hungarians whose roots go back thousands of years!
@@Ταργιτάος1 it doesn't matter what the others say what your origin is, the question is that how you identify yourselves. Your scholars, your political elite says it straightforwardly that you are Turkic. Romanians at least don't change their origin to favour someone to get money. A nation that changes its history of origin for the sake of political and money interest is not trusted on all levels. You already lost credit among finno uralic nations, and there is a huge distrust growing among native european christian nations towards Hungarians.
@@lba6859 You are spreading lies here, because no Hungarian historian or linguist has made such a claim, they have always only talked about cultural influences, and it has always only been about a small fraction of the military tribes! Vámbéry did not make such claims either, except that he may not have known the letter of Emperor Konstantinos Porphyrogennetos, where it is clearly written that the Hungarian ambassadors Bulcsú and Tarmacsu (Tormás) protested when the Byzantines mistakenly called them Türkic! Based on what the Hungarian princely envoys said, the learned emperor noted that the name of the Hungarians "...was not called Turks, but for some reason they were called Sabartoiasfaloi (Σαβαρτοιασφαλοι)..." And here, all Hungarian prehistory historians agree that this indicated the Sabirs, who were always considered Western Huns and had nothing to do with the inner Asian Turkic peoples! This letter of Konstantinos Porphyrogennetos was written at the beginning of the 10th century, so it proves that the Magyars or Hungarians did not consider themselves Türkic people even then, and that's why they protested because they were offended by this name! And this description is considered a primordial source anyway, and is also very important and authentic because, for example, Prince Tormás was the grandson of Árpád, and with this the Hungarians made it clear that the Byzantines mistakenly called them Turkic people! But if you did not know this source, you were still very wrong, because anthropological and genetic research also confirmed what Bulcsú and Tormás said, but if you knew about all this and still spread lies, then you are an enemy of the Hungarian people!
There is an error in situating the "region between the Dniepr and the Lower Danube": you put it to the west of the Don (Levedia). It is way further west, close to the Carpathians (Etelköz). By the way, that is where we find most Hungarian-type objects outside of the Carpathian basin.
In forming a nation's identity, culture, religion, worldview and consequent lifestyle is way more important than genetics and language. I as a Cuman Hungarian have zero connection to Finns and Estonians, but tons of shared traditions with the great cultures of the steppe. Nearly all Hungarian folklore including music and artisanship is based on Eastern steppe tradition according to both Vámbéry's observation and common knowledge. German scholars stink of narrow mindedness, oversimplification, ignorance and provincialism, although Western science in general is hardly better ( I am a scientist, so I know). One of my son is called Árpád, the other Zoltán Hunor. I live in a Hungarian town named after a Cuman prince, Zotmaz. So it is time to abandon simplistic Western propaganda, narrative and mental constructs. They should not tell us who we are. We are children of the steppe and will remain so forever. I am even working on an entirely new philosophy displaying some traces of steppe traditions. So we live on.
Prof. Grover S. Krantz Geographical development of European languages "... the Greek language, therefore, was present in 6500 BC, Celtic language was born in 3500 BC in Ireland. The greatness of the Hungarian language in the Carpathian Basin is equally surprising; I find that its origin leads to the mesolithic, before the Stone Age. "
The Turkic language was used even under the Scythians, as a silver bowl with Turkic runes was discovered. Not to mention the fact that their gods and names are quietly translated into Turkic with the preservation of meaning and sound.
@@keteket Impossible. Because the Scythians existed from bc. 900 to 300, and the first Turkish was ad. 520. It is logical that the Scythians could not use the language of a people that was created at least 800 years later! The Scythians had their own Scythian language and Scythian runic writing. The Türk rune was created from the Scythian-Hun rune and not vice versa.
@@childabductioninitaly8946 dude you just claimed ancient indo-europeans existed 10 thousand years ago. Surely you sound like a white nationalist boomer than a reliable debator. Turks existed way before the Göktürks, and greeks only came to exist around 3000 years ago
Some Scythian symbols in the Hungarian tradition. Four lilies around the sun on the Solti hair braid and Scythian carpet. Heart-shaped lily on Scythian carpet and Hungarian beads. Tulip with a seed in the abdomen on Scythian jewellery, on a Sarkad bracelet and in Hungarian folk art. Bird with beak in contact with its breast on Scythian, Reformed and even Catholic churches, and on embroidery from Raba. Antlers ending in a lily on Hungarian salt cellars and on Scythian tattoos in Paziriki. Burning antlered deer on the Scythian horn of the Green Phalompusta, in the legend of the miraculous deer of St. László of Vác. In the legendary hymn, the miraculous stag also has burning antlers! In the Paziriki carpet, the boy who became a deer also appears. Turul, or griffin, above the stag, from the Scythian medieval church of Székesfehérvár, on a stone carving of an arched doorway, on a railing of a sanctuary in Zalavaro. Eagle's head with ears in Scythian, Avar, monastery excavated in Bélapátfalva. Vines enclosed in lilies or tulips on Scythian, Avar archaeological finds, on the ribbon of a bishop's mitre, on a Székely gate. Burial on horseback. Blood covenant, in which the contracting parties became brothers and sisters by giving the blood of the body. A lion attacking a deer in Scythian and Hungarian salt cellars. Horned lion with tree of life in Hungarian folk art, on Székely cap and Sarmatian headdress. Could they be lying to us?
@mrroyale5688 Legends usually contain seeds of the truth. The old Magyars knew who their ancestors were exactly. I have spent years reading and researching Magyar history and Hungarian origins, and I will say this much that the truth has been purposely ignored for political reasons and to confuse the people about their lineage. But thankfully the science of Archaeogenetics will shed some much needed light on the truth!
Very detailed and informative video but unfortunately it contains a lot of false or scientifically obsolete, unproven information. On the other hand regarding the turkic connection it is unnecessarily detailed which leads to false conclusion 1.) If you want to understand the story of the steppe people and culture, you have to look back not just to the 4th century when the Huns hit Europe but to the Scythians thousand year earlier at least. They invented and mastered mounted archery and warfare, bronze and goldsmith and were settlers of the Eurasian steppe. They have very significant archeological legacy from the Carpathian basin, too with mythological golden stag findings which are not the only very clear cultural connection to Arpad's Hungarians. Medieval chronicles, mythological and folk tradition is also refer back to the Scythians. Genetic studies show a strong connection between Arpad's Hungarians and the pre-Scythian Mezhovskaya culture. That time pre-turkic people were not yet steppe people 2.) Finno-ugric theory of origin is partially true and partially contradicted: language origin is proven, common genetic ancestry is proven but the formation of the language and later separation of the tribes were in the steppe zone. That means that the ancestors of the Khantys and other finno-ugric tribes migrated from the south to the north not the ancestors of the Hungarians in the other way around. 3.) Álmos is a Hungarian (finno-ugric) name that has a meaning actually (Emese álma - Dream of Emese) not a Turkic one. That's a proven fact, check it. 4.) It is not proven that the Huns were a turkic tribe and spoke turkic language exclusively. If you understand how steppe people integrated several tribes than it is most likely they had turkic, finno-ugric, german (proven) and maybe even iranian-sarmatian-alan speaking tribes. The same way as Arpad's Hungarian integrated several tribes 5.) and finally to the commenters who even deny the genetic continuity of the current Hungarians to Arpad's: the time didn't stop in the 9th century and it keeps running nowadays... Check the genetic map of Europe: each country is genetically the closest to its neighbours. that means that people mix with each other which is a good thing. Slavs also integrated many steppe people: Polish have strong sarmatian, Bulgars turkic connection. Romanians integrated a lot of Cumans. Current Solvakia and Romania has a significant Hungarian population, partially assimilated already...The only difference is that Hungarians kept his language and some of the traditions. That can only be possible if the Hungarian language came to the Carpathian basin not just with Arpad but with former waves of steppe people.
To me, the very clear evidence you stated seems the most dubious. To make the Hungarians the main people of the Scythians based on the horseshoes of dead horses in the graves when so little is known about them seems to me deceitful. I agree that the Khanty-Mansi language was the ancestor of Hungarian, but why did you leave where you were thousands of years ago requires the instinct of a migratory bird. Almos and his descendants were Khazars. The Huns would not have spoken Turkish, but we can no longer ask Hunor and Magor Hungarian. Finally, keep the genetic analyzes out of the eyes of the Slovaks, because Budapest will also claim them.
The word Yula (title Gyula in Hungarian) was the original non-Slavonic name of the Bulgar "Dulo" clan which claimed descent from Attila and had the same Tamga as that of the Oghuz Kayi tribe all this led to a theory for the Arpad, Ottoman, Dulo & Attilid dynasties descending from the Xiongnu Yula tribe
Gyúl means to ignite in hungarian, and gyula is an archaic word for torch, but this word fell out of use by now. This is all connected to the Sun and fire worship. I wonder if it has the same meaning in Turkic languages.
Nonsense conspiracy shit. Dulo doesn’t have a certified symbol, besides, Dulo name comes from the ruling house of Xiongnu “Tuge”, probably “Tughluq”, just as Dulo being Tughluq.
Thank you very much it is very accurate and interesting. I have three remarks: it is a pity that the sarmatian connection story was forced to cut out. Second, I thought there is no 100% proof of the roots of Hunnic language. The third - the Turkic underworld god Erlik is unlikely coming from the same word root as Hungarian Ördög, as the meaning of Őr-Dög is meaning the Guardian of the Dead in Hungarian.
This is the best english language content what I ever seen on youtube about Hungarians origins. Great job, thank you! I would be happy if I could see something based on Tahiri Üngürsz. It is a book based on the library what has been looted from Székesfehérvár's library after the Ottoman conquest. (as I know)
Did the Vandals originate from Hungary? Historians have written that the Vandals arrived in Morocco via the Strait of Jibraltar in 429, and they built a kingdom in North Africa from 439 until 533.( تحياتي لكم من المغرب)
@@KhansDen yes, kind of... "A" in Almos is like "a" in "khan" and "s" is like "sh" is "show". Hungarian is not an easy language. :) For the "s" like in "some" we have a double letter "sz". Simple "s" is always like "sh" is "show".
Hey! I really appriciate what you trying to do by covering the history of the steppes, that is why I decide to leave some objective criticism under this video of yours that might be helpful in the future. In case of this magyar video I happen to know alot about from historical texts. The part about their religion is full of errors, I assume the source for it was wikipedia because you won't find the same information anywhere else. There is 0 proof there was a sun mother and moon father in magyar religion, the only magyar god/godess we got proof for is Boldogasszony. It's literally the only god recorded by name there is no other one (her name roughly translates to joyous/happy woman and become synonimous with Mary mother of Jesus). If you wanted to, sience you brought up the bashkirs, one of the muslim writers decided to describe all the gods of the "bashkirs" so you could have mentoined that. He don't name them but tells for each one what they are the god of (there was quiet alot of them). You can also find other informations about their practices, pretty much all of them can be connected to tengrism. You bringing up ördög for elrik is only etymological so its a bit strange to base the tengrist connection solely on that. About their writing system is also super errorous. There were 3 runic scripts in the carpathian basin all of them separete from each other. There is the avar script, khazar script and székely-hungarian script (which this latter one mostly got prescedent alot later in time when hungarians were already christian for more than hundreds of years, the khazar and the avar script however converge with the time of the magyar invasion). It would be nice to see historical youtubers genuenly base their videos on direct sources rather than extremely errorous ones and fictious ones so I hope you don't take it the hard way and I could help improve your content. I also think your own voice narrating rather than ai voice would be alot better, you got nothing to be ashamed of. Either way good luck for your future videos!
@@gaborjuhasz5610< Polish name well know of nowdays poland , they was emigrated from underneat of todays estonia , where , they are slavic people . But the southern parts " Galicia " of todays poland are the original "lengyel - lend vel " people are mixed from the sar(+)matians - sar+mathians " ( sar+ gels, etc tribes ) -> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE TRADITIONAL BOUND BETWEEN THE POLJAKS AND HUNMAGYARS .Etc...
So the Magyars ran away from the Pechenegs in fear and then defeated pretty much every European empire in battle until 970. This two doesn’t add up as far as I’m concerned.
It actually adds up very well. The Pecheneg, Khazar and others were using the same tactics as the Magyars. The European powers, throughout most of ancient and medieval history, had no chance against the superior steppe cavalry. So it does make sense for them to crush European sedentary societies who were simply not accustomed to this art of warfare while not being always on-par with other steppe warriors. That being said, I am merely summarizing what the sources tell us.
You put a little logic and reason into your thoughts: KhansDen's explanations are pertinent, but "fleeing in fear" could have a simple explanation: the peoples allied with the Pechenegs were perhaps much superior numerically, compared to the sum of the Hungarian tribes.
Finno-Ugric is just a terminology invented by linguists, because no one ever thought that there was such a thing as Finno-Ugric during the millennia! But the only truth in this is that there are northern languages like Estonian and Finnish where the linguistic structure is a bit similar to the Ugric languages, or there are much smaller ethnic groups in the east like the Khanty and Mansis who they have some similar words, but this does not mean anything serious linguistic kinship, such as for example among the Neo-Latin-speaking peoples who understand each other quite well! The real situation is that Hungarian is the most unique language in the world, because we do not understand the language of the Mansis, who are supposedly closest to us, and they do not really understand us, just as we do not really understand the Turkic peoples who speak a related languages! That is why it is increasingly important what the American anthropologist and cryptologist Grover S. Krantz has outlined about the origin of the Hungarian language for more than forty years, that the Hungarian language is so unique and logically structured compared to other languages that it really has no equal in Europe or Asia! That is why it could only have come from here in the Carpathian basin, when thousands of years ago it was not very possible to get into the Carpathian basin surrounded by huge mountains and rivers, and where the mountains were still surrounded by endless forests and there were no roads or even paths in the mountain passes! This is the only way to explain that the Indo-European speaking peoples could avoid the Carpathian basin for a long time, because most of the names of rivers and mountains are not of Indo-European origin. And then it is understandable that those who lived here at least since the Neolithic, were not Indo-European peoples, which is why it is much more likely that they could have spoken Proto-Hungarian, and there is already evidence for this! And then it's much more logical thatthe Hungarian language also started from here with those who were the predecessors of the Mogyerians - Magyars and migrated from here thousands of years ago, and that the words related to Hungarian are a part of them could reach the peoples of the East! That is why the people who came with Árpád thought that they had returned to the land of their ancestors, except that they were the descendants of those who mixed with the Asian peoples and thus also with the ancestors of the Siberian Mansis. This is the only way to best explain the linguistic kinship with the Finno-Ugric, but also with the Asian Turkic languages and ancient languages such as Dravidian, Sumerian, Etruscan, Minoan, Carian, Ancient Greek and Sanskrit!
The 17 scientists asked the question: The aboriginal population of Europe, in what proportion are the ancient European genes present in the sons of various peoples living today? The ancestral gene, which means nothing more than the genetic code of people living here 35 - 40 thousand years before Christ, which peoples of the European population carry the highest proportion? In Hungarian, the question can be asked as follows: who are the indigenous population of Europe? The test is carried out by determining the Y chromosome. The male chromosome can be better researched because it can be determined from any cell fragment. An intact mitochondrion is required for the female chromosome test. The result is astonishing. Based on Y chromosome research, this group of scientists found that the European ancestor is present in 95% of the population living here in the truncated Hungary today. This means that 95% of the Hungarian population carries proto-European genes. It is at least as interesting as to what proportion of the other European populations carry the European ancestral gene? Who carries the European ancestral gene in a high percentage after the Hungarians? The Poles, the Croats and the Ukrainians beyond the Eastern Carpathians. (50-60 %) The other ethnic groups do not carry the European ancestral gene even in a fraction" Renowned geneticist Dr. Endre Czeizel Genetics of Hungarians c. in his book, he writes about the conclusions that can be drawn from the Semino study: "60% of Hungarian men are descendants of the EU-19 - Paleolithic - ancestor. ...A further 13.3% of Hungarian men are from the EU-18, 11% a is EU-7, and 8.9% are descendants of EU-4 ancestor. All this means that 93.3% of current Hungarian men originate from four ancestors, and 73.3% already here in the Paleolithic era the offspring of living men." Given the outstanding importance of this study, the names and locations of all its authors are published below: Ornella Semino,1,2 Giuseppe Passarino,2,3 Peter J. Oefner,4 Alice A. Lin,2 Svetlana Arbuzova,5 Lars E. Beckman,6 Giovanna De Benedictis,3 Paolo Francalacci,7 Anastasia Kouvatsi,8 Svetlana Limborska,9 Mladen Marcikiae,10 Anna Mika,11 Barbara Mika,12 Dragan Primorac,13 A. Silvana Santachiara-Benerecetti,1 L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza,2 Peter A .Underhill2 The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective; SCIENCE VOL 290. NOVEMBER 10, 2000.
The genetics of today's "Hungary": - 45,000-year-old prehistoric Aurignacian Paleolithic hunter-gatherer Europeans, extant branch of M170-I1 8.5% - M173-M17-R1a from 30,000-year-old Late Stone Age Gravettian hunter-gatherer Eurasians, this is the most characteristic haplogroup that has survived to this day, 30% - 8,000-6,000 years ago in the Neolithic, from farmers who settled here from the Middle East: - M170 I2a, Kőrös-Stracevo cultural people, today 16% - Yap M35-E1b, Mediterranean type male, today 8%. - J2, Anatolian origin, Caucasian origin, Transdanubian Polish culture, today 6.5% - The population of the Bronze Age and Iron Age Eastern settlements (Kurgans, Scythians, Celts), M173 R1b is 18% today, most of them moved to Western Europe, where today the most typical By the end of the Iron Age, 87% of the gene pool of today's "Hungarians" had been assembled! There are also smaller superstratifications, genetically related settlements: Sarmatians, Jaszians, Dacians, some Far Eastern genes (N1c) with the Huns, Avars, Griffins, Árpáds. Mostly R1a+R1b markers from the eastern neighbor.
A connection to Huns and Magyars, yeah it is 2 completely different groups who eventually colonized the region known as Hungary at different time periods like 400-500 years apart. The modern Hungarian language is a Fino-ugric language directly from Magyar, yet it carries the Turkic name of Hun. Yet genetically, most of the people of Hungary have proto-slavic, proto-celtic and proto fino-ugric.
PLEASE NOT MAKE A COMMON MISTAKE = TURC(K)'S PEOPLE ARE NOT TÜRK'S PEOPLE . DID THEY MIXED , SOME OF THEM YES , BUT THE BANCHES MUST KEEP SEPARATE ,WE DON'T SAY , THE SCYTHIANS ARE TÜRKS , JUST LIKE THE SARMATIANS ARE TÜRKS TOO ‽ NO WAY . Etc...
I did in the past but did not even get 10% of the view count of the original English version. So with all due respect to my memleket, it's just not worth all the time and energy.
I will tell you much more ancient names that could really be the ancestors of the ancient Scythian-Hungarians of the Carpathian Basin, such as Hargita, Arpas, Kolozs, Lápos, Napos. Herodotus writes that the largest river in Scythia is the Ister (Danube), the Partisum (Tisza) flows into the Ister, and the Maris (Maros) river flows from Agathyrs (Transylvania). Here he mentions that the waters of the Alpis (Alps) and the Karpis (Carpathians) also age the Ister. We also learn from Herodotus that the first great ancestor of the Scythians of the Carpathian Basin was Targitaos. If we subject the name of the first king to a proper linguistic examination and, according to the rules of language development, replace the hard "T" with its soft vowel "H" and leave out the Greek suffix "os", it is clear to us that the first king the mountain called Hargita still preserves its name. Herodotus writes that when Targitaus reigned, a plough, a yoke, an ax and several cups fell from the sky, but they were all made of gold. Targitaus's eldest son, Lipoxais, when he approached the golds, the golds opened fire and he fled. The other, Arpoxais, went the same way. When the youngest boy approached, the golden ones did not set fire, so the donation went to Koloxais, which is why the Scythians still wear cups in their belts today. And the older boys handed over the rule to their youngest brother. The fact is that this story can be found several times in Hungarian folk tales, which seems to go back to much older roots and proves that the majority of Hungarians originate from the Scythians here and not from the tribes that came with Árpád. In other transcripts, the name of Napoxais also appears with these names, who could only be one such Scythian prince, because we know well that the ancient Greeks transcribed these names a bit, and if we cut off the appendages, Arpoxais is Árpás or Árpád, Koloxais is Kolos or Kolozs, Lipoxais means Lipos or Lápos, and Napoxais is clearly Napos - Sunny! But if someone understands Hungarian, they will also understand these names, because Árpás comes from barley, Kolos comes from millet, Lápos is the same way we say muddy areas with water, and Napos is also clearly understandable in today's Hungarian language! That's why it's also worth looking into, that it can't be a coincidence that, for example, according to Herodotus, one of the rivers of the Scythians, the Naparis, flows from the Carpathians, which name means the sunny river in the Hungarian language, for sun in the sky that ar Nap in Hungarian! And then there is the castle of Napoka on the ancient home of the Aghatyrs, which is said to be the city of the Dacians, but the Dacians were also Scythians according to most ancient writers! No one can say that it's all a coincidence, the name of Prince Napoxais, the name of the Naparis river and the name of Napoka Castle, all a few hundred kilometers from each other in the Carpathians?! But they don't even want to notice that in the very place where this ancient castle of the Napoka existed, the later Hungarians built a castle of their own, which they named Kolos Castle, from which today's Kolozsvár - Cluj Castle became! These names are still well known in Transylvania today, and there are still many such names here that were mentioned in ancient times and are only understandable in Hungarian, which all proves that this was the ancient homeland of the Scythians and Agathyrs, so the real Hungarians!
Majiars are not directly linked to th huns.. the protobulgars that founded the first bulgarian empire are more direct candidates.. or at least the turkish historiography is saying so.. bulgarians also have documented dinastical record of the Dulo dinasty that began wih Atilla. .
Álmos = Dreamy - because of divine dreams, clearly Hungarian and not Turkic origin, most common word. Álmos also can be translated as Sleepy, but not that is the case at a leader.
Ilk Turkic dil konusanlar Urallarin guneyindeydi, cogunlugu doguya bir kismi batiya yayildi. O bolgelerin halklariyla karistilar, dillerinin genel yapisi ( sondan eklemeli dil ) korundu
Hungarians knew history even 1,500 years ago. They heard about the Roman Empire and the Hun Empire. They wanted to found a country in the same place where the Hun king Attila's empire was located. Why? Because of the grass. :-) The Hungarians had tens of thousands of large animals, horses and cattle. Grass grows slowly on the eastern steppes, so from time to time it was necessary to look for new pastures and to migrate. Grass grows three times faster in the Carpathian basin, so animals can be kept on the same pasture from spring to autumn. The Carpathian Basin, Hunnia, Pannonia is an ideal place to live. The downside is that many people know this.
Onogur (On-Ogur) means ten family or clans in ancient Turkic language. The word "On" still means "Ten" in current Turkish. Onogur refers to those ten clans (7 of them Magyars and 3 are Turkic) that walked to Europe under a common ruler from Central Asia steps. The word Hungary derived from this Turkic word Onogur and used by the westerns. We Turks still use the word Macar in Turkish to name our cousins from Asia steps.
Mind esküdt népek, mert a vérszerződés már a szkíták törzseinek ősi szokása volt, de ezt eskünek nevezték már a szkíták, és ebből lett a görög szküth - szküthai = esküt! Ennek a szövetségnek az asszír ékiratos táblákon Aškuza vagy Iškuza volt a neve, ami aztán a Bibliában Aškuz, de ezek mind rontott alakban voltak leírva, amelyekből érthető miért lett aztán a görög forrásokban Szküthai (Σκυθαι). Mert ha megfigyeled a "sku" vagy "skü" minden nyelven ott van az ókorban, amit aztán a latinok már Scyth - Scythai-ra torzítottak, és akkor ezzel is magyarázható, hogy ők nem tudták az ü betűt leírni, ezért y írtak. Tehát az Eskü népe volt eredetileg a szkíta név, amiből az európaiak Sküth - Skyth és végül Scythian-ra torzították, ezért már a 18. századi magyarok ebből szkítát és szittyát csináltak, mert elfelejtették a névnek a régi jelentését! Ezekre már Ferenczi Enikő Kolozsvári magyar nyelvész is rájött, aki szerint a görögös "szküth" szótövet a magyar eskü szóval lehet logikusan összekapcsolni: „A szkíták nevezhették magukat ama megszólítás szerint, mely visszaállítható a mai magyar esküsző(k) vagy esküző(k) szóból, és jelentése »a személy, aki esküszik« vagy »az eskü népe« szóösszetételhez állhat közel. Az eredeti népnév ismeretlen, csak a szomszédos nemzetek által elrontott elnevezést ismerjük. Legvalószínűbben az asszír változat, az Aškuza(i) vagy Iškuza(i) áll legközelebb a magyar nyelvből alkotott népi névhez.” Forrás: Wikipédia - A királyi szkíták!
The Huns and the Romans died out, as did the Avars and the Pechenegs, but they also had descendants, and they live on in us. Even the Celts, who lived in Pannonia before the Romans.
According to what is in Bulgarian historiography. Old Great Bulgaria (6c AD, today Central-Eastern Ukraine + Krasnodar+Rostov) was a state of two families of tribes Onoghurs(east) and Kotrighurs(west). Onoghurs are supposedly ancestors of Hungarians(basically (H)onoghurs -> Hunghurs -> Hunghars -> Hungarians) and Yughurs. At least that's the etymological connection mentioned. Evidence is very scarce and inconclusive as those people were at the time shamanic and story telling oriented and there is little written evidence by outsiders. The 'gaar - ghur - ghar - giar - garian suffix though has Semitic roots meaning people of. I.e. Hungarians literally means Hun('s)-people. Modern day Hungarians moved to the Carpathian basin in 10th century to fill the power vacuum after the fall of the Avar Khaganate and mixed with the locals. Quite similar to their Bulgar cousins 3 centuries earlier and facilitated by the First Bulgarian Empire, for their own benefit. One difference in nation forming from the Bulgarians though is that Bulgars adopted Slavic language and made an alphabet for it and Hungars kept their Turkic one... and used Cyrillic for some centuries.
A Magyar a Kárpat medence népe... - kultúrahordozó - őseurópai nép - nyelve ősnyelv , A Sumerral rokon... ! ! ! - vagy azonos ..... - no - finn - ugor ..... *
Greetings from Chuvash Turkic People🌲🌞 Syvloh sunatop, Vengri, äpӗ Čovaš enren. Äsir jӗrkellӗ pulassa šanatop. Äsir pitӗ ujrom haloh✌️☮️ Don't let other Turkic People claim you. You are what you are, you are the most unique Finno-Ugric people🙏🏼
Sorry bro, I just cannot stand it... Khazar is shoud be pronunced the same as Khan, where is not the H is pronunced but the K, so please mention it witt K instead of H. Thx in advance.
Chronicon Pictum circa 1360 Noah - survivor of the flood (his son Jáfet, who received Europe from his father when the land was divided - according to the writings of St. Jerome - his son Magóg - the founder of the sittya, that is, the Hungarian family) Noah's other son Kham is his Kush, then Tana, who is the father of Nimrod Nimrod (who is the first king of the earth, who is the first king of the world.) is married to Enéh. His two sons, Hunor and Magor, are the founders of the Hun, that is, the Hungarian nation So: Noah's son Kham, his is Kús, then Tana, his is Nimrod, his is Hunor his Bor his is Dáma his is Keled, his is Keve, his is Kér his Belér, his is Kádár, his is Otmár, his Farkas, his is Bondofárd, his Bökény, his is Csanád, his is Budli, his Beszter, his Mike his Miske, his Ombód his Kölcse his is Levente his Lél, his is Zámor his Balog, hers is Bulcsú, his Szultan, hers is Berend, his is Kadocsa his Opos, his Ete, his is Szemeny, his is Torda, whose son is Bendegúz. Children of Bendegúz; Saint Etele, also known as Atilla (Food-Drink, i.e. Life..Body-Blood) (the second first king of the Hungarians, the Scourge of God, the Hammer of the World, the delimiter of our country) and he was Buddha (enlightened!) (material consciousness (Body level: active physical lifestyle) Magor (soul consciousness: process of becoming still)... The historical Buddha (Buddhism) Gautama Siddhartha, Gautama Buddha/Buddha The name Sakyamuni is a Sanskrit word, meaning 'Sage of the Shakyas'. Siddhartha Gautama's father is Sakya/Sakya, meaning Scythian... It is believed that the Sakyas/Sakyas originate from the ancient sage Gautama Maharisi (Magarisi/Magor) who lived in Vedic times... Atilla's son Csaba, his Ed, his Ügyek (Ugec), his Előd, his is Álmos, who led a significant part of the Hungarian people living in the east home. Árpád, son of Álmos, who strengthened our Carpathian country, dividing our people into seven parts, as follows: 1. Árpád, the most powerful, who fought at the forefront in battles, settled with his people in Pilis. 2. Szabolcs, still in the area of Szabolcs County. 3. In the part between Gyula, Transylvania and Nagyalföd. 4. Künd, next to the Nyír. 5. Lél, the Galgóc countryside became theirs. 6. Vérbulcsú, inhabited the elbow of Lake Balaton. 7. Örs, but the Sajó district became his accommodation. Árpád's son Zoltán, his is Taksony, his Géza, his Saint István (the third first king of our nation) Orseolo Peter Aba Samuel 1041-1044 Orseolo Peter the second time 1044-1046 Andrew I 1046-1060 Béla I 1060-1063 Solomon 1063-1074 Géza I 1074-1077 Laszlo I (Saint) 1077-1095 (Book) Kálmán 1095-1116 II. Stephen 1116-1131 II. (Blind) Béla 1131-1141 II. Géza 1141-1162 III. Stephen 1162-1172 II. Viceroy László 1162-1163 ARC. Viceroy István 1163-1165 III. Béla 1172-1196 Imre 1196-1204 III. László (minor) 1204-1205 II. Andrew 1205-1235 ARC. Béla 1235-1270 Stephen V 1270-1272 ARC. (Kun) László 1272-1290 III. András 1290-1301 Mixed house rulers (Czech) Wenceslas 1301-1305 (Bavaria) Otto 1305-1307 (Anjou) Robert Charles I 1308-1342 (Anjou) Louis I (the Great) 1342-1382 (Anjou) Mary 1382-1385 (of Durazzo) II. Charles (Little) 1385-1386 (Anjou) Mary 1386-1395 Sigismund (of Luxembourg) 1387-1437 (Habsburg) Albert 1438-1439 (Jagielló) Ulaszló I 1440-1444 (Habsburg) László V 1444-1457 Governor János Hunyadi 1446-1453 (Hunyadi) Mátyás I 1458-1490 (the moral decline of the world really began after the death of our lord Mátyás, after all, he was our last Sacral world king) (Jagiello) II. Ulaszló 1490-1516 (Jagiello) II. Louis 1516-1526 János Szapolyai 1526-1540 ....then came the chance and the time of the House of Habsburg....Mátyás Hunyadi closed his eyes and gave them the opportunity to rise...but unsuccessfully...
What is the relationship between “magyar”and “Magar”language of Nepal 🇳🇵.I heard 20% of magyar languages match with Nepali Magar communities language.There should be some origin history. Iam leaving this clue for historians. Mijhorle 🙏
The word "Xanqan" in Turkic means deity, XAN means descendant of deity or demigod, HUN means given by god.HUNGI means which, but its true meaning is anything created by god. AR means human. HUNGIAR or Hungary means people of god, humans created by god, children of god. Same meaning with GUKTURK which means celestial Turk. And by the way, Iranian is a fabrication of 20th century made by British agents trying to destroy Turkic QAJAR kingdom's politicial, social and cultural identity. Fabricating the modern hilarious and baseless Iranian identity. ------ After the first reply it seems that it's required to put more explanations here. The modern self proclaimed Persians are imposters since they are actually TAJIK immigrants brought to the area at the fall of Safavid Turkic dynasty by king Mahmoud Afghan from modern Afghanistan. Their Tajik language is basically a blend of Arabic, Turkic and Hindi and has NO relations with the ancient Persian language.
Xanqan = X : S ( sz ) english : sun , the ( nap ) , qan = kan , -> kény = the children of the sun k(h)an [ q ] . Sun is the khan of life , of all living things .We , magyars , always stick to the very original belive, we are the god sun exeptional ( leader - "khan " ) children . THE OLD WORLDS BELIVERS OF SUN RESPECT [ TISZTELET ] WHAT WAS ALL CIVILIZATION FIRST BELIEVE , BECAUSE " WITHOUT SUN , NO LIFE CAN EXIST ON EARTH = SUN WORSHIPERS . Etc...
So when the Magyars conquered the carpathian basin, they fought and integrated the avars and defeated other slavic tribes/kingdoms. Not a single word about finding or fighting romanians/vlachs. How is this possible when according to modern romanian history they were in Transilvania since forever xD. So either they didn't fight (cowards) or they weren't even there to fight... Btw, Magyars found in Transilvania the Szeklers, who are hunnic remnants, with close to the same language as of the magyar. They were welcoming the Magyars and immediately joined them.
Romanian history is made up. Vlach came from the Balkans. They are not originated from the Dacians neither the Romans. or if they have some ties with the Romans it came from the Romans living in the Balkans and not in Wallachia for example.
Yeah thatswhere the romanian dacian theory falls apart. Dacians were thracians according to the Greeks, they didnt speak latin, and why would they adopt it later, they were a way older culture in Europe than the Romans.@@the_white_rabbit
Regardless of the origins you claim, Hephthalites and Parthians, about which the information is obscure by citing authors you invented, Scythians with n peoples you try to base, no one outside the mythological history you invented will believe your lies. What normal logic accepts that you left here from Pannonia, which you widen like the Carpathian Basin, to return after 3000 years as if you had the instinct of migratory birds. The Romanians bothered you from the moment you arrived, this is how the natives suffer. Why deny the Turks when out of the 7 Hungarian tribes 4 were Bashqires and with the 3 Kabari there are only 7 Turkish tribes. Another lie with the Szeklers, they come from the south of Slovakia and in the 2 counties in Hungary where there are many Szeklers you made them the most modest Hungarians.
@@CocoSon-we2rg So where were the romanians to fight the magyar conquerors? You elegantly ignored the main point. Cause you don't have an answer. Cause romanian communist era history is a made history full of lies and myths. Modern romanians migrated MUCH later from today's Serbia-Albania as nomadic shephards to Wallachia. Even their capital Bucharest was established by a vlach shepherd called "Bucur". Later in the medieval ages vlach were brought to Transylvania as workers to replenish the losses caused by tatars/pechenegs/cumans etc. invasions. So the ones here to lie is you my friends. By pure logic.
@@loecorristo555 Your logic is purely illogical. You talk about Heptalites, Parthians, Scythians, Huns, Avars who are known for sure to have spoken a Turkish language, although in documents the lingua franca in their time was rather Slavonic, while your genetics show that you have no continuity even with the riders who arrived a date with Arpad. There is no point in claiming those so-called ancestors. On the other hand, you cannot compare the sedentarism of the inhabitants of some isolated villages in the mountains that may have had 50 fighters as they did not oppose the 500 conquerors who lived on looting. And yet it took them about 200 years to cover the entire territory. You underestimate Anonimus, but please, he was yours, but what about Nestor. Do you really think that it is not known how Hungarianization took place in the Pannonian Plain where they dismounted? The military commanders of the Hungarian sailors had harems in the villages where the children had real teachers who also arrived in wheelbarrows. It is not something to criticize but rather to admire because otherwise they would have suffered like the Bulgarians or the French. However you twist it with transhumance, it is not migration, plus a movement from south to north of the Danube, from west to east of it, does not compare to the distance between the Urals and Pannonia. You can find these speakers or former speakers of Latin from Epirus to the Polish Carpathians (Gorals) and from the east of the Bug to the Czech Republic (Moravian Wallachia) called Valašsko. Only in Pannonia, when you landed, those Vlachs spoke old Hungarian from the time of the Scythians. It's a pity for our neighborhood to keep stabbing each other by inventing all kinds of aberrant hypotheses when we also have things that bring us closer.
At 21:15: "The history of Magyars was massively shaped by migrations". Absolutely true. However, this statement does not and cannot explain the history and slow development of the Hungarian language. The migratory political and military ruling elite must have used a form of Old-Hungarian either exclusively or together with a Turk (or Iranian) alternate second language. The survival of the Hungarian language entirely depended on the sedentary peasants and craftsmen in the Carpathian Basin (Pannonia) providing a constant supply of majority speakers in the midst of speakers of other languages totally unrelated to Hungarian. Without those native inhabitans the Hungarian language would have been lost and melted into some other spoken languages of the region.
This video was supposed to be 24 minutes long. But the more research I conducted, there more excited I got about Magyar history. So here it is, with 47 minutes runtime my longest video since 2021. Still I was forced to cut out a part about the Sarmatians and their connections to the Magyars - a remnant of that topic can be seen in the first world map at the beginning of the video. Forgive me, Magyar friends. I hope that you, especially, enjoy this one nonetheless. I might have missed an event or important person here and there. Tell me in the comments below, and I'll consider it for a follow-up video in the future.
On this occasion, please consider joining my revived Discord server. Over there, we like to discuss history about the steppe and Turkic peoples, ancient primary sources, DNA research and so on. There's even a "Research" group where you can, if you feel like it, contribute to one of the future projects. --> discord.gg/mwqE8dTcFq
Pechenegs amd the Besenyő are the same?
@@janosszentpeteri1922< igen , yes , ők a mai bosnyákok - bosnians .-> P-B= same : pecsenyegs : magyarul "becses nyék" néptörzsűnk , hátunk mögött követő " hátvédők " . -> több nyék törzsből vannak , mint mi [ 107+ 3-5 ] pesenyek -> besenyek -> bosonyákok -> bosnyákok : bősz-nyék : " bosnyákok - egyik néptörzsűk . Stb...
15:30= " non - turkic ..." muslims in general -> ‽
16:00= the very original belief of us - hungarians : cosmology: within the sun as good-"god" with respect , and the eartly made fire worship , sun who give life to every living thing , to live ! Not realy the side effect tengriism . This come from the other branch , when the iceage hit europe , one original carpatian basin people went to south to africa ( nilus river statue on it : makari people ) from there they went to middle east - sumeria , the are the s(z)aburians asfaloids branch people , those who went trought the cau( kő ) casus montains to reunite with in altai - altáj ( al talaji - not mountainious ) place with their relatives . Together they came back to the original place where they use to live before the iceage , the nowdays called carpatian basin . Etc...
17:18= not truth ! Even today folks tale clearly say = ördögűzők - ördűnglők- ördög döngölők . That's exactly the opposite of worshiping the devil - ördög ! Need to know why ? Because we present and show the evil , the devil to fight against him and his spirit , we don't hidding the represent the enemy , just like the natives in north and south america , and other continent .So this is clearly an other misconseption . Etc...
匈牙利人认为自己是匈奴的兄弟国家。匈奴人和匈牙利人的祖先是同一个人。另一方面，阿瓦尔人认为自己是匈奴人的后裔，特兰西瓦尼亚的塞克勒人也是如此。匈牙利人和阿瓦尔人在喀尔巴阡盆地联合。因此，匈牙利人之间的匈奴联系得到了加强。
Érdekes, hogy a kárpát medencében a dél dunántúli avar kori temetőkben fellelt emberanyag genetikája 80% ban megegyezik a mai székely emberek genetikájával. Ma is élnek avarok Dagesztánban, Kaukázusban, saját nyelvükön maglarülal "магларулал" ami highlander hegyi embert jelent. Hangzásban a "magyar" és a "магларулал" hasonló.
big stinkin’. onsense
A Magyarok akarnak pihenny ,hagyon ököt csöndben maradyanak, tisztelettel ❤
值得一提的是，兄弟情不仅仅指血缘关系，还包括人们是否视对方为兄弟并以此为依据的判断。The DNA test won't show the result of this.
There is a tradition in Hungary. It is called "komaság" it can be vary. Those who have no blood in common may be familiar.
I think so blood oath makes a similar connection between nations on the steppe.
Thank you for this absolutely amazing video.
A little fun fact to add: in Hungary we use the Eastern name order. Family name comes first, and the given name after that. This is the official way. As far as I know, no other European country uses it.
Another fun fact: the word Táltos (the Hungarian name for the "shaman") also means "a horse, that runs very fast" (in some folk tales they also can fly - like the shamans souls while beeing in trans).
And the name Emese (the mother of prince Álmos) is still popular here. :)
A magyar hagyományban van táltos ló és táltos ember, mindkettő tud az égi világban utazni.
Another fun fact: the Hungarian date order is year - month - day, opposite to most other European countries, even Eastern European ones. Which is pretty logical - but only for us 😂. Now imagine a British, for example, who travels to Egypt and sees the front page of a newspaper with the date on it. He thinks: it is not strange, it is the same as ours: day - month - year. But he is dead wrong! Because the Arabic writing goes from right to left, therefore it is year - month - day for an Arabic speaker 🙂. And whom did we get the numbers we use from ? 😉
@szilvi79 Fun fact Romania use family name first
day month year si welcome to the balkans 😀
@@DacucelRau Good to know. So Nicolae Ceausescu's name is all wrong written in Romanian or Nicolae was his family name and not his given?
@@DacucelRau and what's that with the "day month year" thing?
We use Year, Month, Day
I am a Volga Tatar and took a genetic test. The closest historical populations are Hungarian conquerors, with very close matches.
Very good, but then you will tell me why your ancestors attacked the eastern half of the Hungarian kingdom for more than five hundred years and killed hundreds of thousands of Hungarians, which is why we then lost Transylvania and Partium to the Romanians?! Did they know anything about this ancient kinship?
@@szakaattila7899 Ezt én is elmondhatom. A mongolok meghódították, és kötelezték a közös harcra őket. Aki nem engedelmeskedett, azokat megölték. A tatár nevet később vehették fel, korábban (XIX. század) volgai bolgárok voltak. A volgai tatárok nem azonosak a krími tatárokkal.
@@szakaattila7899 The Volga Bulgars, ancestors of the Volga Tatars, were also subjected to conquest and devastation by the Mongols
True Volga Bolgars ans Hungarians were neighbors there and closely related. Both did fight aganist the Mongol invasion and the Hungarians there were completly eliminated.
@@Goratrix66 All right, except that they were not Hungarians, but Mogyerians - Magyars, and this is where everyone is wrong about this, because, unfortunately, anti-Hungarian historians also feed this misconception!
Thank you for taking the time to make this video!
The whole truth would probably require a time machine,and even if there were, some details would probably be left out!
Tengri be with you !
thank you for making a video about us, it is always nice to see someone putting energy into this topic. there are a couple of things which are still up to debate, but it would not be fair to pick apart the perceived inaccuracies due to the tentative nature of the finer details and the obscurity of the studies and knowledge supporting those details. all in all a well put together work with logical consistency and generally in a good direction. especially the take on türk vs ugric origins: well it can be both. lastly, i am pretty sure there will be rude comments from some of my compatriots who have lower impulse-control, but don't let those comments take away your curiosity and enthusiasm about the subject. thanks again, cheers! :)
I feel the same. But i foresee some envious slavic and orc comments too..
Türk és ugor eredet tudata nem volt népünknek, mindkettő külhonból származik.
@@mrroyale5688 ebben nagyjából egyetértünk. :)
@@Baso-sama Byzantines are called Turkic and Arab sources even include the Hungarians among the Turkic peoples.
@@mrroyale5688A finnugor eredet egy külföldről és az MTA által ránk tuszkolni vágyott dolog, de hála az archeogenetikának kiderült, hogy mese habbal.
This video was well presented, informative and engaging. Thank you for creating it and please continue to produce more.
What a well done video, brother! Thank you for covering our history!
I was waiting for this video since the Bulgars one, because you said you were not doing Balkan history anymore. I was exited for this video, Thanks!
Well, as Hungary is not part of the Balkans geographically, it is still a technically correct statement ;-)
@@KhansDen You are right, Hungary has never been in the Balkans, and I hope it never will be.
@@sandors.5526 Understandable sentiment.
Under a recent openings of some Hun cemeteries, located in the Northern Mongolian region, the DNA blood relationship between the deceased Huns and the Hungarians living in Central Europe today, has been confirmed as being the same. This confirms a long believed relationship between this two brother nations.
Exactly! 💯🎯
Thanks to the science of Archaeogenetics the old political denial of Hun-Avar-Magyar continuity can be proven genetically!
Magyarságkutató Intézet - The Origin of the Hungarians video
ruclips.net/video/mV3v3rvPRfE/видео.htmlsi=_9_VZrtXEnsSw8I1
HÜLYESÉG
ungarians living in Central Europe today, ... : SLAVIC (east European) genetic
@@DanishIV Mi itt a hülyeség? Várom a választ.
I have been waiting for the Magyars to be covered for some time now. As a Hungarian wanting to learn more of my roots I am Greatful that u took the time to talk about us. 🎉🇭🇺🔥
I shared here hungarian chronic details and more.
@@childabductioninitaly8946 ight I will read
Asimilated Slavs.
Asimilated Slavs.
Huh
Finally some real content on this subject! Well done!
They always forget that among Hungarians marrige with a relative was and is a taboo. The further away your spouse from is the better. So mixing was suppoerted.
It was and still is a taboo for all Turks today. In my opinion, this was taboo among both the Huns and the Scythians
I didn't know that. It is also a characteristic that I found in sources about the Kyrgyz and Göktürk people, and virtually all other Turkic peoples to this very day. So I am not surprised that it would be the same with the Magyars. Thanks for the info.
This is true. A recent genetic study of 4 Avar age cemetary did total family trees of the skeletons of the graves and it showed that almost everyone of those communities were relatives to eachother, but only in father line. Their society was based on paternal heritage and clan structure based on the father line heritage, while the women in the cemetaries were of totally different communities genetically. There were barely any female descenant which shows us that the girls married to different communities and the wives came from also different communities. They even payed attention to not to marry someone who had even a little distant family realtivity. Also the genetical connections proved the existance of 'Leviarty' which is a steppe turkic tradition, if the husband of a woman died, she was kept in the family by marrying her to the brother, uncle, or to a close male relative of the deceased husband. So in Father line there was a huge blood based structure of these sociaties, but they paid high attention to marry such women who had totally no blood relativness to them.
You know who loves to marry their first cousins? The Pakistanis! In England they have a real serious problem because of stale blood......the British doctors are trying to talk them out of marrying their cousins to no avail. Their parents are making the decision for them. They can't go against family decision. Very backward.
Isn't it actually illegal in most countries to marry your own relatives? lol
In 2020, new research on the genetics of the Huns appeared, which collected significantly more material on this people. French and Mongolian scientists published the results of their research in one of the most popular genetic journals in the world - Human Genetics.
According to research, the Huns were a mixed Eurasian population of Siberian Scythians (originally the Andronovo archaeological culture), which included the descendants of the Aryan (R1a) and Proto-Turkic peoples (Q), as well as haplotypes that were directly related to the Hungarian conquerors - the Magyars (N ). That is, the Huns who invaded Europe united three different tribal formations of Eurasian steppe nomads.
We are related to the Asian Huns through the Siberian Scythians.
I’m Magyar, with Polynesian DNA
Only a small part of Mgyars DNA is N1 haplotype. Magyars are Fino-Ugric people like Estonians, like Livonians, like Finland, and like Northwest Russians. They are Not Turkic. N1 is a haplotype originally from China that spread into Siberia and then through Samoyedic people intermarried into Fino-Ugric people, but a haplotype of Someone with N1 could easily after a couple thousand years be a blonde person with blue eyes and the only evidence of the N1 is the DNA.
Strangely, the "Dream of Emese" is represented on a golden vessel of the Avar age in Hungary from Nagyszentmiklós (8th-beginning of 9th century), not from the Magyar age (10th century).
on one hand we will never know what is on those vessels since there is no written record. on the other hand the woman grabed by a hawk like bird could be interpreted as a Emese and the Turul. The avar state fell under the Frank attack but the avar population certainly lived through and they became subjects of Hungary. Some historians like Gyula Laszlo mentiones thet avars were much more numerous then the conquering magyars. He suggest that Hungarian may be the language of the avars or the majority of avars. The conquering magyars might spoke turkish according to the names of tribes and leaders. But Isaac Newton was not jewish neither spoke hebrew even if he had hebrew name. So this is all just speculation. We have no idea about the linguistic situation in Hungary in the X. c. Khazar jews, iranian muslims from Choresm called Kalasz and Pomaz, iranian speaking jasz (iasi), türkic speaking besenyős (petchenegs), varang and kölpény vikings came with the magyars and found slavic tribes, probably türkic and uralic speaking avars, and slavic-turkic-uralic speaking bolgars in Hungary. So using an avar age vesel to picture a magyar myth is appropriate in this quiet wide range of ethnic situation of that age.
@@ciszegebe Τhe double conquest theory of Gyula László has widely been discredited among Avar and Conquest period Magyar researchers of the end of the 20th century, it is interesting but rather a marginal idea: among historians only László really professed it, but it is indeed a highly popular idea in the "popular history" or national mythology, still attached to Hungarians being Altaic instead of Uralic. I am not sure why is this, but if you look at the little evidence there is, the only readible inscriptions of the late Avars are clearly in a Turcic language, whereas nothing suggests that the Hungarians weren't actually speaking Hungarian when they arrived into the basin (they certainly did have a Turcic and a more ancient Iranic component though). The territorial theoris of László have largely been rejected by later researchers. The archaeological origins of the Conquering Hungarians point to the southern Ural region which is also in concordence with a Finno-Ugric population, the region being right in the heart of the Uralic languages, between its three branches of Samoyedic, Finnic and Ugric. Also the conquering population seems to have been much larger than previously thought, as we know now that Hungarians were already partly cultivators well before their arrival, living on the northern boundary between the steppe and forest ecosystems and could sustain a much larger population than pure nomads.
pure european union 😅
@@ciszegebe the same scene is represented on Indian and Iranian vessels and may have referred to any other myth. The idea the it represents the dream of Emese comes from László Gyula's book on the treasure of Nagyszentmiklós in which he partially dates it to the time of the Hungarian kings on quite ridiculous grounds. For the correct dating and cultural situation of the hoard, see the more recent Bálint Csanád's A Nagyszentmiklósi kincs at Balassa editions (also a vulgarized version and another one in German) or that of Szenthe György at the National Museum (Budapest).
Turk ve Macar Kardes! Not all Huns where Hungarian, but all Hungarians where Hun. Our greatest King Dynasty, the Árpád House was from the Hun dynasty of Tugrul. Basicly the Huns where arround: 60% Turk; 25% Sarmatian; 10% Hungarian; 5% Mongolian. When we ruled the Goth-Germans, they join to our army.
🇭🇺❤️🇹🇷
nonsense
Huns were early forebearers. Documentary here says the last Magyar leader in Hungary, became Christian and the first King of Hungary ?
@@ronaldgrove3283 King Stephen (St. Stephen) was the first King of Hungary. However he was not the first King in Pannonia from his family line. Before King Stephen it was the Magyar confederacy. The title was something like Grand Prince. His ancestor Arpad was the first ruler in Pannonia (modern Hungary).
@@ronaldgrove3283 That is clearly incorrect
Teşekkürler Emre Her zamanki gibi çok güzel video olmuş
video atılalı 20 dakika olmuş .d
@@norakssolucani videonun beş on dakikasını baktıktan sonra destek yorumumu yazarım Artı Emre yaptığı videoların hepisi kaliteli Yorum yazmam sizi rahatsızmı etti?
@@Userjunior2016 hayır videonun tamamını izlemeden böyle yorumlar yazmak bana saçma geliyor o yüzden dedim
@@norakssolucaniEmrenin kanalını uzun zamandır takip ediyorum Yayınladığı kitabıda aldım Kaliteli iş yaptığını çoktan ispatlamış benim için Ben gönül rahatlığıyla destek yorumumu video bitmeden yazıyorum
🐺🇹🇷🇦🇿🇰🇿🇹🇲🇰🇬🇺🇿🇭🇺🐺🤘at least the Macars are in the Turkish counsil. Are home of Kurultai and Part of Turan..
hungarians not turks at all our dnas 95% typically european and rest of it hun,sarmatans etc
@@latakicsi2183 Cant you see atleast?
@@dertkuyusu😂
Spot on!
@@latakicsi2183 Hungary is in Turkic council. On the highest level Hungary recognises its Turkish roots.
@@lba6859 thats root is about 1-2% and orban is a clown who taking bribes from everyone
As a Hungarian I'm surprised how accurate and well informed this video was. You really did put in a lot of time to research. Our origin is a mystery and we have many theories even more than you presented here but these you presented were the ones most supported by historical evidences. This was a quality presentation. This is a sensitive topic. There are cult-like groups spreading misinformation about this and it is hard to find real historical facts. Hobby historians creating novels and some people believe everything they read. You did a great job trying to not hurt anyone's feelings.
Hobby Wikipedia historian
Nagyon szep Video ❤
What a luck! I was just questioning myself about this topic out of blue and there it is your video on it made a week ago. :)
Extract from Neparáczki archaeogenetics:
Based on Neparáczki, the following genetic distribution emerges from the 89 "occupier" graves excavated in Hungary: Scandinavian Germanic 39 (43.82%), Asian Hun 37 (41.57%), Caucasian 5 (5.61%), Slavic 2 (2 .25%), Other European 6 (6.75%).
"The groups closest to the population of Karos are the early European farmers who lived 6000-3000 years ago (STR=Starcevo), the Middle Eastern Neolithic (MEN), the Szakálhát culture of the Carpathian basin (SZA), the Yamnayas (YAM, 3500-2300 BC Black steppe above the sea), the population of the Scythian kurgans of the Iron Age (KIK, 800-600 BC) and the Asian Bronze Age Scythians from the Tagar-Tachtyk culture (TAG, 800 BC - AD 400). The Central Asian Bronze Age is also close Sintastha culture (SIA, the first steppe nomads) and the population of the Iron Age Baraba steppe (BB3, southern Siberia)."
Nincs skandináv, szláv, germán gén. Ez így komolytalan.
@@erikakatona4356 Hát igen. Nagy vonalakban csak europid gén van, de Neparáczkival nem mernék vitatkozni ezen. Biztos találtak valami apró különbséget ami populációkra jellemző és az alapján tudják felaprózni az europid génállományt.
Well, it is not so simple to say that Hungarians have only marginal connections with the Huns.
But, as I will show you in the followings, the Hungarians are the direct descendants of the Huns!
First of all, what were the Huns? Turks? Are there any linguistic proofs of this? Until we find a text written by the Huns, that proves what language they spoke, we cannot say that they were Turks or any other nationality. That some Hunnic names can sound Turkic, do not prove anything, because it could be a matter of fashion to give such names to some of people. Today the Turks from Turkey have mostly Arabic names, and the Hungarians mostly have Indo-European or Hebrew names, because of their religion and the cultural influence to which they were subjected in the last centuries.
I. Genetically, the question is more interesting, and this can shed light on the Hungarian origin too.
Archeogenetical mitocondrial studies of the Hunnic graves in Mongolia showed that the Huns originated from two major groups:
1. In the East, until the line of Ulan Bator, they were mostly of East Asian, Mongoloid type,
2. West from Ulan Bator they were Europid types, of the Scythian people originating from the Northern shores of the Black Sea.
So the Western part of the Huns were Scythians, while the eastern part were of Mongolic or Turkic origin.
The Western Huns (Xiongnu) were the descendants of the Yamnaya Pre-Scythian culture, which founded the Scythian empire, as a result of which many Scythians from the Black Sea region migrated to the East, and established themselves in Western Mongolia and the Altay mountains. Their rich archaeological finds, and great artistic creations (gold objects, rugs, etc.) were excavated from Altay, Tuva, and Mongolia, together with the mummies of Europoid, blond or red-haired people.
In 48-49 AD, the Chinese chased away the Western Huns (those of Scythian origin), which migrated, after a short period of dwelling around Lake Balkash, in two directions:
1. The region which today is Bashkortostan, or in the past was Magna Hungaria. And there they remained for many centuries. From there the Huns which in the 4th century formed the European Hunnic empire, migrated to today's Hungary, then from the same region 500 years later the 7 Magyar tribes migrated to retake the Hunnic lands in the Carpathian Basin.
2. To the south: Bactria, Northern Afghanistan, and Northern India, where they founded the White Hunnic (or Hephtalite) Empire.
So, the place where the Huns settled East from Ural, was the same place from where the Hungarians migrated in the 9th century, to found Hungary. And in the same place, in the 13th century, the Hungarian priest Julianus found Hungarians and called that place Magna Hungaria. So the Hungarians and the Huns lived in the same place for 800 years.
But both Attila's Huns and the Hephtalites have connections with the Hungarians of today. Actually, the Avars who settled in the Carpathian Basin were not mostly of East Asian Mongol-Turkic origin, but of Hephtalite White Hun origin. Their ethnic name Var-Chunni shows this. When the Gök Türks in alliance with the Iranians, destroyed the White Hun Empire, the White Huns joined the Avars (Rourans) in the region of the Caucasus, after crossing the whole Persia and the Caucasus mountains from the South, as the Byzantine chronicler Corippus writes in his book In Laudem Iustini III. After that the Var-Chunni empire, called Avars, established itself in the Carpathian Basin. But the majority of the Avars seem to be the White Huns, but because the kaghan was Avar, the empire was called Avar Empire. When, in 895, the 7 tribes of the Magyars came, they found there huge masses of Avars, and, we can say, they reunited for the first time since the Chinese chase away their ancestors from Mongolia.
An interesting thing about the Hephtalites, is that, it seems that some of them remained in the East, are the Maghar people from Nepal, who claim that their ancestors came from Central Asia, and this is proven also by the Shamanism and the wooden pillars that they put on the graves of their dead, which are similar to the funerary wooden pillars of the Székelys and Hungarians called kopjafa. This means that actually, the White Huns had among them a tribe called Magyar, which retreated in the Southern Himalayas after the Whites Huns were chased away from Bactria.
III. And now, lets look at the language. It is really peculiar how this isolated language exist in Central Europe. It is told by some researchers that this language was spoken by the 7 tribes of the Magyars, when they came in 895. It is proven that these 7 tribes were not very numerous in comparation with the peoples they found in the Carpathian Basin. But if only they would have spoken this language, regarding the fact that they found a huge mass of people of other origins in the Carpathian Basin (as some say, mostly Slavs), then their fate would have been the same as the Bulgarians, who despite conquering the lands South to the Danube, they lost their language and Turkic culture, and became Slavs. Or the Viking (Varangian) Russian troops that conquered the East Slavs, became Slavs. Or the Germanic Longobards who conquered Italy, they became Italians. And the examples can go on and on, with the Visigoths, Vandals, Franks, Sveves, etc. This shows that if a nation conquers a region on which another nations live, which are more than the conquerors, the conquerors finally assimilate in the conquered peoples, and disappear completely, only their name remaining in some cases (France, Bulgaria, Russia)... But nothing else. So why only the Magyars could survive without loosing their language and culture, and, furthermore, “impose” it on the peoples they conquered, although these peoples were in majority? The only plausible explanation is, that a huge part of the people the Magyars found there, were speaking also Hungarian! So, it seems, that a part of the Avars, and mostly probably the descendants of the White Huns (Hephtalites) spoke Hungarian! And as these two people speaking the same language met, they became majority in the Carpathian Basin, and this is how the Hungarian language survived until today. Even in the Hungarian Chronicles there is proof about this: the Székelys which is said that they were waiting for the Magyars of Árpád, and united with them in the Carpathian Basin. And what is this showing? That the Huns, who departed from Mongolia in 48-49 AD, spoke a form of ancient Hungarian, and when in 895 the Magyar tribes arrived in Pannonia, their descendants still spoke it. Probably the Eastern Xiongnu, who remained in Mongolia after 49 AD, who were mostly of Mongoloid ancestry, they spoke Turkic. So, in conclusion, the Xiongnu (Asian Huns) were composed by two major components: Proto-Hungarians and Turks. The Proto-Hungarians departed in 49 AD from Mongolia and founded the European Hun and the White Hun Empires. The White Huns, after being defeated by the Gök-Türks (former Eastern Xiongnu) and the Persians, fled, together with the Avars (Rourans) to the West Later, and established themselves in the Carpathian Basin in 568. And the two branches of the Xiongnu, which fled to the West in 49 AD reunited in the Carpathian Basin in 895. As I showed, the only explanation how the Hungarian language survived in the Carpathian Basin, and did not disappeared after 895, is that the Hungarians are direct descendant of both the Huns of Attila and the White Huns (Hephtalites).
Other proofs that the Hungarians are the direct descendants of the Huns.
Of course the ancient legends about the origin of the Hungarians. No other nation in the world in its legends about its origin, says that it comes from the Huns, only the Hungarians! Is this just a coincidence? Today you can go at any Hungarian village and ask the people who live there, who are your ancestors, and he will respond: the Huns!
And another, which in my oppinion, is the most important. The archaeological research of the graves of nomadic peoples, starting with the Scythians and ending with the Mongols, showed that from all nomadic horse-archer peoples only two burried their dead by partial horse burial: the Huns and the Hungarians.What is that meaning? While all the other nomadic people burried their dead with the whole horse, the Huns and the Hungarians burried only the horse’s head and leg bones together with the dead. This is called partial horse burrial. While we can find such kind of burials very sporadicly also among other peoples (which can be explaned that some Huns or Hungarians lived among them), but as the whole people, only the Huns and Hungarians burried their people in this way. All Hunnic and Hungarian burials are partial horse burrials, while among Turks, Mongols, Rourans, Kitans, Mandjus, etc, you can find one or two such burrials. What is that if not the decissive proof that the Hungarians of today are the direct descendants of the Huns?
We could divide this into 3 components:
1.0. Xiognu ulus.
- Huns. (Mongolia to Europe)
2.0. Gokturk ulus.
- Mamluks. (Irak to Egypt)
- Seljuk Turks (Persia) -> Sultanate of Rum (Anatolia) -> House of Osman (Anatolia).
- Khazar Khaganate.
- Other?
3.0. Mongol ulus.
- Chagatai Khanate.
- Ilkhanate.
- Golden horde.
- Yuan dynasty.
- Timurids
- Mughal Empire.
- Other?
All of the 3 empires were once organised towards one place namely Otuken wich was the center for all the Nomads and had as well the same religion namely Tengrism. Migrations resulted to mixing with other races and change of religions of course. Also the national monument of Mongolia illustrates this very well.
Magyars were and still much larger in numbers than all of the others all together put into the so called "Finno-Ugric" group. Scientifically this should be called the "Magyar" group. The culture was moving from the south to the less developed and more harsh north, from the more numerous people to the less. Not the reverse way. That would be quite illogical. This movement explains the relationships, but not that the Magyars learned from Finnish as the political wrong name suggests. The northen people mixed and learned from the southern neighbors who were also militarily clearly superiors. The movement is also simple to see if you look at the rivers coming from the Mongolian plateu and flowing to the north, as the cold weather slowly improved after the ice age. Rivers were used as the best roads for moving. This is the direction how people moved, cultural transition faded, and the number of people diminished. There is a clear natural arrow. If someone ignores this arrow, then I will not believe whatever crazy theory is presented...
As a Hungarian American I appreciate your very informative and logical explanation of the Hungarians origin. It is refreshing to hear the logic and fact based history where the Hungarians came from especially in this day and age where political bias and anti Hungarian theories on this subject are endless and nonsensical. I have heard dozens of theories about the origin of the Hungarians from multiple interests and sources and non of them made too much sense to me. More often than not I sensed deliberate antagonistic viewpoints toward the Hungarian history depicting the Hungarians as uncultured, primitive, non white, non European tribes who don't belong in the European community despite the fact, that they've been in that country for over a thousand year..
@@martinmaltbor1290 Thank you very much!
Thats true!!!
This video is amazing, but I wish you guys talked about only surviving oghur Turkic language : Chuvash !
and ironicly high amount of similarities that it shares with Hungarian (and other ugric languages which are claimed to be related to Hungarian) There are MANY words in Hungarian and Chuvash languages which are exclusive to these two.
Not to mention Chuvash people STILL are living at the region what is called "Magna Hungaria" today place where Hungarians originated or at least initialy arrived
Whole Chuvash Hungarian linguistic relation can serve as a explanarion for :
1-) Where did app. %30 of Hungarian vocabulary with Unknown origin comes from ?
(Today mostly extinct Oghur Turkic lanuage family)
2-) Why Hungarian is mutualy uninteligable with other Turkic languages ?
(Just like Chuvash, which is also COMPLETELY uninteligable with every other existing Turkic language, they are a part of a Subbranch of Turkic languages that has specialised from other 5 main subbranch of Turkic languages when Oghur Turks (Huns, Avars, Khazars, Sabars, Bolgars, Chuvashs and Hungarians) begun to imigrate to west at the 1century BC.)
This ALSO proofs Hungarian-Hunnic relation : Hungarians too were a part of Oghur tribes that made up Hunnic empire of Atilla alongside fellow Chuvashs, and when empire collapsed and raidings into europe were no more these Turkic peoples had to imigrate back to volga basin where they initialy gained a footfold (magna hungaria, where chuvashes still live today) as invading gepid, quad and scribi germanic tribes seized pannonia
Proves not proofs.
@@XY-sd5bn ups. Anyways what do you think about this whole Chuvash Hungarian thing ?
Scythians Huns Magyars some of the people, same culture. Horse riding.
Literally every nation had horse riding, because that was the quickest way to move on land...
Greetings from Hungary, awsome job. Szép összefoglaló. Köszönjük szépen.
and avars
Go fish
1. The Hungarian legends also state the conquest of the Carpathian Basin was a RETURN to their original homeland.
2. Hungarian legends claim the leaders of the Hungarians were of Scythian descends and not Huns
3. The legend of Hunor and Magor states they were BROTHERS, thus, the Hungarians cannot be DESCENDANTS of the Huns
4. There is no historical and archeological proof of Finnic people migration, therefore, the common homeland in the Urals is absolutely baseless. Even more the Lapps (Saami) have been residing in Scandinavial for a good 10 000 years. If they are related to the Hungarians, their common homeland could be anywhere in Central-Europe as well (taking into account the last galcial age)
5. All European peoples who lived in Europe before the Indo-European invasion spoke agglutinative langauges: the Basques, the Etruscan, the Minans etc. etc. They are all considered language isolates as such an ancient connection to langauges existing today cannot be proven linguistically but on the same account it cannot be refuted either.
As a conclusion from the above I have a strong belief that Hungarian is either a missing ancient link between the Finno-Ugric and Turkic people or even they are ancestral to both of them (so there is no borrowing of any kind) and further back in time they are related to the ancent extinct people of Europe predating both the Greeks and the Romans.
It is certain that Hungarian langauge separeted from its closest Ugric relatives in the Iron age a good 3000 years ago, so there is a specific Hungarian langauge since then, therefore, it is more ancient than Latin, not to mention any exsiting spoken European languages.
RETURN ?????!!!!
@@CocoSon-we2rg yes, the chronicles write about a return
@@CocoSon-we2rg< YES ! FROM THE EUROPIAN ICEAGE THEY MOVED SOUTH AND EAST AND NORTH , AND AFTER ICE AGE THE ALL MOVED BACK THEY ORIGINAL TERITORY . SOME SMALL GROUPS NEVER LEFT WITH EACH RACES AND GROUPS , RIGHT NOW MORE AND MORE PROOF THEY FIND AND FOUND . Etc...
@@Baso-samaA litle mistake there.
The Huns were Scythians.
This information also pointed those Chronicles .
Also Priscos retor call Atilla King of Scythians
@@Baso-sama Paul Lendvai among others says: Folklore research and modern philology recognize the popularlegends, in any case, a historical kernel: a close connection with a
Bulgarian-Turanic people and with the Alans. While the name Magyar
"Hungarian" that the Hungarians give themselves dates back to the Ugric era, the name of
hungarus, Hungarian "Hungarian", has its origin in the Turanian tribal organization
of the honor to which the Hungarians belonged for a long time. honor in-
means "ten arrows", i.e. tribes. But it is also possible that
the name that became common in the West from the early 9th century
to remind of the union of the seven initial tribes, weakly connected
them, of the old Hungarians with the three perjured Khazar tribes, with the Kabaris.
In any case, it is certain that the Hungarians belonged to
near the Turanic Khazar empire between the Middle Volga and the Infe
river of the Danube. The old Hungarians, however, were never a "people
Mongolian", as it has often been said. Beginning in 830, the Hungarians
they lived together in Etelköz, in the "land between the waters", on a vast territory between
Don, Danube and Black Sea, with different nomadic Turanian peoples,
with Alans and Slavs. In the Byzantine and Eastern sources, they are given by those
several times the name "Turks". About 200 words of original
Bulgarian-Turkish give us even today the possibility to identify
in becoming the tribal union of the old Turkish component Hungarians
very significant." However, the Turks do not claim to have returned to Anatolia, nor do they ally themselves with the Etruscans like the Albanians or now like the Hungarians.
In fact, the Hungarians were also related to the Pannonians and the predecessors of the Roman Empire, the Etruscans. Not only the Hungarians came from Asia, but the whole of Europe, which was resettled from Asia after the ice age. Central Asia used to be white.
I am a Turk, and we have never been a racist nation in our history, and we have mixed with all the peoples we have taken in. That's why we are so diverse.
Horizontal 77 < I keep writting to this channel the same thing , but they always errised that , what you wrote as same , you must have better connection with them . He or they don't like me , for my shocking truth comments . Etc...
@@bir_cumle That's right! Like the Turks, the Hungarians are also a mixed people. And we are both proud of our ancestors, our origin.
@@attilatasciko4817 I may be phrasing it differently.
You are right, Turkisms and Turkic dna are found everywhere in the world.
Greetings from Hungary to our all Turkic𐱅𐰇𐰼𐰜 brothers🤘🏻🐺🇹🇷🇺🇿🇰🇿🇦🇿🇰🇬🇹🇲🇭🇺🇧🇬🐎🏹
🇭🇺❤️
hungarians not turks at all our dnas 95% typically european and rest of it hun,sarmatans etc
@@latakicsi2183We are know bro. Chill! We are just love Attila and he is Turk. The now hungarians not Turks. We see and love Attila the Hun as a Turk. We love you because you love Attila...
@@latakicsi2183Also, your country is a member of Turan, so we put you in the Turkish section. Not to see you as a Turk...
@@NationalistTurk.-nq1sb "We are just love Attila and he is Turk" zero proof of that...he just used turks tribes in his army but even the second one in command was goth/german so the turks were his underdogs/vasals... he was just hun
You can see below that until the 18th century, the Hungarians and the whole of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and the Scythians.
The Hungarian chronicles also confirm this. Chronicles are made for kings and lying to a king is dangerous. The chronicler can easily lose his head. So the chronicler wrote the truth.
(But they did not yet know the Finno-Ugric theory or the Turkic-Onoguric theory.)
The chronicles were written according to the king's taste, the truth was the last consideration.
@@erikakatona4356 The same is not typical of the Finno-Ugric and Türk-Onogur origin theories...
@@erikakatona4356 I agree, like the Gesta Hungarorum was written to embellish the deeds of the King. All over Europe, the scribes wrote to make Kings and Kingdoms seen in a better light, beaver, bigger. That is not to say all of it is a lie, but to take it with a grain of salt. That's all.
Great video, awesome job!
Hehe. I do not think I have to refer to recent Hungarian scientific researches. I think the creator of this video should do this. Two well known results from the last few yeas : 1. There is genetic link between the so called `Hun` people in the Carpathian Basin and the so called old Magyar people ceturies later in the same area. Shortly those so called `Hun` are partly ancestors of the later Magyar. 2. There are evidences for Avar-Magyar continuity and the usage of the ancient Magyar or very similar language in the Avar Empire. The Hungarian tribal confederation which entered the Carpathian Basin in the late 9th century took ten tribes, seven Magyar (about four of them had name with Turkic origin) and three Kabar (by Hungarian name). There are two theories about the language of the Kabar : They spoke Iranian language or they spoke Turkic language.
It seems like that the so called Magyar people continuously appeared in the Avar territory or late Avar lands in the Carphatian Basin far before 895 (probably even in the 8th century) and there is no any sign of fight. Yes it was tribal confederation and it was far before the fake 19th century nationalism so in the Hungarian tribal confedaration people probably spoke at least two different languages (and it woukd not be surprising if even 3-4 languages) because these nomad tribal confederations were political pacts regarless the native language. Also there are opinions that the old Magyar language was present among the Pechegen so there was no such thing that the so called Hungarian `nation` entered the Carphatian Basin. I am really sick of such narrative. Before 900 AD there was no such thing as Hungarian nation. It is the fake 19th century ideology about nations. But in the ninth century there was no such ideology.
OK, these sound strange, but again, these are scientific results and facts.
Kedves Gábor! Örülök, hogy említed az avar magyar folytonosságot! Az avarság minden bizonnyal nemzet alkotó népcsoport a magyarságban! A nemzet nation szavakhoz lenne egy észrevételem! A szó mai értelmében, hogy magyar nemzet a 9. században ahogy említed nem beszélhetünk, viszont törzsi szinten már létező dolog volt! Nemzettségfők fogtak össze kisebb törzseket, majd képezte a sokaság a törzset élükön a törzsfőkkel. Adott területen adott nyelven beszélő népcsoportokról volt és van szó, amely viszont a mai nemzet szónak is megfelel. Az már hab a tortán, hogy nekünk magyaroknak a nemzet és nemzetiség szavunk a nemzésből, a nemzeni igéből ered teljesen egyértelműen magyar jelentés és eredet. Ugyanakkor más nemzeteknél a nation szó a latin natio szóra vezethető vissza ami a nascor, születni szülni jelentésből ered. Nekünk nem kellett ez a szó kölcsönzés. Amúgy az sem elvetendő, hogy a magyar nyelv egy linga franca szerepet is betölthetett, pont azért mert pl az avarok saját nyelvükön megérthettek bennünket, mert volt egy közös korábbi alapnyelv, hasonlóan mint a szláv, ahol az ukrán megérti az oroszt, vagy részben a szerbet. A szlávok is kb 1500 évvel ezelőtt nyelvileg közelebb voltak egymáshoz.
@@volcsiorion Ezek mind féligazságok, de a legnagyobb hülyítés amit egyes történészek is propagálnak, hogy nem létezett a nemzet fogalma a középkorban! Akkor a Werbőczy István jogtudós "Unio Trium Nationum" törvénye miről szólt szerinted? Az Unio Trium Nationum azt jelenti, hogy a három nemzet egyesülése, ez volt a kápolnai unió kölcsönös szövetségi egyezmény, amelyet az erdélyi magyar nemesek, a székely lófők és az erdélyi szászok vezetői kötöttek Csicsókápolnán 1437. szeptember 16-án, válaszként az az év nyarán kitört erdélyi parasztfelkelésre. A szövetség hivatalosan az Erdélyt fenyegető mongol és oszmán veszély ellen, ténylegesen azonban a parasztok ellen irányult. De hozhatnék korábbi példákat is, például már a rómaiak is írtak a "nation" - nemzetekről, mint például Dio Cassius római író, aki ezt írta a 2. században: „Dacos Scythicam quodammodo nationem suisse", ami azt jelenti, hogy a dákok egy szkíta nemzetből valók! De Thuróczy János vagy Oláh Miklós és sok más korabeli író a magyar nemességről úgy írnak mint "Hungarica natio" - a magyar nemzet! Tehát latinul a nationum = nemzet! Akkor minek mind nyomjátok ezt kommunista mesét, hogy a nemzet az csak egy 18. századi fogalom? Ez csakis azért lehet mert valamelyik nagyokos történész kitalálta, hogy a francia forradalommal alakult ki a nemzet mint modern fogalom. De ebben csak annyi volt az igaz, hogy akkor lett a francia parasztság és a polgárság is jogilag része a francia nemzetnek, de már a középkorban is a nemesség mindig is nation - nemzetnek tartotta magát mindenhol Európában! Ezért is a történelmet nem lehet mindig a mai korhoz hasonlítani, hiszen akkor ugyanúgy mondhatnánk azt is, hogy az ókori Hellászban a görögök csak azok voltak akik szavazati joggal rendelkeztek! De akkoriban csak a városokban élő férfiak egy részének volt joga szavazni, és akkor ilyen logikával mondhatnánk, hogy akik a városon kívül éltek, vagy akár a városokban élő nők és gyermekeik sem voltak görögök, nem igaz?!
I could answer to no.1 problem: forced magyarisation of the local people.
@@Nicky220 There was no magyarisation, this is one of the biggest anti-Hungarian lies invented by Ceausist historians and securitatea officers from the media! And I say this from Romania, as someone who has seen these documents and I find it outrageous that propagandists like the charlatan Daniel Roxin continue to push this dangerous lie! These liars, knowing that the Romanians don't know Hungarian anyway and won't look into it, refer to the Apponyi Law, which required Hungarian public schools and institutions to learn the Hungarian language, which was the official language of the Hungarian kingdom! And this happened because it turned out that, for example, more than 80% of Transylvanian Romanians did not know the Hungarian language as citizens of the Hungarian state! Where in the world today is it not compulsory to learn the state's language in schools? And it is precisely the Romanians who, starting in the 20s, took away and Romanized the Transylvanian Hungarian universities, theaters and schools? They romanized the ancient Hungarian place names and geographical names, and there is evidence that they romanized the Hungarian first names and even the names of Hungarian historical figures, one by one, as if they had always been Romanian! That's why I think Romanians are the meanest people in the world, because they do exactly what they accuse other people of doing, a liar and plagiarist people who steal other people's history and living space! That's why these scumbags constantly accuse the Hungarians of something in order to hide their own misdeeds from the world! And then it's no coincidence that only the Romanians have the saying, I quote: Hoţul strigă: „Hoţii!”!
@@Nicky220 You mean was forced magyarization hundreds of years ago, just like is forced romanization and slovakization today , hundred years later ? Gabor Czirjak USA
This is the Finno-Ugric concept, which cannot be reconciled with archaeogenetic and recent results. The Hungarians are the descendants of Proto-Europeans who were superimposed on a population with a steppe culture that was mixed from the Scythian-Hunavar populations. These ancient Europeans are the inhabitants of the Carpathian Basin and the Balkans since the Paleolithic, who survived the Ice Age and continue to inhabit their homeland.
An integral part of Scythia is the Bronze Age Carpathian Basin, where the very first written signs appear (Tordos - Vinča culture, Tatárlaka).
Here they found the first cart model (Budakalász) proving the use of wheels, and ancient smelters for smelting ores.
The Hungarian language is idioma primogenitum, i.e. the oldest language of Europe. It is not Finno-Ugric based, but self-developed like Turkish, Finnish, Basque, Japanese, and Korean languages. These languages were still in contact with each other during the Hunnic era.
I agree with you brother. Eurasiatic language macrofamily includes all dene-caucasian, uralic-altaic, indo-european language families. According to related Jäger (2005) study, closest languages to indoeuropean languages are uralic languages.
Also mitochondrial dna shows similarity of finnougric, western turkic, iranic, european people in addition to paternal ydna lineages. (We can also find these west eurasian mitochondrial + east eurasian paternal mixture in elder eurasians.) Why finnougric people may not have been the ancestors of europeans?
There is no indo european
@@Samanyolu-ov1yk Evet, benim anladığım kadarıyla binlerce yıl önce ural-altay sibirya bölgesinden güney asya, avrupa, orta doğu yönüne göçler başlamış. Ural-altay halkları, bölgesel halklarla zaman içinde karışarak yeni hint-avrupa dillerini keşfetmişler. Macarlar, avrupanın en eski dillerinden demiş arkadaş, bence de öyle ve hint-avrupa dilleri ural dillerinden türemiş olabilir.
Hungarian is a uralic language you fucking retard stop this sumeriean bullshit
Are you planning to do a video on the Cuman-Kipchak Confederation in the History of Turkic States series?
Yes.
This was EXTREMELY interesting. I've been obsessed with the steppe peoples for a LONG time! It's interesting just how HUGE the legacy of the turkic and mongolic peoples actually is! They influnced pretty much ALL of Eurasia, even Europe, or maybe ESPECIALLY Europe would be more appropriate.
In conclusion: The huns and hungarians DO have a strong connection, but not in the way most probably think and it's VERY complicated.
As a swede I really appreciate the connection between the germanic peoples and the huns. There is no direct genetic connection between the huns and germanics, but I do feel some kind of kinship with them just from being INFLUENCED by hunnic culture.
Greetings from Sweden.
Hungarians are not mongolic.
@@laszlobodis7389 I know.
Saint Isidore (around 630) also mentions it with the following introductory lines: "The Hungarians, who before that were called Huns..." [The Latin Patrologia, volume 82, book nine, chapter two, article 66.
Migne Patrologia latina Tomus 82. page 334. S. Isidori: Originum sive Etymologiarum liber. IX. chapter II § 66.], then Rubruk (circa 1254) writes the following referring to Isidorus "Isidorus says ... the Huns, who were later called Hungarians ...
Hungarians are not descendents of Huns. Hungarians barely have 2% of Magyar blood in them. Hungarians are just Magyarized Slavs, Germans, Romanians, Cumans, etc.
@@aiziszizis2536 What are Magyarized Slavs?
The Hungarians are the Huns and the Scythians.
The Hungarian chronicles are divided below. It is worth looking at the medieval reviews.
Until the 18th century, the whole of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and the Scythians.
But we also know that the Hungarian language is the Nostratic language, the original language of Eurasia.
The Hungarian language must be spoken with 39 sounds and 44 letters are the Hungarian ABC.
@@aiziszizis2536 Until the 18th century, no one was interested in the Scythians. Until then, all of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and Scythians (plus Sarmatians).
When the first Scythian gold treasures were found, the Hungarians were sent to Jugra, behind the Urals, and since then everyone wants to be Scythian. Since then, Germans, Bulgarians, Turks, and Persians have wanted to be Scythians.
@@aiziszizis2536 :D Monkey
@@childabductioninitaly8946
_The Hungarians are the Huns and the Scythians_
😂 Huns had a spot on their asses. Hungarians don't have it. The real descendants of Huns who live in Europe (in a remote valley in Switzerland) do have this genetic trait.
_Until the 18th century, the whole of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and the Scythians._
It was a Magyar claim used since they arrived in Europe and started to grab lands from their rightful owners. They claimed, "we are descendents of Huns, give us your land!"
_we also know that the Hungarian language is the Nostratic language_
Hungarian language is a Finno-Ugric language.
*Nostratic is a hypothetical language macrofamily including many of the language families of northern Eurasia first proposed in 1903. Though a historically important proposal, it is now generally considered a fringe theory.*
(A fringe theory is an idea or a viewpoint which differs significantly from the accepted scholarship of the time within its field.)
Sooo ... We "the Bulgarians " are cousins with the Hungarians?
🤝🏻
Yes, we are! :)
9 stanko < BULG ( BOLG B= V ) BULG ÚR - VU(O)LGÚR'S = VOLGA RIVERS PLACE - ÚRAI : LEAREDS - OWNERS OF THAT TERITORY . -> " FROM THE MIDDLE DOWN TO SEA OF THE VOLGA RIVER " . Etc...
This is not news. We Hungarians have known this for a long time. Bulgarians are not Slavs, they just lost their original language and became Slavified. Hello brother!
@@attilatasciko4817Today’s Volga was called Etil/Etel those days. A half millenia later the Russians named it Volga.
A cemetery was found in Valkány, where Hungarians and Avars were buried together in the 7th - 13th centuries. The later Hungarians respected the graves of the Avars and did not loot them. The Avars could not be enemies of the Hungarians, but rather a related people. 🙂🙂🙂 Archeology does not lie.
So if I'm decent enough to not loot a grave I'm supposed to be related to the person who is buried there?
@@the_white_rabbit I never heard any civilizitation used the same semetery with enemies. I only said avars were not enemies.
@@attilasipos2968 A temetők tele van különböző nemzetiségű halottakkal. Gondolj csak Erdélyre! Az Úzvölgyi katonai temető elég híres például.
@@the_white_rabbit Nyilván nincsenek szabályok, csak szokások. Én különbséget tennék a helybeliek által évszázadokon át használt temető, és egy hadjárat során elesett katonák eltemetése között. A valkányi temető bizonyítottan avar és magyar temető. Ezért ritkaság, hogy ilyet találtak.
@@attilasipos2968 Miuán igen valószínű hogy az avar lakosság innen nem ment sehová, tehát asszimilálódtak nincs ebben semmi különös. Épp az lenne különös hogy az eleinte bizonyosan kisebb létszámú magyarok elkezdtek volna vadi új temetőkbe temetkezni egy avar lakta településen.
Madjars and Magyars genetically not similar, as the people of Angola are not related to the people of Anglia (England)
The Madjars have sometimes been linked onomastically to the Magyars (Hungarians); proponents of this view include supporters of "Hungarian Turanism", such as András Zsolt Bíró, who noticed the high frequency of Y-DNA Haplogroup G-M201 among Madiyars and the presence of Haplogroup G amongst Hungarians.[3]
However, it is not supported by any strong material evidence. In fact, haplogroup G is rare in Hungary (at a rate around 3%) and has much higher rates in parts of Western and Southern Europe (e.g. Italy and France).
Southern German populations also have a higher rate of Haplogroup G than the Hungarian population. Furthermore, Turkologist Imre Baski concluded that the Kazakh clan name Madi-yar "cannot possibly be linked to the Magyar ethnonym and thus cannot serve as proof for a relationship between Madiyar and Magyar."[4]
Isn't "turanism" coming from an urban legend involving a story about a man travelling to east and finding ancient documents but noone knows where this person exactly was and noone saw this document besides him?
All the mentioned are common sense from a historical point of view.
Interesting and wise informations.
common sense bunch of false information that was spread about us on the ineternet. This is why we dont like foreigners AKA outsiders making videos about us. Scythian-Hun Magyars same folks ;9)
Helal olsun sana. Eline, emegine saglik.
Can you do a video on the Moors? A lot of history from them. They rule and built the world for over 700 years.
Great video. A suggestion for future topics, you can talk about the Crimean Khanate, it has an interesting but little-known history, and it had an important relationship with the Ottoman Empire.
márha nem érdekel a valóság, csak a hősi mítosz, amit ráadásul most fabrikálnak
The stag motive is pretty common in scythian art and steppe cultures in general, so the story of Hunor and Magor is possibly an original one from the old Hungarian mythology, not a later addition.
Both of my parents were Hungarian refugees. ( my surname is through marriage.) My father was from Sopron, my mother, from Dunabogdany/ Budapest. I am very interested in history as was my father. I understand that in previous generations, the Finno- Ugric origin theory was popular, to be replaced by the northern/ Siberian/ taiga ancestry theory, and the Black Sea area steppe one. Although this is a complex issue, it is fascinating - I have read many accounts where links are made with Turkic people, Mongolians, Sumerians, even, Ural/ Altai etc. I still don't quite know what to make of all this, but am open to, and interested in all well presented information. ( such as this one.) It is interesting to know that among present day people, our closest relatives are the Kanti and Mansi - both of these people are obviously Asian. Strong ties have also been made with Scythians - but I wonder if the Scythians were Turkic, were they forerunners of the Huns? were they Mongolian? So many questions, even with modern DNA and genetic research, this all seems like a huge mystery - Where did Magyars come from?
The question 'Where did Magyars come from' is all intriguing and important especially for people of Magyar descent. 🙂
My answer is follow the origin of the Hungarian language for it satisfies my curiosity above all else.
I am pleased to say that there are quite a few thorough and reliable studies now on the subject (also plenty of of good substantial comments here).
I give you a short extract from a detailed study by Ferenc Cser (written in Hungarian in Melbourne around 2000) to get you interested so as to delve into that field of research.
"The Hungarian language culture cannot be derived from the culture of the herder steppe people. The structure, system, and complexity of the Hungarian language cannot be explained either by the Finno-Ugric theory or by its origins in the steppes of Central Asia, because the creation of a developed language requires a long-term, enclosed (practically monolingual!), high-density, settled lifestyle, which these theories do not prove.
However, all of this can be explained without fear of contradiction if we assume that the origin of the Hungarian language and culture is the Carpathian Basin. The archaeological analysis of the Carpathian Basin attests a long-time settled high-density culture, which requires a corresponding successor language, of which Hungarian is the only one of the modern languages of the Carpathian Basin to satisfy.
Therefore, we can rightly claim that the two phenomena, the long-established sedentary culture and the advanced, subjunctive agglutinative language are connected. The characteristics of that ancient culture can still be found in Hungarian culture today, so we can conclude that the successor language of that culture is Hungarian, thus the origin of the Hungarian language is the Carpathian Basin."
yt deletes links but pls search this: hanti lány számol
If you can speak some Hungarian this video proves everything in an instant.
Yeah, still not the Norwegians sacked Troy just because they speak indo european as the greeks do, but not even all of their tribes at the time did.@@the_white_rabbit
Scythians are IRANIAN. Not Turkic. Kazakg, Kyrgyz, Turks, Azeris are Turkic.
👍thank you for your time! History is not an easy or absolute truth, we can only work with what we have. You did a good job !
Thanks for this wonderful video, maybe it isn't directly related to this video but I want to share a few things. According to the DNA test performed on Saka remains, the peoples they are most closely related to are generally
Saka (Tian Shan)- Bashkir (Miyakinsky), Lipka Tatar, Besermyan / Saka (Central Steppe)- Bashkir (Baimaksky), Siberian Tatar (Yalutorovsky) / Khotanese Saka- Pamiri (Sarikoli) etc... More Turkic influence than indoeuropean influence. There is only one Gandhara (Saka-Parthian Period) sample related with iranic- hindu. most of other samples are Turkic related dna. Languages can't directly prove certain relation inbetween nations. Most people continue to believe in the same story about scythians, they aren't indoeuropean either. The closest people in the Scythian (Pazyryk Culture) dna samples are; Bashkir (Baimaksky), Siberian Tatar (Yalutorovsky) / for Scythian (Western Steppe), Mishar Tatar, Balkan Turk (Deliorman) etc... I don't understand what the authorities are waiting for to update history, there is the evidence based on DNA results.
Saka people are here in hungarian carpatian basin = " the saka huns -> székely' s . Etc...
@@attilatasciko4817I am Turkish and I have 30 percent saka dna!
@@attilatasciko4817I guess, szekelys are real descents of Attila or magyars. They even have cresent and star in their flag. I didn't know that but i heard this székely name before. I wonder about their dna components.
@@LuthienwithoutBeren< My ansistery have part of saka = székely hun too , great great father was a "lófő" ( checked out 😏)-> "kitari" saka huns = kétúri huns ( two leaders they had ) of the " red " huns , does who went down to p(h)unjab - india . Here , in hungary , mostly from all huns are here = " black huns ": north huns ( above lived the mongoloid races ) ; the "blue huns " : east huns , including the rüans : alan avars ; " red huns " : south huns - saka huns ; and the " white huns : west huns , they was leading back to the original homeland , after the europian iceage : bastards ( bask ! - car+patian ) basin . Well known ready , all europian 95% left from iceage , and moved back to their original place after iceage . Etc...
@@LuthienwithoutBeren< székelys , just like pannons ( panhuns - med branch ) and palóc , úz people of huns , and the "jazigs" jász people = all relative branches of one race . Etc...
The next article deals with the 10th century conquerors and the medieval population of the Southern Urals. "Long shared haplotypes identify the Southern Urals as a primary source for the 10th century Hungarians"
The admixture analysis showed that they are mainly descendants of the Yamnaya culture.
One explanation is for the Magyars traveling to the west is the explosion of the Crakatau volcano what changed the weather and by knowing the digestion system difference between the horse and the cow explain the horse keeping population was forced to move to the west for greener pasture. That is one explanation.
In order to understand who the real Hungarians were, it is important to know the real data about the population of the Carpathian Basin and the military people of Árpád! I quote from scientific publications of recent years, from the website of the Hungarian Research Institute:
"The presence of the ancestors of today's Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin has been continuous for thousands of years"
"A new database of 16,000 mitogenomes of 172 ancient and living populations has been created and investigated their connection system based on artificial intelligence method. The new algorithm recognizes all haplogroup correlations, regardless of the time of the process behind the correlation. A new methodological article (1) has been published in the journal Molecular Genetics and Genomics by the researchers of the Archaeogenetic Research Center of the Hungarian Research Institute, the Department of Genetics of the University of Szeged, the Institute of Technical Physics and Materials Science." "The Carpathian Basin is an unbreakable unit / Applying the method to the investigation of the former and present-day populations of the Carpathian Basin, the authors found that the vast majority of the present-day population is from a Copper Age (4500 BC-2800 BC) - Bronze Age (2800 BC-700 BC) can be traced back to a basic population, while immigration from the eastern steppe region seems to have had a smaller genetic impact on the population in the tenth-eleventh centuries. This result coincides with the result of the previous communication written by the researchers of the Hungarian Research Institute, in which they found that the population of the 10th -11th centuries were mostly indigenous locals. In our previous publication, we established that in the 10th-11th centuries even the vast majority of the common nobility came from the indigenous population of the Carpathian Basin, who naturally mixed with groups coming (returned) from the east, including the Hungarians of Árpád, and the tribes that came with them."
These are the real scientific data about the true origin of the Hungarians, the rest are all politically created data compiled by the enemies of the Hungarians in the past two centuries, and thus this video also belongs to the same category!
Nomadic lifestyle very typical for Turkic Hungarias. Culturally modern Hungarians still share a lot in common with their Turkic family.
@@lba6859 Turkic Hungarians never existed, this was a huge mistake, which was clearly proven by the archaeogenetic data! The Hungarians who came with Árpád made up only ten percent of the Hungarians here, from whom most of the later Hungarians came! But the majority of the Hungarians of Árpád were not of Turkic origin either, mainly because the Turkic were formed from a much later ethnic group or tribe long after the Huns and the Magors, from where the ancestors of the Huns had moved a long time ago, which is why they couldn't even be related! Today's nationalist and brainwashed Turks are looking for ancient peoples to whom they can relate, just like the Romanians, but they are all young nations whose roots only go back to the Middle Ages!
And have nothing to do with the Hungarians whose roots go back thousands of years!
@@Ταργιτάος1 it doesn't matter what the others say what your origin is, the question is that how you identify yourselves. Your scholars, your political elite says it straightforwardly that you are Turkic. Romanians at least don't change their origin to favour someone to get money. A nation that changes its history of origin for the sake of political and money interest is not trusted on all levels. You already lost credit among finno uralic nations, and there is a huge distrust growing among native european christian nations towards Hungarians.
@@lba6859 You are spreading lies here, because no Hungarian historian or linguist has made such a claim, they have always only talked about cultural influences, and it has always only been about a small fraction of the military tribes! Vámbéry did not make such claims either, except that he may not have known the letter of Emperor Konstantinos Porphyrogennetos, where it is clearly written that the Hungarian ambassadors Bulcsú and Tarmacsu (Tormás) protested when the Byzantines mistakenly called them Türkic! Based on what the Hungarian princely envoys said, the learned emperor noted that the name of the Hungarians "...was not called Turks, but for some reason they were called Sabartoiasfaloi (Σαβαρτοιασφαλοι)..." And here, all Hungarian prehistory historians agree that this indicated the Sabirs, who were always considered Western Huns and had nothing to do with the inner Asian Turkic peoples! This letter of Konstantinos Porphyrogennetos was written at the beginning of the 10th century, so it proves that the Magyars or Hungarians did not consider themselves Türkic people even then, and that's why they protested because they were offended by this name! And this description is considered a primordial source anyway, and is also very important and authentic because, for example, Prince Tormás was the grandson of Árpád, and with this the Hungarians made it clear that the Byzantines mistakenly called them Turkic people! But if you did not know this source, you were still very wrong, because anthropological and genetic research also confirmed what Bulcsú and Tormás said, but if you knew about all this and still spread lies, then you are an enemy of the Hungarian people!
There is an error in situating the "region between the Dniepr and the Lower Danube": you put it to the west of the Don (Levedia). It is way further west, close to the Carpathians (Etelköz). By the way, that is where we find most Hungarian-type objects outside of the Carpathian basin.
In forming a nation's identity, culture, religion, worldview and consequent lifestyle is way more important than genetics and language. I as a Cuman Hungarian have zero connection to Finns and Estonians, but tons of shared traditions with the great cultures of the steppe. Nearly all Hungarian folklore including music and artisanship is based on Eastern steppe tradition according to both Vámbéry's observation and common knowledge. German scholars stink of narrow mindedness, oversimplification, ignorance and provincialism, although Western science in general is hardly better ( I am a scientist, so I know). One of my son is called Árpád, the other Zoltán Hunor. I live in a Hungarian town named after a Cuman prince, Zotmaz. So it is time to abandon simplistic Western propaganda, narrative and mental constructs. They should not tell us who we are. We are children of the steppe and will remain so forever. I am even working on an entirely new philosophy displaying some traces of steppe traditions. So we live on.
Thank you for making a video on my people 🎉 hello from Hungary
Prof. Grover S. Krantz
Geographical development of European languages
"... the Greek language, therefore, was present in 6500 BC, Celtic language was born in 3500 BC in Ireland. The greatness of the Hungarian language in the Carpathian Basin is equally surprising; I find that its origin leads to the mesolithic, before the Stone Age. "
Missing the numbers !
The Turkic language was used even under the Scythians, as a silver bowl with Turkic runes was discovered. Not to mention the fact that their gods and names are quietly translated into Turkic with the preservation of meaning and sound.
@@keteket Impossible. Because the Scythians existed from bc. 900 to 300,
and the first Turkish was ad. 520. It is logical that the Scythians could not use the language of a people that was created at least 800 years later! The Scythians had their own Scythian language and Scythian runic writing. The Türk rune was created from the Scythian-Hun rune and not vice versa.
@@childabductioninitaly8946 dude you just claimed ancient indo-europeans existed 10 thousand years ago. Surely you sound like a white nationalist boomer than a reliable debator. Turks existed way before the Göktürks, and greeks only came to exist around 3000 years ago
@@anttwo And how do you know this?
Some Scythian symbols in the Hungarian tradition. Four lilies around the sun on the Solti hair braid and Scythian carpet. Heart-shaped lily on Scythian carpet and Hungarian beads. Tulip with a seed in the abdomen on Scythian jewellery, on a Sarkad bracelet and in Hungarian folk art. Bird with beak in contact with its breast on Scythian, Reformed and even Catholic churches, and on embroidery from Raba. Antlers ending in a lily on Hungarian salt cellars and on Scythian tattoos in Paziriki. Burning antlered deer on the Scythian horn of the Green Phalompusta, in the legend of the miraculous deer of St. László of Vác. In the legendary hymn, the miraculous stag also has burning antlers! In the Paziriki carpet, the boy who became a deer also appears. Turul, or griffin, above the stag, from the Scythian medieval church of Székesfehérvár, on a stone carving of an arched doorway, on a railing of a sanctuary in Zalavaro. Eagle's head with ears in Scythian, Avar, monastery excavated in Bélapátfalva. Vines enclosed in lilies or tulips on Scythian, Avar archaeological finds, on the ribbon of a bishop's mitre, on a Székely gate. Burial on horseback. Blood covenant, in which the contracting parties became brothers and sisters by giving the blood of the body. A lion attacking a deer in Scythian and Hungarian salt cellars. Horned lion with tree of life in Hungarian folk art, on Székely cap and Sarmatian headdress. Could they be lying to us?
ruclips.net/video/UiId2ZNWHzg/видео.html
@mrroyale5688
Legends usually contain seeds of the truth. The old Magyars knew who their ancestors were exactly. I have spent years reading and researching Magyar history and Hungarian origins, and I will say this much that the truth has been purposely ignored for political reasons and to confuse the people about their lineage.
But thankfully the science of Archaeogenetics will shed some much needed light on the truth!
Very detailed and informative video but unfortunately it contains a lot of false or scientifically obsolete, unproven information. On the other hand regarding the turkic connection it is unnecessarily detailed which leads to false conclusion 1.) If you want to understand the story of the steppe people and culture, you have to look back not just to the 4th century when the Huns hit Europe but to the Scythians thousand year earlier at least. They invented and mastered mounted archery and warfare, bronze and goldsmith and were settlers of the Eurasian steppe. They have very significant archeological legacy from the Carpathian basin, too with mythological golden stag findings which are not the only very clear cultural connection to Arpad's Hungarians. Medieval chronicles, mythological and folk tradition is also refer back to the Scythians. Genetic studies show a strong connection between Arpad's Hungarians and the pre-Scythian Mezhovskaya culture. That time pre-turkic people were not yet steppe people 2.) Finno-ugric theory of origin is partially true and partially contradicted: language origin is proven, common genetic ancestry is proven but the formation of the language and later separation of the tribes were in the steppe zone. That means that the ancestors of the Khantys and other finno-ugric tribes migrated from the south to the north not the ancestors of the Hungarians in the other way around. 3.) Álmos is a Hungarian (finno-ugric) name that has a meaning actually (Emese álma - Dream of Emese) not a Turkic one. That's a proven fact, check it. 4.) It is not proven that the Huns were a turkic tribe and spoke turkic language exclusively. If you understand how steppe people integrated several tribes than it is most likely they had turkic, finno-ugric, german (proven) and maybe even iranian-sarmatian-alan speaking tribes. The same way as Arpad's Hungarian integrated several tribes 5.) and finally to the commenters who even deny the genetic continuity of the current Hungarians to Arpad's: the time didn't stop in the 9th century and it keeps running nowadays... Check the genetic map of Europe: each country is genetically the closest to its neighbours. that means that people mix with each other which is a good thing. Slavs also integrated many steppe people: Polish have strong sarmatian, Bulgars turkic connection. Romanians integrated a lot of Cumans. Current Solvakia and Romania has a significant Hungarian population, partially assimilated already...The only difference is that Hungarians kept his language and some of the traditions. That can only be possible if the Hungarian language came to the Carpathian basin not just with Arpad but with former waves of steppe people.
To me, the very clear evidence you stated seems the most dubious. To make the Hungarians the main people of the Scythians based on the horseshoes of dead horses in the graves when so little is known about them seems to me deceitful. I agree that the Khanty-Mansi language was the ancestor of Hungarian, but why did you leave where you were thousands of years ago requires the instinct of a migratory bird. Almos and his descendants were Khazars. The Huns would not have spoken Turkish, but we can no longer ask Hunor and Magor Hungarian. Finally, keep the genetic analyzes out of the eyes of the Slovaks, because Budapest will also claim them.
he is an outside to us this is why us hungarians dont like outsiders talking about us they read the interent and think aliens are real ...lol
Agree with you. I also would like to add Scythian is really high in our whole region. I am Hungarian and have 39.4% Scythian in my DNA.
The first minute already not correct! The rest, oh my God . . .many many fake information
The word Yula (title Gyula in Hungarian) was the original non-Slavonic name of the Bulgar "Dulo" clan which claimed descent from Attila and had the same Tamga as that of the Oghuz Kayi tribe all this led to a theory for the Arpad, Ottoman, Dulo & Attilid dynasties descending from the Xiongnu Yula tribe
Again nonsense. Why is the Dullo dynasty mentioned in Mycenaean documents, from 3240 BC? What fabrications are you quoting?😊
A document -KNDD 1193
Gyúl means to ignite in hungarian, and gyula is an archaic word for torch, but this word fell out of use by now. This is all connected to the Sun and fire worship. I wonder if it has the same meaning in Turkic languages.
And Illness too.
Nonsense conspiracy shit. Dulo doesn’t have a certified symbol, besides, Dulo name comes from the ruling house of Xiongnu “Tuge”, probably “Tughluq”, just as Dulo being Tughluq.
Thank you very much it is very accurate and interesting. I have three remarks: it is a pity that the sarmatian connection story was forced to cut out. Second, I thought there is no 100% proof of the roots of Hunnic language. The third - the Turkic underworld god Erlik is unlikely coming from the same word root as Hungarian Ördög, as the meaning of Őr-Dög is meaning the Guardian of the Dead in Hungarian.
This is the best english language content what I ever seen on youtube about Hungarians origins. Great job, thank you!
I would be happy if I could see something based on Tahiri Üngürsz. It is a book based on the library what has been looted from Székesfehérvár's library after the Ottoman conquest. (as I know)
Still not true just imagination and misinformation
Did the Vandals originate from Hungary?
Historians have written that the Vandals arrived in Morocco via the Strait of Jibraltar in 429, and they built a kingdom in North Africa from 439 until 533.( تحياتي لكم من المغرب)
They didn't originate in Hungary but I'm pretty sure they settled there
@@Nastya_07 شكرا🙏
from Scandinavia to Tunisia
Gaiseric the famous Vandal king was born near the lake Balaton in today Hungary.
Association with Huns was a major reason the European powers disliked them, and were so harsh with Magyars at Trianon.
Nonsense!
by the time of that treaty it didnt matter at all, it was just the usual western powergame and we got caught up in it
Hungarians are more Langobardic and Pannonian Slavic than they are central Asian at this point
Emese is pronounced Emeshe, with all the "e"s pronounced the same way as the "e" in the word "get" (more or less)
Duly noted. I had a suspicion. Is Almos also prounced Almo-sh chance?
@@KhansDen yes, kind of... "A" in Almos is like "a" in "khan" and "s" is like "sh" is "show". Hungarian is not an easy language. :) For the "s" like in "some" we have a double letter "sz". Simple "s" is always like "sh" is "show".
Hey! I really appriciate what you trying to do by covering the history of the steppes, that is why I decide to leave some objective criticism under this video of yours that might be helpful in the future.
In case of this magyar video I happen to know alot about from historical texts. The part about their religion is full of errors, I assume the source for it was wikipedia because you won't find the same information anywhere else. There is 0 proof there was a sun mother and moon father in magyar religion, the only magyar god/godess we got proof for is Boldogasszony. It's literally the only god recorded by name there is no other one (her name roughly translates to joyous/happy woman and become synonimous with Mary mother of Jesus). If you wanted to, sience you brought up the bashkirs, one of the muslim writers decided to describe all the gods of the "bashkirs" so you could have mentoined that. He don't name them but tells for each one what they are the god of (there was quiet alot of them). You can also find other informations about their practices, pretty much all of them can be connected to tengrism. You bringing up ördög for elrik is only etymological so its a bit strange to base the tengrist connection solely on that. About their writing system is also super errorous. There were 3 runic scripts in the carpathian basin all of them separete from each other. There is the avar script, khazar script and székely-hungarian script (which this latter one mostly got prescedent alot later in time when hungarians were already christian for more than hundreds of years, the khazar and the avar script however converge with the time of the magyar invasion). It would be nice to see historical youtubers genuenly base their videos on direct sources rather than extremely errorous ones and fictious ones so I hope you don't take it the hard way and I could help improve your content. I also think your own voice narrating rather than ai voice would be alot better, you got nothing to be ashamed of. Either way good luck for your future videos!
Thanks interesting wise info makes sense science is amazing salutations
The Sarmatian aspect is key to the Magyar story
indeed it is :)
Like Polish?
They were Sarmatians....
@@gaborjuhasz5610< Polish name well know of nowdays poland , they was emigrated from underneat of todays estonia , where , they are slavic people . But the southern parts " Galicia " of todays poland are the original "lengyel - lend vel " people are mixed from the sar(+)matians - sar+mathians " ( sar+ gels, etc tribes ) -> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE TRADITIONAL BOUND BETWEEN THE POLJAKS AND HUNMAGYARS .Etc...
Hungary-hun, don't you think that the name sez it all ? Most of the time is like that! Just think about it!❤❤
So the Magyars ran away from the Pechenegs in fear and then defeated pretty much every European empire in battle until 970. This two doesn’t add up as far as I’m concerned.
? Its written history It does add up
It actually adds up very well. The Pecheneg, Khazar and others were using the same tactics as the Magyars. The European powers, throughout most of ancient and medieval history, had no chance against the superior steppe cavalry. So it does make sense for them to crush European sedentary societies who were simply not accustomed to this art of warfare while not being always on-par with other steppe warriors.
That being said, I am merely summarizing what the sources tell us.
@@KhansDen hey you made a pretty nice video i like It alot , thanks brother !
@@KhansDen fair enough
You put a little logic and reason into your thoughts: KhansDen's explanations are pertinent, but "fleeing in fear" could have a simple explanation: the peoples allied with the Pechenegs were perhaps much superior numerically, compared to the sum of the Hungarian tribes.
The finno-ugric origin of the hungarian language is a myth, nothing else. Cheers from Hungary!
Cheers back my friend.
Finno-Ugric is just a terminology invented by linguists, because no one ever thought that there was such a thing as Finno-Ugric during the millennia! But the only truth in this is that there are northern languages like Estonian and Finnish where the linguistic structure is a bit similar to the Ugric languages, or there are much smaller ethnic groups in the east like the Khanty and Mansis who they have some similar words, but this does not mean anything serious linguistic kinship, such as for example among the Neo-Latin-speaking peoples who understand each other quite well!
The real situation is that Hungarian is the most unique language in the world, because we do not understand the language of the Mansis, who are supposedly closest to us, and they do not really understand us, just as we do not really understand the Turkic peoples who speak a related languages! That is why it is increasingly important what the American anthropologist and cryptologist Grover S. Krantz has outlined about the origin of the Hungarian language for more than forty years, that the Hungarian language is so unique and logically structured compared to other languages that it really has no equal in Europe or Asia! That is why it could only have come from here in the Carpathian basin, when thousands of years ago it was not very possible to get into the Carpathian basin surrounded by huge mountains and rivers, and where the mountains were still surrounded by endless forests and there were no roads or even paths in the mountain passes! This is the only way to explain that the Indo-European speaking peoples could avoid the Carpathian basin for a long time, because most of the names of rivers and mountains are not of Indo-European origin. And then it is understandable that those who lived here at least since the Neolithic, were not Indo-European peoples, which is why it is much more likely that they could have spoken Proto-Hungarian, and there is already evidence for this! And then it's much more logical thatthe Hungarian language also started from here with those who were the predecessors of the Mogyerians - Magyars and migrated from here thousands of years ago, and that the words related to Hungarian are a part of them could reach the peoples of the East! That is why the people who came with Árpád thought that they had returned to the land of their ancestors, except that they were the descendants of those who mixed with the Asian peoples and thus also with the ancestors of the Siberian Mansis. This is the only way to best explain the linguistic kinship with the Finno-Ugric, but also with the Asian Turkic languages and ancient languages such as Dravidian, Sumerian, Etruscan, Minoan, Carian, Ancient Greek and Sanskrit!
The 17 scientists asked the question:
The aboriginal population of Europe, in what proportion are the ancient European genes present in the sons of various peoples living today? The ancestral gene, which means nothing more than the genetic code of people living here 35 - 40 thousand years before Christ, which peoples of the European population carry the highest proportion? In Hungarian, the question can be asked as follows: who are the indigenous population of Europe?
The test is carried out by determining the Y chromosome. The male chromosome can be better researched because it can be determined from any cell fragment. An intact mitochondrion is required for the female chromosome test.
The result is astonishing.
Based on Y chromosome research, this group of scientists found that the European ancestor is present in 95% of the population living here in the truncated Hungary today.
This means that 95% of the Hungarian population carries proto-European genes.
It is at least as interesting as to what proportion of the other European populations carry the European ancestral gene? Who carries the European ancestral gene in a high percentage after the Hungarians?
The Poles, the Croats and the Ukrainians beyond the Eastern Carpathians. (50-60 %) The other ethnic groups do not carry the European ancestral gene even in a fraction"
Renowned geneticist Dr. Endre Czeizel Genetics of Hungarians c. in his book, he writes about the conclusions that can be drawn from the Semino study: "60% of Hungarian men are descendants of the EU-19 - Paleolithic - ancestor. ...A further 13.3% of Hungarian men are from the EU-18, 11% a is EU-7, and 8.9% are descendants of EU-4 ancestor. All this means that 93.3% of current Hungarian men originate from four ancestors, and 73.3% already here in the Paleolithic era the offspring of living men."
Given the outstanding importance of this study, the names and locations of all its authors are published below: Ornella Semino,1,2 Giuseppe Passarino,2,3 Peter J. Oefner,4 Alice A. Lin,2 Svetlana Arbuzova,5 Lars E. Beckman,6 Giovanna De Benedictis,3 Paolo Francalacci,7 Anastasia Kouvatsi,8 Svetlana Limborska,9 Mladen Marcikiae,10 Anna Mika,11 Barbara Mika,12 Dragan Primorac,13 A. Silvana Santachiara-Benerecetti,1 L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza,2 Peter A .Underhill2
The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective; SCIENCE VOL 290. NOVEMBER 10, 2000.
The genetics of today's "Hungary":
- 45,000-year-old prehistoric Aurignacian Paleolithic hunter-gatherer Europeans, extant branch of M170-I1 8.5%
- M173-M17-R1a from 30,000-year-old Late Stone Age Gravettian hunter-gatherer Eurasians, this is the most characteristic haplogroup that has survived to this day, 30%
- 8,000-6,000 years ago in the Neolithic, from farmers who settled here from the Middle East:
- M170 I2a, Kőrös-Stracevo cultural people, today 16%
- Yap M35-E1b, Mediterranean type male, today 8%.
- J2, Anatolian origin, Caucasian origin, Transdanubian Polish culture, today 6.5%
- The population of the Bronze Age and Iron Age Eastern settlements (Kurgans, Scythians, Celts), M173 R1b is 18% today, most of them moved to Western Europe, where today the most typical
By the end of the Iron Age, 87% of the gene pool of today's "Hungarians" had been assembled!
There are also smaller superstratifications, genetically related settlements: Sarmatians, Jaszians, Dacians, some Far Eastern genes (N1c) with the Huns, Avars, Griffins, Árpáds. Mostly R1a+R1b markers from the eastern neighbor.
A connection to Huns and Magyars, yeah it is 2 completely different groups who eventually colonized the region known as Hungary at different time periods like 400-500 years apart. The modern Hungarian language is a Fino-ugric language directly from Magyar, yet it carries the Turkic name of Hun. Yet genetically, most of the people of Hungary have proto-slavic, proto-celtic and proto fino-ugric.
PLEASE NOT MAKE A COMMON MISTAKE = TURC(K)'S PEOPLE ARE NOT TÜRK'S PEOPLE . DID THEY MIXED , SOME OF THEM YES , BUT THE BANCHES MUST KEEP SEPARATE ,WE DON'T SAY , THE SCYTHIANS ARE TÜRKS , JUST LIKE THE SARMATIANS ARE TÜRKS TOO ‽ NO WAY . Etc...
I neither stated that the Scythians nor the Sarmatians had been Turks.
@@KhansDen< i did it , that was a suggestive comment , for the comparization .
@@attilatasciko4817 Ah, now I get it. Nevermind then.
Nope, you are wrong:First ancient DNA analysis of mummies from the post-Scythian Oglakhty cemetery in South Siberia
Dear Kaan, I would love for you to publish these videos in Turkish.
I did in the past but did not even get 10% of the view count of the original English version. So with all due respect to my memleket, it's just not worth all the time and energy.
Álmos, Előd, Ond, Kond, Tas, Huba, Töhötöm is the 7 chieftains, no? Edit: in reference to 16:27
I will tell you much more ancient names that could really be the ancestors of the ancient Scythian-Hungarians of the Carpathian Basin, such as Hargita, Arpas, Kolozs, Lápos, Napos.
Herodotus writes that the largest river in Scythia is the Ister (Danube), the Partisum (Tisza) flows into the Ister, and the Maris (Maros) river flows from Agathyrs (Transylvania). Here he mentions that the waters of the Alpis (Alps) and the Karpis (Carpathians) also age the Ister. We also learn from Herodotus that the first great ancestor of the Scythians of the Carpathian Basin was Targitaos. If we subject the name of the first king to a proper linguistic examination and, according to the rules of language development, replace the hard "T" with its soft vowel "H" and leave out the Greek suffix "os", it is clear to us that the first king the mountain called Hargita still preserves its name. Herodotus writes that when Targitaus reigned, a plough, a yoke, an ax and several cups fell from the sky, but they were all made of gold. Targitaus's eldest son, Lipoxais, when he approached the golds, the golds opened fire and he fled. The other, Arpoxais, went the same way. When the youngest boy approached, the golden ones did not set fire, so the donation went to Koloxais, which is why the Scythians still wear cups in their belts today. And the older boys handed over the rule to their youngest brother.
The fact is that this story can be found several times in Hungarian folk tales, which seems to go back to much older roots and proves that the majority of Hungarians originate from the Scythians here and not from the tribes that came with Árpád. In other transcripts, the name of Napoxais also appears with these names, who could only be one such Scythian prince, because we know well that the ancient Greeks transcribed these names a bit, and if we cut off the appendages, Arpoxais is Árpás or Árpád, Koloxais is Kolos or Kolozs, Lipoxais means Lipos or Lápos, and Napoxais is clearly Napos - Sunny! But if someone understands Hungarian, they will also understand these names, because Árpás comes from barley, Kolos comes from millet, Lápos is the same way we say muddy areas with water, and Napos is also clearly understandable in today's Hungarian language! That's why it's also worth looking into, that it can't be a coincidence that, for example, according to Herodotus, one of the rivers of the Scythians, the Naparis, flows from the Carpathians, which name means the sunny river in the Hungarian language, for sun in the sky that ar Nap in Hungarian! And then there is the castle of Napoka on the ancient home of the Aghatyrs, which is said to be the city of the Dacians, but the Dacians were also Scythians according to most ancient writers! No one can say that it's all a coincidence, the name of Prince Napoxais, the name of the Naparis river and the name of Napoka Castle, all a few hundred kilometers from each other in the Carpathians?! But they don't even want to notice that in the very place where this ancient castle of the Napoka existed, the later Hungarians built a castle of their own, which they named Kolos Castle, from which today's Kolozsvár - Cluj Castle became!
These names are still well known in Transylvania today, and there are still many such names here that were mentioned in ancient times and are only understandable in Hungarian, which all proves that this was the ancient homeland of the Scythians and Agathyrs, so the real Hungarians!
@@szakaattila7899 Nap-oka, Nap-kor.
Majiars are not directly linked to th huns.. the protobulgars that founded the first bulgarian empire are more direct candidates.. or at least the turkish historiography is saying so.. bulgarians also have documented dinastical record of the Dulo dinasty that began wih Atilla.
.
Igen, a magyarok közvetlenül a szkítákhoz kötődnek. A hunok között volt sok szkíta is.
My father is a Bulgarian Turk, I did a dna test and my ancestors are related to Arpad dynasty.
Álmos = Dreamy - because of divine dreams, clearly Hungarian and not Turkic origin, most common word. Álmos also can be translated as Sleepy, but not that is the case at a leader.
So he was like "sleepy" Joe 😴
Emeğine sağlık.
We still sometimes call them Magyars here
where? :)
@@zoltantoth1821 poland
Hungarians are Scytho Siberian, Scythian and Hunnic.
We have nothing to due with Siberia LOL.. Scythians Leave from Old Eruope
Very good documentary. Interesting , detailed & informative . A lot of avenues to explore....... Many thanks.
Full of False information about us Magyars which is spread on the Interent.
Ilk Turkic dil konusanlar Urallarin guneyindeydi, cogunlugu doguya bir kismi batiya yayildi. O bolgelerin halklariyla karistilar, dillerinin genel yapisi ( sondan eklemeli dil ) korundu
i read gesta hungarorum🐎👍🦅🌎🧿♥️🇹🇷 so proud we have a shared ancestry...
Hungarians knew history even 1,500 years ago. They heard about the Roman Empire and the Hun Empire. They wanted to found a country in the same place where the Hun king Attila's empire was located. Why? Because of the grass. :-) The Hungarians had tens of thousands of large animals, horses and cattle. Grass grows slowly on the eastern steppes, so from time to time it was necessary to look for new pastures and to migrate. Grass grows three times faster in the Carpathian basin, so animals can be kept on the same pasture from spring to autumn. The Carpathian Basin, Hunnia, Pannonia is an ideal place to live. The downside is that many people know this.
Nemvolt semmi bajunk a besenyökkel☝️🤣ez egy az egész egy nekünk irt történelem ami hazugságokon és ferditések sokaságát próbálja elhitetni☝️🤣
Source?: she made the f it up.
Te aztán biztosan jobban tudod😂😂😂
@@radir1657 igyvan ☝️jobban tudom☝️😉
Onogur (On-Ogur) means ten family or clans in ancient Turkic language. The word "On" still means "Ten" in current Turkish. Onogur refers to those ten clans (7 of them Magyars and 3 are Turkic) that walked to Europe under a common ruler from Central Asia steps. The word Hungary derived from this Turkic word Onogur and used by the westerns. We Turks still use the word Macar in Turkish to name our cousins from Asia steps.
Skita,Avar,Hun,Magyar👍🇭🇺
Mind esküdt népek, mert a vérszerződés már a szkíták törzseinek ősi szokása volt, de ezt eskünek nevezték már a szkíták, és ebből lett a görög szküth - szküthai = esküt! Ennek a szövetségnek az asszír ékiratos táblákon Aškuza vagy Iškuza volt a neve, ami aztán a Bibliában Aškuz, de ezek mind rontott alakban voltak leírva, amelyekből érthető miért lett aztán a görög forrásokban Szküthai (Σκυθαι). Mert ha megfigyeled a "sku" vagy "skü" minden nyelven ott van az ókorban, amit aztán a latinok már Scyth - Scythai-ra torzítottak, és akkor ezzel is magyarázható, hogy ők nem tudták az ü betűt leírni, ezért y írtak. Tehát az Eskü népe volt eredetileg a szkíta név, amiből az európaiak Sküth - Skyth és végül Scythian-ra torzították, ezért már a 18. századi magyarok ebből szkítát és szittyát csináltak, mert elfelejtették a névnek a régi jelentését! Ezekre már Ferenczi Enikő Kolozsvári magyar nyelvész is rájött, aki szerint a görögös "szküth" szótövet a magyar eskü szóval lehet logikusan összekapcsolni:
„A szkíták nevezhették magukat ama megszólítás szerint, mely visszaállítható a mai magyar esküsző(k) vagy esküző(k) szóból, és jelentése »a személy, aki esküszik« vagy »az eskü népe« szóösszetételhez állhat közel. Az eredeti népnév ismeretlen, csak a szomszédos nemzetek által elrontott elnevezést ismerjük. Legvalószínűbben az asszír változat, az Aškuza(i) vagy Iškuza(i) áll legközelebb a magyar nyelvből alkotott népi névhez.” Forrás: Wikipédia - A királyi szkíták!
The Huns and the Romans died out, as did the Avars and the Pechenegs, but they also had descendants, and they live on in us. Even the Celts, who lived in Pannonia before the Romans.
Hungarians are a mix of Scythians, Xiongnu Hun and Siberians 🇭🇺🏹
hungarians not turks at all our dnas 95% typically european and rest of it hun,sarmatans ,goths etc
According to what is in Bulgarian historiography. Old Great Bulgaria (6c AD, today Central-Eastern Ukraine + Krasnodar+Rostov) was a state of two families of tribes Onoghurs(east) and Kotrighurs(west). Onoghurs are supposedly ancestors of Hungarians(basically (H)onoghurs -> Hunghurs -> Hunghars -> Hungarians) and Yughurs. At least that's the etymological connection mentioned.
Evidence is very scarce and inconclusive as those people were at the time shamanic and story telling oriented and there is little written evidence by outsiders.
The 'gaar - ghur - ghar - giar - garian suffix though has Semitic roots meaning people of. I.e. Hungarians literally means Hun('s)-people.
Modern day Hungarians moved to the Carpathian basin in 10th century to fill the power vacuum after the fall of the Avar Khaganate and mixed with the locals. Quite similar to their Bulgar cousins 3 centuries earlier and facilitated by the First Bulgarian Empire, for their own benefit. One difference in nation forming from the Bulgarians though is that Bulgars adopted Slavic language and made an alphabet for it and Hungars kept their Turkic one... and used Cyrillic for some centuries.
A Magyar a Kárpat medence népe... - kultúrahordozó - őseurópai nép -
nyelve ősnyelv ,
A Sumerral rokon... ! ! !
- vagy azonos .....
- no - finn - ugor ..... *
Greetings from Chuvash Turkic People🌲🌞 Syvloh sunatop, Vengri, äpӗ Čovaš enren. Äsir jӗrkellӗ pulassa šanatop. Äsir pitӗ ujrom haloh✌️☮️
Don't let other Turkic People claim you. You are what you are, you are the most unique Finno-Ugric people🙏🏼
Piękna historia państwa i narodu węgierskiego. Pozdrowienia z Polski.
Sorry bro, I just cannot stand it...
Khazar is shoud be pronunced the same as Khan, where is not the H is pronunced but the K, so please mention it witt K instead of H.
Thx in advance.
Chronicon Pictum circa 1360
Noah - survivor of the flood
(his son Jáfet, who received Europe from his father when the land was divided - according to the writings of St. Jerome - his son Magóg - the founder of the sittya, that is, the Hungarian family)
Noah's other son Kham is his Kush, then
Tana, who is the father of Nimrod
Nimrod (who is the first king of the earth, who is the first king of the world.) is married to Enéh. His two sons, Hunor and Magor, are the founders of the Hun, that is, the Hungarian nation
So: Noah's son Kham,
his is Kús,
then Tana,
his is Nimrod,
his is Hunor
his Bor
his is Dáma
his is Keled,
his is Keve,
his is Kér
his Belér,
his is Kádár,
his is Otmár,
his Farkas,
his is Bondofárd,
his Bökény,
his is Csanád,
his is Budli,
his Beszter,
his Mike
his Miske,
his Ombód
his Kölcse
his is Levente
his Lél,
his is Zámor
his Balog,
hers is Bulcsú,
his Szultan,
hers is Berend,
his is Kadocsa
his Opos,
his Ete,
his is Szemeny,
his is Torda, whose son is Bendegúz.
Children of Bendegúz;
Saint Etele, also known as Atilla (Food-Drink, i.e. Life..Body-Blood) (the second first king of the Hungarians, the Scourge of God, the Hammer of the World, the delimiter of our country) and he was Buddha (enlightened!) (material consciousness (Body level: active physical lifestyle) Magor (soul consciousness: process of becoming still)...
The historical Buddha (Buddhism) Gautama Siddhartha, Gautama Buddha/Buddha
The name Sakyamuni is a Sanskrit word, meaning 'Sage of the Shakyas'. Siddhartha Gautama's father is Sakya/Sakya, meaning Scythian...
It is believed that the Sakyas/Sakyas originate from the ancient sage Gautama Maharisi (Magarisi/Magor) who lived in Vedic times...
Atilla's son Csaba,
his Ed,
his Ügyek (Ugec),
his Előd,
his is Álmos, who led a significant part of the Hungarian people living in the east home.
Árpád, son of Álmos, who strengthened our Carpathian country, dividing our people into seven parts, as follows:
1. Árpád, the most powerful, who fought at the forefront in battles, settled with his people in Pilis.
2. Szabolcs, still in the area of Szabolcs County.
3. In the part between Gyula, Transylvania and Nagyalföd.
4. Künd, next to the Nyír.
5. Lél, the Galgóc countryside became theirs.
6. Vérbulcsú, inhabited the elbow of Lake Balaton.
7. Örs, but the Sajó district became his accommodation.
Árpád's son Zoltán,
his is Taksony,
his Géza,
his
Saint István (the third first king of our nation)
Orseolo Peter
Aba Samuel 1041-1044
Orseolo Peter the second time 1044-1046
Andrew I 1046-1060
Béla I 1060-1063
Solomon 1063-1074
Géza I 1074-1077
Laszlo I (Saint) 1077-1095
(Book) Kálmán 1095-1116
II. Stephen 1116-1131
II. (Blind) Béla 1131-1141
II. Géza 1141-1162
III. Stephen 1162-1172
II. Viceroy László 1162-1163
ARC. Viceroy István 1163-1165
III. Béla 1172-1196
Imre 1196-1204
III. László (minor) 1204-1205
II. Andrew 1205-1235
ARC. Béla 1235-1270
Stephen V 1270-1272
ARC. (Kun) László 1272-1290
III. András 1290-1301
Mixed house rulers
(Czech) Wenceslas 1301-1305
(Bavaria) Otto 1305-1307
(Anjou) Robert Charles I 1308-1342
(Anjou) Louis I (the Great) 1342-1382
(Anjou) Mary 1382-1385
(of Durazzo) II. Charles (Little) 1385-1386
(Anjou) Mary 1386-1395
Sigismund (of Luxembourg) 1387-1437
(Habsburg) Albert 1438-1439
(Jagielló) Ulaszló I 1440-1444
(Habsburg) László V 1444-1457
Governor János Hunyadi 1446-1453
(Hunyadi) Mátyás I 1458-1490 (the moral decline of the world really began after the death of our lord Mátyás, after all, he was our last Sacral world king)
(Jagiello) II. Ulaszló 1490-1516
(Jagiello) II. Louis 1516-1526
János Szapolyai 1526-1540
....then came the chance and the time of the House of Habsburg....Mátyás Hunyadi closed his eyes and gave them the opportunity to rise...but unsuccessfully...
🤣🤣🤣
You found this on the internet right?
What is the relationship between “magyar”and “Magar”language of Nepal 🇳🇵.I heard 20% of magyar languages match with Nepali Magar communities language.There should be some origin history.
Iam leaving this clue for historians.
Mijhorle 🙏
I wouldn't be surprised😅
The word "Xanqan" in Turkic means deity, XAN means descendant of deity or demigod, HUN means given by god.HUNGI means which, but its true meaning is anything created by god. AR means human. HUNGIAR or Hungary means people of god, humans created by god, children of god. Same meaning with GUKTURK which means celestial Turk.
And by the way, Iranian is a fabrication of 20th century made by British agents trying to destroy Turkic QAJAR kingdom's politicial, social and cultural identity. Fabricating the modern hilarious and baseless Iranian identity.
------
After the first reply it seems that it's required to put more explanations here. The modern self proclaimed Persians are imposters since they are actually TAJIK immigrants brought to the area at the fall of Safavid Turkic dynasty by king Mahmoud Afghan from modern Afghanistan. Their Tajik language is basically a blend of Arabic, Turkic and Hindi and has NO relations with the ancient Persian language.
Thank you for your information. May I write that we have immense respect for Persia, and its thousands of years of history.
Hungarians -> huns of many kinds = huns + garians = garmada : many . MANY ( KINDS ) OF HUNS = HUNGARIANS .
Xanqan = X : S ( sz ) english : sun , the ( nap ) , qan = kan , -> kény = the children of the sun k(h)an [ q ] . Sun is the khan of life , of all living things .We , magyars , always stick to the very original belive, we are the god sun exeptional ( leader - "khan " ) children . THE OLD WORLDS BELIVERS OF SUN RESPECT [ TISZTELET ] WHAT WAS ALL CIVILIZATION FIRST BELIEVE , BECAUSE " WITHOUT SUN , NO LIFE CAN EXIST ON EARTH = SUN WORSHIPERS . Etc...
@@afischer8327 The bloke you talk to is pan-Turkic, they don't appreciate anything Persian, Iranian etc.
Árpad never fundet a Árpad dinasty.Árpád people was a TURUL dynasty..,and Árpád was born in KEVEVÁR,today so called KIEV..
So means that Turkish hun Hungarians also found Kyiv??
Please make a video on Turk shahi
So when the Magyars conquered the carpathian basin, they fought and integrated the avars and defeated other slavic tribes/kingdoms. Not a single word about finding or fighting romanians/vlachs. How is this possible when according to modern romanian history they were in Transilvania since forever xD. So either they didn't fight (cowards) or they weren't even there to fight... Btw, Magyars found in Transilvania the Szeklers, who are hunnic remnants, with close to the same language as of the magyar. They were welcoming the Magyars and immediately joined them.
Romanian history is made up. Vlach came from the Balkans. They are not originated from the Dacians neither the Romans. or if they have some ties with the Romans it came from the Romans living in the Balkans and not in Wallachia for example.
Yeah thatswhere the romanian dacian theory falls apart. Dacians were thracians according to the Greeks, they didnt speak latin, and why would they adopt it later, they were a way older culture in Europe than the Romans.@@the_white_rabbit
Regardless of the origins you claim, Hephthalites and Parthians, about which the information is obscure by citing authors you invented, Scythians with n peoples you try to base, no one outside the mythological history you invented will believe your lies. What normal logic accepts that you left here from Pannonia, which you widen like the Carpathian Basin, to return after 3000 years as if you had the instinct of migratory birds. The Romanians bothered you from the moment you arrived, this is how the natives suffer. Why deny the Turks when out of the 7 Hungarian tribes 4 were Bashqires and with the 3 Kabari there are only 7 Turkish tribes. Another lie with the Szeklers, they come from the south of Slovakia and in the 2 counties in Hungary where there are many Szeklers you made them the most modest Hungarians.
@@CocoSon-we2rg So where were the romanians to fight the magyar conquerors? You elegantly ignored the main point. Cause you don't have an answer. Cause romanian communist era history is a made history full of lies and myths. Modern romanians migrated MUCH later from today's Serbia-Albania as nomadic shephards to Wallachia. Even their capital Bucharest was established by a vlach shepherd called "Bucur". Later in the medieval ages vlach were brought to Transylvania as workers to replenish the losses caused by tatars/pechenegs/cumans etc. invasions. So the ones here to lie is you my friends. By pure logic.
@@loecorristo555 Your logic is purely illogical. You talk about Heptalites, Parthians, Scythians, Huns, Avars who are known for sure to have spoken a Turkish language, although in documents the lingua franca in their time was rather Slavonic, while your genetics show that you have no continuity even with the riders who arrived a date with Arpad. There is no point in claiming those so-called ancestors. On the other hand, you cannot compare the sedentarism of the inhabitants of some isolated villages in the mountains that may have had 50 fighters as they did not oppose the 500 conquerors who lived on looting. And yet it took them about 200 years to cover the entire territory. You underestimate Anonimus, but please, he was yours, but what about Nestor. Do you really think that it is not known how Hungarianization took place in the Pannonian Plain where they dismounted? The military commanders of the Hungarian sailors had harems in the villages where the children had real teachers who also arrived in wheelbarrows. It is not something to criticize but rather to admire because otherwise they would have suffered like the Bulgarians or the French. However you twist it with transhumance, it is not migration, plus a movement from south to north of the Danube, from west to east of it, does not compare to the distance between the Urals and Pannonia. You can find these speakers or former speakers of Latin from Epirus to the Polish Carpathians (Gorals) and from the east of the Bug to the Czech Republic (Moravian Wallachia) called Valašsko.
Only in Pannonia, when you landed, those Vlachs spoke old Hungarian from the time of the Scythians. It's a pity for our neighborhood to keep stabbing each other by inventing all kinds of aberrant hypotheses when we also have things that bring us closer.
At 21:15: "The history of Magyars was massively shaped by migrations". Absolutely true.
However, this statement does not and cannot explain the history and slow development of the Hungarian language. The migratory political and military ruling elite must have used a form of Old-Hungarian either exclusively or together with a Turk (or Iranian) alternate second language. The survival of the Hungarian language entirely depended on the sedentary peasants and craftsmen in the Carpathian Basin (Pannonia) providing a constant supply of majority speakers in the midst of speakers of other languages totally unrelated to Hungarian. Without those native inhabitans the Hungarian language would have been lost and melted into some other spoken languages of the region.