"Hungarys early history" or "The Maygars and the Finns: Lost cousins part 2"

[cool3a2]

The other thread got closed by a reason I do not understand. If there are still people interested in this topic, why close that thread. I got one answer only, but in a quite short time. So there is at least one person that is interested. Now, if I would be an admin I wouldn't bother if there is an old thread that got restarted, but I would if there are tons of thread about the same topic. However, tell me why you have closed that other thread if you want while I will restart it here .

So back to topic. The point was, that there were many people supporting the finn-ugric heritage theory, so I started to show you a different point of view which doesn't claims to be right, but sounds logical. This is what I posted:

My father is Hungarian and I am, too, since I have hungarian citizenship. I am very interested in this topic and I also read a lot about this. German, english and hungarian sources, so I think I am somewhat familiar with this and can add some things. First of all I'd like to link a source. I don't know how useful it is for a non-Hungarian. However, it basically says there is a relation between Hunnic and Hungarian and there are lots of similar words. Yeah, you will say "No! You bloody heretic!", well, think what you want. I am sure that there is a (distant) relationship between Finnic and Hungarian, but this doesn't mean there is no relationship between Hungarians and Huns. First off all: I read often that the word "Hungarian" comes from "Onogur" and not from "Huns". This may be partitially true, but not completely. There are sources that say that "Hungarian" is a composition of the other two words and I think that's true. This is not an evidence for a relationship between Huns and Hungarians, it can be because in earlier times people "thought" there is an relationship. Even the german word Ungar(n) doesn't excludes this as in older sources it appears as Hungar(n). I don't see how the H joined the word if it doesn't comes from Huns, at least partially. The next thing is, and now it gets interesting, that there are people that believe that the hungarian language doesn't changed much since the conquest. That it appears different if you look at old texts, they argument, could be due to problems applying the latin alphabet to the hungarian language. Before they used the latin symbols, there were an other writing, called hungarian or székely rovásírás, that fits 100% to Hungarian, even in modern times. There was even an english writer who describes Hungarian as a rock in the waves of time, meaning that it resists and doesn't change (much). So if this is true, and this is not so unlikely, you can compare it with a different ancient language like they did in my source. Furthermore there are people saying Hunnic was a turkish language. Now, some of you may know that there are 300 words that are similar between Hungarian and Finnic, but there are 1500 words similar in Turkic and Hungarian. These words are also quite old, older than the turkish occupation, so it can't come from that time. And they are main words, like "father" (hungarian: atya, turkish: ata [like Atatürk - father of the Turks]). A lot of sources mention a complete sentence that is similar in Turkish and Hungarian ("There are a lot of small apples in my pocket."). And it's not only words. The grammar is also similar. In german that kind of grammar is called agglutinierend, so I guess it "agglutinating" in english. So if Hungarian is related with Turkish and Hunnic, too, then this fits to each other. Lastly I'd like to mention something that can be found rarely, maybe because it is a rather new source. There are still Magyars living in Kazakhstan. This is simply a fact, believe it or not. They are close genetical relatives. If you want I can scan that newspaper article and post it here, but it is written in Hungarian. The kazakh Magyars also had a story, that their nation fall in to parts. One part went towards west to search a new home and promised the other part that, if they are successful, they would return one day to lead the other part to the new home. It seems like we forgot them... Nowadays the kazakh Magyars can even learn Hungarian in Kazakhstan, if they want. This reminds me of an other story. It is told that the Székelys are the remaining Huns that flet hide from the other european nations that wanted to revenge. Because they feared that they could be attacked by others, they send for reinforcements from there brothers that live in asia (or at the border region of europe and asia). Some historians claim that these brothers could have lived in... tata! Kazakhstan! And the best is that these historians have claimed that before it came out that there are Magyars in Kazakhstan (at least I read them long before I read that article). The next step would be, that the kazakh Magyars fall into two parts, one that remains in Kazakhstan and one that went to europe to help their brothers. So this all gives a logic picture to me. No one can say if it is correct that one part of the kazakh Magyars really went to help their brothers or not. However, I believe there is a relation between Huns and Hungarians. Maybe it is not like father and son, but like brothers. It's your choice to believe it or not. All I want is showing you, that there could be another explanation (that doesn't necessarily mean that there is no relation between Finns and Huns), different from what you read normally. I always found this finn-ugric thing is too dogmatic, that there supporters don't give a chance to new theories. So, if you are more open-minded now, I have reached all I want.

BTW: There was a question whether the Avars and the Magyars are related or not. Possibly. When the Magyars arrived in Hungary, there were still Avars. Records show, that there was no overlapping between the settlement areas of both, nor where there bigger avar or bigger magyar settlement areas next to each other. The Magyars simply fulfilled the gaps between the avar settlements, they didn't mixed. You can imagine it like a mosaic. This is why they say they may be of one ethnicity or at least of related ethnicities. However, there are historians that believe Magyars came to Hungary in two waves. The first on were the late avars, the second were Árpáds Magyars. There are even thoughts that Hungarians came in three waves and that the Huns were the first.

Now I am interested in what you guys think about this or about the ancient Hungarians and their history in general.

 

[alcal]

I've always known Hungarians were brothers to Turks.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

If you want to reject the Ugro-Finnic hypothesis, you have to essentially make the argument that our entire methodology for evaluating the genetic relations of languages is wrong. This would mean that not only is our model of Uralic languages wrong, but that all of our models of each and every language family is also wrong. Essentially, you would have to say that modern Historical Linguistics, as it has existed since the late 19th century, is flawed. And then you would have the burden of introducing a system that is better, proving that your new system is better, and showing that your new system leads to your conclusions.

I again repeat the statistic that no non-Hungarian academic has argued for a non-Uralic origin for the Hungarian language since 1913. If there was any possibility of the Ugro-Finnic hypothesis being wrong, do you know what would happen? A western academic would publish a paper on it. In western academia, being the first person to release a correct, ground-breaking theory results in prestige, money, guaranteed employment for the rest of your life, and all those other good things that academics seek. There is an enormous incentive to develop new theories, and if there was any basis to do so for Hungarian, the academic market would have brought us at least one paper on the subject. But it hasn't.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

Maybe some the University of Leipzig or some other school with a strong Linguistics program and a lot of money should start sponsoring vacations for Hungarian nationalists to go visit Finland. Maybe they'll like it and see that it's not shameful to be related to the Finns, who from what I hear are universally considered to be wonderful people.

 

[alcal]

If you want to reject the Ugro-Finnic hypothesis, you have to essentially make the argument that our entire methodology for evaluating the genetic relations of languages is wrong. This would mean that not only is our model of Uralic languages wrong, but that all of our models of each and every language family is also wrong. Essentially, you would have to say that modern Historical Linguistics, as it has existed since the late 19th century, is flawed. And then you would have the burden of introducing a system that is better, proving that your new system is better, and showing that your new system leads to your conclusions.

I again repeat the statistic that no non-Hungarian academic has argued for a non-Uralic origin for the Hungarian language since 1913. If there was any possibility of the Ugro-Finnic hypothesis being wrong, do you know what would happen? A western academic would publish a paper on it. In western academia, being the first person to release a correct, ground-breaking theory results in prestige, money, guaranteed employment for the rest of your life, and all those other good things that academics seek. There is an enormous incentive to develop new theories, and if there was any basis to do so for Hungarian, the academic market would have brought us at least one paper on the subject. But it hasn't.

Isn't possible that magyars were an uralic tribe living in Kazakistan? This could explain their cultural ties with nomads of Central Asia, and maybe their linguistic ties with turks, couldn't it?

 

[SeleucusNicator]

Isn't possible that magyars were an uralic tribe living in Kazakistan? This could explain their cultural ties with nomads of Central Asia, and maybe their linguistic ties with turks, couldn't it?

This is what modern Linguistic evidence suggests. The Magyars were originally from the proto-Uralic homeland in modern Siberia, then moved to Central Asia where they lived with Turks, and then moved to Pannonia where they lived with Slovaks, Vlachs, Avars, and perhaps Huns.

 

[cool3a2]

If you read my post carefully, you will see that I didn't say Hungarians and Finns aren't related, I even said there is a relationship. And it is not a shame to be related to the Finns. But why do you think it is impossible that Hungarians are related to Finns and Huns? I have also posted a source that supports what I have written, at least partially. On the other hand we already discussed that Hungarian genes aren't very trustworthy. There are multiple explanation about how the mongoloid gene marker came into hungarian gene pool, this might be true for uralic genes as well. Hungarians (or there ancestors) could have traveld from Altaic to Uralic and settle down there for some years, maybe centuries. If so, they would have mixed up with the local residents. Or it is possible that an uralic tribe has joined Hungarians on their route. Maybe Hungarians are uralic, maybe Huns were, too. I don't know if there have been found Hun graves or anything that can provide genes. However, if you take a look at that source I have posted you'll see that there is unquestionably a relation. As well as Turkic is similar to Hungarian. It may be accidential or the words in the list of Isfahan aren't Hunnic, but it also may be not.
Did you actually ever heart about the history of the finn-ugric theory? The Austrians brought it to Hungary during their occupation, although they aren't the inventors. They used it as a method of breaking the Hungarians will of fight for independence. Because of political calcul some important politicians and historians have adopted it. This was the beginning. The whole elite of the MTA (Magyar Tudományos Akadémia) is believing this, except of some lonely people (I can remember that the guy who published the two wave theory was also from the MTA). They are beton heads that don't allow to discuss on this, that's the problem. If you are dealing with history you have to be open-minded to be able to valuate new results objectively. But they aren't, nor are you as I see. You are welcome to discuss and of course try to convince me, but don't try to teach me my own history. Don't say Hungarians and Finns are related and that's all. There are so few evidences that proof anything in the Hungarians early history, how can you claim to know the ultimate truth?

BTW: There are several authors and several papers that give contra to the finn-ugric theory. It's just that they are not supported by the elite, so they are published in Hungarian only. And there is nobody who translates them, that's why you might not know about them. But only because you don't know them, it doesn't mean that they aren't there.

And once again: I don't doubt that there is a relation between Finns and Hungarians. I just try to be open, that's all. Who knows? Maybe the Hungarians early history is completely different then the elite things? Wouldn't it be a pity if we don't know it and don't even try to know it?

 

[alcal]

Finno-Ugrian Theory
The most widely accepted theory of the Magyar's origin is the Finno-Ugrian concept. Advocates of this theory believe the linguistic and ethnic kinship between the Hungarians and the Finns, Esthonians, Ostyaks and Voguls provide evidence for the origin of the Magyars. This relation of the Magyars with the Finns places the ancient homeland of the Finno-Ugrians on both sides of the southern Ural Mountains. The advocates of this theory insist that Magyars came from this group in the Urals, and as the theory explains, it was about 2000 B.C. that the Finnish branch broke away to settle in the Baltic area. The Magyars remained on the West Siberian steppes with the other Ugrian peoples until 500 B.C. It was then that the Magyars crossed the Urals westward to settle in what is present day Soviet Bashkiria, north of the Black Sea and the Caucasus. The Magyars remained here for centuries with the various Ural-Altaic peoples such as the Huns, Turkic Bulgars, Alans and Onogurs. The Magyars soon adopted many cultural traits and customs of these people and it was from the region of Soviet Bashkiria that the Magyars started their migration westward toward the Carpathians.

After World War II, the Finno-Ugrian theory was challenged by scholars who argued that the Finno-Ugrian theory was based on linguistics alone, without support in anthropology, archeology or written records.


Orientalist Theory
Scholars known as orientalists believe that the origin of Magyars and their language is not found in the Urals, but in Central Asia known as the Turanian Plain or Soviet Turkestan which stretches from the Caspian Sea eastward to Lake Balchas. Ancient history has traditionally called this region Scythia. Folklore holds that the Magyars are related to the Scythians who built the great empire of the 5th century B.C. After the Scythian empire dissolved, the Turanian Plain witnessed the rise and fall of empires built between the first and ninth centuries A.D. by the Huns, Avars, Khazars and various Turkic peoples, including the Uygurs. The Magyars subsequently absorbed much of the culture and tradition of these peoples and many Onogur, Sabir, Turkic, and Ugrian people were assimilated with the Magyars, resulting in the Magyar amalgam, which entered the Carpathian Basin in the later half of the ninth century A.D.

Scholars of Far Eastern history believe that the Magyars were also exposed to the Sumerian culture in the Turanian Plain. Linguists of the 19th century, including Henry C. Rawlinson, Jules Oppert, Eduard Sayous and Francois Lenormant found that knowledge of the Ural-Altaic languages such as Magyar, helps to decipher Sumerian writings. Cuneiform writing was found to be used by the Magyars long before they entered the Carpathian Basin. The similarity of the two languages has led orientalists to form a Sumerian-Hungarian connection. The orientalists speculate that a reverse of the Finno-Ugrian theory may be possible. The theory holds that if the proto-Magyars were neighbors of the proto-Sumerians in the Turanian Plain, then the evolution of the Hungarian language must have been a result of Sumerian rather than Finno-Ugrian influences. The theory in turn holds that rather than being the recipients of a Finno-Ugrian language, it was the Magyars who imparted their language to the Finns and Estonians without being ethnically related to them. What scholars site for added evidence for this theory is the fact that the Magyars have always been numerically stronger than their Finno-Ugrian neighbors combined. The theory believes that the Finns and Ugors received linguistic strains from a Magyar branch who had broken away from the main body on the Turanian Plan, and migrated to West Siberia.



The Magyar-Uygur Theory
The connection between the Magyars and the Uygurs tie Hungarians even closer to Asia. The Uygurs are people who live in the Xinjiang province of China. The Uygurs are Caucasian in appearance and maintain a Turkic language. To the north of the Uygar's border stretches the Dzungarian Basin which has a striking similarity to the word Hungarian. Northeast of the Dzungaria lies the Altai Mountain Range, a name used by linguists to define the Ural-Altaic language group to which the Magyar language belongs. Further up to the north stretches the Lake Baykal region where first the Scythians, then the Huns emerged to conquer the Turanian Plain. The Magyars, Uygurs and the Turks may also have started their migrations from the northeastern part of the Baykal area.

Further anthropological, archeological and linguistic research must be conducted on this theory, but is limited by the little access the Chinese government grants foreigners to the region. There are, however, many Asiatic influences seen among Hungarians today. Hungarian legends and folk tales are strikingly similar to those of Asian peoples. The structure of Magyar folk music, which uses the pentatonic scale, also points to Asian origins. The Hungarian cuisine shows traces of Asia in its use of strong spices such as paprika, pepper, saffron, and ginger.




They have been a bit German mixed (Budapest area) during Habsburg occupation era; however that's not the case for the entire population (East is mainly Coman Turk, Szekely area are also told to be pretty "pure Hun").
When Magyar people uprised against Habsburg invaders, they were called "Kuguk": Christian Turks. They have been assimilated by being called "Mongol" (!).
Also, the Pan-Turanian ideology raised in that country. In 1910's, they edited the "Turan" journal, first part in Hungarian, the second in Turkish. They deported Germans out of Hungary to "Turanify" entirely Hungary. Hitler supported that ideology; the Leader of Turanists -Pal Teleki- was Prime Minister under Nazi Hungary. He told "I'm Asian, and proud to be it". What are the thoughts?

 

[alcal]

This is what modern Linguistic evidence suggests. The Magyars were originally from the proto-Uralic homeland in modern Siberia, then moved to Central Asia where they lived with Turks, and then moved to Pannonia where they lived with Slovaks, Vlachs, Avars, and perhaps Huns.

Just a question: how is it possible that Hungarians are Uralic, when the name "Hungary" has a clear altaic origin?

My point is: are Hungarians more Altaic or more Uralic?

 

[cool3a2]

Glad to see there are people amongst us that are more open to alternative theories. Thank you for your overview, really interesting. BTW: is it still called Soviet Bashkiria? I thought Soviets got "extinct"...

My point is: are Hungarians more Altaic or more Uralic?

Yes, I also think that's the main point, but I also think this is unfortunately not all to easy to solve and it remains this for some time. However, we need to be open-minded to solve it, as I said before.

SeleucusNicator: Sorry if my statement sounded too harsh. You are really welcome to discuss with us and of course you have a right on your own opinion. It's just that I hate it when foreigners (or are you of hungarian heritage?) come and say "oh, it is that way in any cause, anyone who disagrees is incompetent or from yesterday." I myself have very limited knowledge about America (don't know how much you are familiar with hungarian history; however, that you have mentioned that there was a work about hun theory was in 1913 shows that you haven't only looked in wikipedia, although there are newer paper about that). Imagine how you would feel if I would try to force you my point of view about your history. But that's somehow normal if it's about hungarian history. I can find that often in german sources and I simply hate it.

BTW: an other interesting thing related with this topic, is the old hungarian writing. As I said before, it fits to the Hungarian with 100%, even better then the modern latin alphabet. Would be interesting where it actually comes from. AFAIK there are multiple theories about it, too.

BTW2: There are old turkic sources mention that Hungarians are related to Huns as well. If Hungarians are related only with Finns (and other finn-ugrics) and Turks are not (as it is usually stated), then this doesn't make sence. This sources should also be somewhat neutral as I can't find a reason why they build a connection just between Hungarians and Huns.

 

[alcal]

I've just read the other thread, and i found it interesting. Personally i think Hungarians were Ugric, but their militar elite was Altaic. With time, the elite got absorbed as in Bulgaria for example, and displaced by bigger indigenous peoples (who were slavic in Bulgaria and ugric in Hungary).

 

[cool3a2]

Interesting idea. Never heart it before. Maybe I should read the whole other thread. Anyways, I could imagine that it happened that way.

 

[Favorius]

alcal: I am impressed by your knowledge mate. I always had a sympathy for Hungarians because of the theories linking our ancestors.

"Turanification of Hungary" shocked me because Pan-Turanian ideology belonging to the last decades of the Ottoman Empire was aimed to create a new momentum for the decaying country. It still has supporters in Turkey and a politically active party.

 

[Huayna Capac357]

I always knew the Hungarian, Finnish, and Altaic languages were related (Uralic-Altaic language family).


Also, there's Japanese and Korean in there, too.

 

[cool3a2]

Since we have someone from Turkey here, I'd like to ask the following: in Hungary the name convention is different from the english (and german and french and AFAIK slavic) one. Consider there is a man called János Kovács. In Hungary they would put his familiy name at the first place, in this case they would say Kovács János. I think Koreans do it the same way. Which name convention do Turkish use? How do it the Finns? I really don't know, but I'd like to. I am just asking, maybe there is another similarity between these 3 languages.

 

[Eretz Yisrael]

Go take a look at my History, Glorius History thread where I and Dachs argue about the origins of the Hungarians.
Dachs says they might have been a small part of the Western Hun tribes......

 

[Eretz Yisrael]

Since we have someone from Turkey here, I'd like to ask the following: in Hungary the name convention is different from the english (and german and french and AFAIK slavic) one. Consider there is a man called János Kovács. In Hungary they would put his familiy name at the first place, in this case they would say Kovács János. I think Koreans do it the same way. Which name convention do Turkish use? How do it the Finns? I really don't know, but I'd like to. I am just asking, maybe there is another similarity between these 3 languages.

In all East Asian languages(including Vietnam, Mongolia, and some of Central Asia)we DO put our last names in front in order to present what family we are from.

 

[Eretz Yisrael]

We cant just base hypotheses on linguistical evidence; that's not evidence to speak of; maybe good for support but not decisive.
The important thing is: Wwhat was the migration pattern of the Xiong-Nu? Were they really linked to the Huns that later almost sacked Rome?
Now according to Chinese scholars(they are not much of scholars, more like nationalist government paid propogandists), they belive that some of the Xiong-Nu migrated to the Ural Moutains after the CHinese Han Dyansty kept putting pressure on them. They later settled in Hungary and called themselves Huns. Of course, there is not much evidence to what they are saying except for linguistical evidence of sorts.

 

[cool3a2]

You have exceeded my expactations. I hoped that you would post here to get this thread alive again, but you even posted 3 times!.

We cant just base hypotheses on linguistical evidence

True words. Yeah, you are sincerly right if you say that there is no hard evidence for any Hun-Hungarian relationship. What I said was ment hypotetically, I used the source I linked only to support the hypothesis I stated. However, you could say same things about the relationship between Hungarians and Finns and Hungarians and Turks. There are analogies between all three languages (grammar). There also may be some genetical relations, but in case of Hungarians these are unreliable. There are actually no more things that would constitue any relationship between them as there is almost nothing known about pre-european Hungarians (no archaeological records that are clearly of hungarian origin). In the end we actually can't say things like "it sincerly happened the following way...". That's why I hate statements like "Hungarians are related to Finns and not to Turks or Huns. That's proofen. Anybody claiming something else is ether stupid, nationalistic or from yesterday." It was actually my intention to get people openminded in this topic and to keep them reading / researching about that from time to time.

In all East Asian languages(including Vietnam, Mongolia, and some of Central Asia)we DO put our last names in front in order to present what family we are from.

Yeah, I recognized that when there was a soccer world championsship in Korea. Seems to me like this is a very old habit of Hungarians. So far I never found anything about the origin of this habit. Interestingly it survived for longer than a millenia under slavic and german influence. It would still interest me if Turks and Finns do the same or at least did.

 

[Israelite9191]

Good lord, this thread is so horribly pseudohistorical. I remember having practically this exact same argument back when I first joined, before I read any decent history of (one of) my homeland(s). As was said, Hungarians are distant relatives of the Finns, Estonians, Ingrians, and other Finnic and Ugric peoples, not of Turks, not of Mongols, and most certainly not of Uyghurs. Yes, there are a lot of similarities with Turkic peoples, but that is due not to related origins, but rather because the Magyars spent a lot of time living among and in alliance with Turkic peoples, particularly the Onogurs. It is, of course, not only possible but almost definate that the Magyars absorbed members of the previous ethnic groups to inhabite Hungary, including descendents of the Huns, for whom Hungary is named (that whole Onogur being the origin of Hungary is pure hogwash, particularly considering that in Hungarian the name for the country remains rooted in the term Magyar, Hungary being a Westernism). If you want a good history of Hungary, in English, I suggest A History of Hungary edited by Peter F. Sugar, Peter Hank (accents over the first e and second a), and Tibor Frank.