:crazy: You really are ridicilous, and most Turks of Bosnia left for Turkey already. Remaining ones still speak Turkish. There is no Bosniak with assimilated Turkish background.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosniensis
Printable View
:crazy: You really are ridicilous, and most Turks of Bosnia left for Turkey already. Remaining ones still speak Turkish. There is no Bosniak with assimilated Turkish background.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosniensis
There are no Bosniaks with Italian, Greek or Macedonian ancestry either. That guy isn't ancestraly Bosniak, he cluster with Romanians and he is just some muslim whose ancestors moved in Bosnia, but they don't originate from there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marmara
It all makes sense now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stearsolina
But most of modern-Bosnians doesn't originate from Bosnia too. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Stearsolina
People were moved by Turks in Bosnia, and out of Bosnia. That's how Bosniensis Vlach ancestors came here, same as many others.
Sure, for example muslim Slavonians have been expelled to Bosnia, as were muslims from Serbia. But that is usual. These people have similar ancestry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlatko Vukovic
He claimed to be mixed with Albanians and Gorani (muslim slavs from Kosovo), wtf ? I have never heard for any Bosnian to have such ancestry.
And genetically he don't cluster with Bosniaks, Bosnian Croats or Bosnian Serbs. He is an outsider (in as sense he is non typical) that spread lunacy in here.
But we should stay on topic, and that is Arpads! I won't offtopic any longer, it disrespectuful towards the thread :)
A lot of modern Bosniaks have actually roots in Montenegro somewhere on the border with Herzegowina, like myself mostly probably. If i turned out on predictions as I2a-Din, there would no be doubts about my Montenegrin paternal origin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stearsolina
But yes. Arapads are the thread.
I am an Avar and Turkic but I have no intention of making everybody Turkic, its a privilege. I am always after the truthQuote:
Originally Posted by Vlatko Vukovic
I try to submit sources while you only talk and talk. So give me your own source about the etymology of 'Bosnia' pls (oh its off-topic right? you can pm me if you wish)
or else you can check these out http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turk...GeneticsEn.htm
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turk...ateline_En.htm
even your lovely wiki talks about the Hungarian influence on Bosnia for some time ''..After Croatia entered personal union with Hungarian kingdom in 1102, most of Bosnia became vassal to Hungary as well''
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnia...he_Middle_Ages
Honestly, so much about the off-topic =)
Word "Bosnia" originate or from Illyrians, or from Avars. But the present-day population of Bosnia have nothing to do with Turks. Also, Bosnian rulers used Avar titles as "ban" but they weren't of Avar origin. The reason is that Croats took it from Avars after Croats defeated them under the voivode Zvonimir lead them in Balkans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buusra
This is true to a certain degree. I say this because it depends what we consider to be Hungarian before they moved into the Carpathian Basin. Because in my opinion we cannot speak of Hungarians thousands of years ago. The Proto-Hungarian language originated among people living between the Ural Mountains and Western Siberia, thus a forest region, living a hunter-gatherer lifestyle, however through some unexplainable way they gave this language to the much more warrior-like steppe nomads coming from Central Asia. In my opinion when this symbiosis happened, only then we can speak of the birth of Old Hungarians, the same ones who moved into the Carpathian Basin. For example Old Hungarians based on the newest genetic research have barely got any relatedness to other Uralic people, but seem to be a mix of Germanic North European and Central Asian people. This is indeed a very mysterious mixture, which cannot be explained too easily, but you cannot dismiss facts. This is also why so many Hungarian Turanists claim so much to Central Asian origins, and look at other Turkic people as long lost brethren. They base their ideas on who Old Hungarians actually were, as culturally and genetically it seems that they didn't had too many things in common with other Uralic people. But the language it is indeed Uralic, therefore this is why so many Hungarian historians have so much headache to give a coherent explanation what was the real origins and evolution of the people who became to be known as Magyars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
Every Hungarian and Russian author write about the steppe. Fodor, Türk, Veres, etc. Even the Ugrics liven on the steppe since the disintegration of the Finno-ugric unity!Quote:
Originally Posted by Stearsolina
But you stated yourself Hungarian origins western Siberia...how is that steppe ?Quote:
Originally Posted by blogen
Do you mean they lived in southern parts of western Siberia, perhaps ?
Yes, of course. Even the Baraba steppe is Western Siberia!Quote:
Originally Posted by Stearsolina
partly organized by Iranians, yepQuote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
'The explanation of the Scythian words by the Iranian language is often full of
contradictions and is greatly exaggerated. However it is assumed that
there is an Altaic upper class, which gave orders to the Greek and
Iranian artists [...]'
(Karl Bouda, Contributions to the Caucasian and Siberian Linguistics, Volume 24, Kraus Reprint, 1966, p. 66)
"Thus Francis V. Schwarz is not succeeded in constructing a prehistoric
Aryan horseman nomadism, and the Turko-Tatar horseman nomadism of
Turkestan is probably as old as the nomadic use of the salt steppes itself."
(Peisker Johann, The older ties of the Slavs to Turko-Tatars and Germanic peoples and their socio-historical importance, W. Kohlhammer, 1905, p. 22)
yepQuote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
P.I.Karalkin also came to a conclusion that The Royal Scythians were the ancestors of the Turkic speaking peoples [Karalkin P.I., 1978, 39-40].
Royal Magy of pre-Iran (non-IE Sumerian > Turkic >armagan< 'gift', >arbag< 'magic', >bögü< 'wizard, spell') + er 'man, tribesman' (hence the word ARPAD and Turkic >arpa< 'barley', ancient Turkic loan in Iranian, because barley is the gift given by the "magicians" :))Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
Scytho-Turkic invasion of India is IE, yep
https://i.imgur.com/XogqjH2.jpg
"the core of our lifestyle" They were not so relevant dear wishful thinker neo-cuman.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
You must believe in conspiracy theories, because it is the basic core and the only survival tactics of all kind pseudo science. You must explain somehow (for yourself or for other people) that why historians linguists did not support your politically motivated theories. "Solution A" The scholars are stupid. Nobody will believe it, it simply doesn't work. "Solution B": The scholars are evil and conspired against "THE TRUTH", it works much better for poorly educated classes (proletarians), who have a traditional and general tendency of mistrust against the intellectuals and against the higher educated classes. The most 4 common and most popular conspiracy theories among Turanian screwballs: 1. The Habsburg conspiracy, 2. The conspiracy of the linguists and historians of the MTA (Hungarian Academy of Sciences) 3. the communist conspiracy (despite that Soviet Union and Communism collapsed long time ago.) 4. The Jews conspired against Turanism. (Despite the fact, that Jewish orientalist played the key role in Hungarian Turanism)Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
There are no neo-Cuman conspiracy, there is only ignorance, as I said many times. Turanists did not conspire against anything, because they create and feed conspiracy theories about other groups. Conspiring against something or somebody is not equal to believe in conspiracy theories.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
Neo Cumans and neo-cuman identity exist in Cumania Kunság region, despite the real cumans were exterminated during the long Turkish war. Why do you try to deny it? Of course it is natural in this subculture, that the fake "turkic ancestry" became very strong, The newcomer mixature migrants (from all around the Carpathian basin and beyond that) claimed the ancient right of the Cuman Reserve Area for economic and political interests. Their late descendants even believed the lies whioch were created for political economic purposes. The neo-cuman fake identity is not a conspiracy, but the simple result of ignorance in local history. Weird and strange things can happen in a subculture, the turkic and central asian terms became positive meaning, despite that turkic central asian are pejorative in the eyes of average Hungarian population (just like the Gypsy).
Again this fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_manQuote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
Belief systems which were raised from ignorance in history and linguistics are not conspiracies.
However you can see on all internationalEnglish language forums video portals, that anti-Hungarian Serbians Romanians Slovaks always support the turanist lunatic believers. Because they know its magic to discredit Hungarians in Europe (Like in the era of Trianon, when Benes and the little-Entente used it successfully against Hungarians.
I fear only from the human stupidity and ignorance, which creates conspiracy theories and try to falsify history culture linguistics to satisfy their wishful thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
"It grows larger every year"Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
It is not a reasoning, but a fallacy again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
And how much people have university degree in the cumanian turan days? 1%? 0.5%? :)))) Typical.
Which folk arts? Do you know that European commoners had no folk costumes and special embroidery Patterns before the 16th century?Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
This international turkic brotherhood of Gábor Vona reminds me the Jobbik's version of internationalism. Turanism: They way from proletarian internationalism to turkic internationalism.
Ironically, it was said by a man from Cumania, where the traditional material culture and way of life were always very very different (eastern European) from Central European Hungarian standard culture. The language was the only weak link with other Hungarians. http://tet.rkk.hu/index.php/TeT/article/view/98/195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
Not my trail of logic. Not sure how you got that impression.
I speak about horses in general. 90% of peasants did not have Horses in Hungary,because horses were expensive that's why peasants used oxen to plow before the early 20th century.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
I love this level of denial, in the fact that it is so simple to dispute. Allow me to yet again remind you about all of our similarities:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stears
All of the names of our leaders were Turkic before we became Catholic. We followed Tengrism while on the steppes together. Our alphabet is directly derived from Old Turkic as a child system. We have many Turkic words that are as old as the language and our ancient lifestyle itself. We lived in yurts and fought on horseback with the same tactics. Our government structure directly followed the Turkic model. We lived together in Central Asia for hundreds of years. Fellow Turkic peoples like the Avars, Cumans, Pechenegs, etc, settled in Hungary. We celebrate our common culture and brotherhood today, with Kurultaj.
Oh, and incase you did not read about the study in this thread...
"Thus, most of the population in the Carpathian Basin originated from the Hun-Turkic cultural community of the Eurasian Steppe and was accompanied by Slavonic and German-speaking groups."
https://link.springer.com/article/10...520-018-0609-7
You see, the more science freely researches, the more evidence it gives to our Turkic past, which is not even disputed, but rather how much % of it is Turkic. Even you, who would once feverishly deny any Turkic relations, now say "it was not as much as you think", because even you cannot logically deny the overwhelming evidence. You are too smart to ignore how silly it makes you look to deny it all outright, so you try to obscure it and minimize it, and maybe try some insults if things do not go well. That is OK; it is how most humans debate when they begin to run into a wall or their ideology begins to fail. You will become more comfortable with your own Turkicness over time.
Not all scholars are stupid, not all scholars are smart. Also they all have bias in some way; it is why outside researchers take part in order to minimize this bias for or against. But note how when foreign academics state positive findings about our Turkic past, your aggression shows and you dismiss it because they are not Hungarians or are "uneducated". I also love how you accuse me of stating a "straw man" when you list four of them yourself, even blaming "the Jews" for Hungarian Turanism lolol. If many Jewish scholars supported your evermore restrictive identity of "Hungarian-ness", I believe you would change your song.Quote:
You must believe in conspiracy theories, because it is the basic core and the only survival tactics of all kind pseudo science. You must explain somehow (for yourself or for other people) that why historians linguists did not support your politically motivated theories. "Solution A" The scholars are stupid. Nobody will believe it, it simply doesn't work. "Solution B": The scholars are evil and conspired against "THE TRUTH", it works much better for poorly educated classes (proletarians), who have a traditional and general tendency of mistrust against the intellectuals and against the higher educated classes. The most 4 common and most popular conspiracy theories among Turanian screwballs: 1. The Habsburg conspiracy, 2. The conspiracy of the linguists and historians of the MTA (Hungarian Academy of Sciences) 3. the communist conspiracy (despite that Soviet Union and Communism collapsed long time ago.) 4. The Jews conspired against Turanism. (Despite the fact, that Jewish orientalist played the key role in Hungarian Turanism)
Ironically, those in the West further poison their historical criticism about Turanism with the idea that it is an almost far-right or proto-fascist ideal (lololol) on places such as the Wikipedia dumpster or in an occasional not-sourced and obscure opinion article, but then there are those like yourself who claim that it is a Jewish ploy and that it originates in the left-wing historical circles of the nation. You cannot make this insane bias on each side up if you tried, haha! Well, I guess you can, if you are trying to discredit an identity and are speaking to an uninformed public.
So, "neo-Cuman days" as you call it, with the idea of Turkifying Hungary from the inside, that is not a conspiracy, but discussing various bias in academia or in history is a conspiracy? Do you understand how that sounds?Quote:
There are no neo-Cuman conspiracy, there is only ignorance, as I said many times. Turanists did not conspire against anything, because they create and feed conspiracy theories about other groups. Conspiring against something or somebody is not equal to believe in conspiracy theories.
We have talked about this already. I disagree with you, that all of the Cumans were killed to the very last man, woman and child. Also, allow me to entertain you. Really. Let us pretend that every Cuman was exterminated from the planet during this time. It does not change anything about our own Turkic past before our settlement. It also does not change the genetic imprint they had on various areas of Hungary. Or do you think that Cumans and Hungarians never shared the same tent on some occasions? lolQuote:
Neo Cumans and neo-cuman identity exist in Cumania Kunság region, despite the real cumans were exterminated during the long Turkish war. Why do you try to deny it?
Regardless, your statements about Cumans (inaccurate) are just a distraction tactic. At Kurultaj, there are no "Cuman" flags, but only fellow Turkic and Magyar flags from the past and present day. Or maybe they are trying to supplant us? But wait, they are not even "Cumans", but a mix of confused/ignorant/conspiring Hungarians/Romanians or whatever else you feel like including in their genetics at the time. Honestly, you can rage against "Cumans" all you'd like, it doesn't change our own Turkic past.
This is the actual dangerous idea. Nobody takes those comments seriously, but your idea of discarding the truth about our origins is what gives us zero credibility to the land we have in Europe. To you, we are all basically Germans speaking a non-Germanic language. Remember when I asked you "what is a Hungarian?" and your answer excluded about 90% of the country? What do you think will happen to all those non-Transdubanian Magyars and their territory? But maybe you do not care, as they are not "real Hungarians".Quote:
However you can see on all internationalEnglish language forums video portals, that anti-Hungarian Serbians Romanians Slovaks always support the turanist lunatic believers. Because they know its magic to discredit Hungarians in Europe (Like in the era of Trianon, when Benes and the little-Entente used it successfully against Hungarians.
It is sad, as you are Székely as well so you claim. This embodies even more Turkic tradition in both fact and myth, and you discard it to bend and scrape for the safety of the West that doesn't even give a shit about you. Hungarians are a wall against invaders for centuries, we are the bastion that takes every sling and arrow and we have nothing. No country has tried to be more "European" than us, with so little to show for it. You are not stupid, you know how we are portrayed in the west today, and it has nothing to do with "Turanism" but rather our lack of "European values". When will you stop kissing the hand that smacks your face? We don't live in the time of Adolf Hitler where being the "whitest" person means something like the difference between going to a gas chamber or not. Our unique culture and origin, which only offers us a precious place of refuge and spirit, is somehow bad? These stupid semantics about Orthodox or "balloon heads" is cute and fun until the EU comes knocking on our door for the kilo of flesh it demands from the "big bad Hungarians" who are so "backward" in every century.
Nobody is saying to hate the last 1000 years; we rise up time and time again and refuse to be "taken" quietly into the darkness. Take your honor being descended of the border guards, and how we stood alone and still stand alone today in the face of EU disdain. Your unhealthy sprint towards westernization would make us the losers in this game of EU assimilation, just like it would have during the Hapsburg monarchy. Does Trianon hurt? Of course it hurts. But it is just soil, and the nation is the people who are Hungarians, and I do not believe in magical soil. Just like the times of old, the Hungarian nation is wherever our tents find a place to be set on this green earth. Such a unique history we have in this world. For the love of everything Hungarian, stand up for it with pride.
When I make an argument about the number of people who show up, it is not to prove "it is right", it is to counter your claims that it is "small and not significant". You are again, ascribing a point that I am not making.Quote:
"It grows larger every year"
...and here I thought that you were learning your logical fallacies? Here, a wikipedia link (that people seem to love to source from so much lol) about the fallacy you just committed:Quote:
And how much people have university degree in the cumanian turan days? 1%? 0.5%? :)))) Typical.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
But yes, as usual, I will entertain this from you as well. When you begin your own event "Stears True Magyar Days", you can admit only those who have multiple degrees, so you can brag to me that 100% of those who attend have academic credits. What will you all do there? Make online accounts and post about how much you don't like craftsmen? lol, very productive for our culture. Kurultaj is a growing experience in all facets: athletics, academics, spirituality and culture. But most importantly, with our international Turkic family to strengthen awareness of our roots.
Which brings me to this statement from you...
Turkic internationalism has nothing to do about communist economics, but economic improvement in general. Even historically and to this very day, the Hungarian Turanism Organization was only focused on the following:Quote:
This international turkic brotherhood of Gábor Vona reminds me the Jobbik's version of internationalism. Turanism: They way from proletarian internationalism to turkic internationalism.
"Turáni Társaság célja az egész turánság, vagyis a magyar nemzet és a velünk rokon többi európai és ázsiai népek kulturális és gazdasági előrehaladása, tömörülése, erősödése, úgymint az ázsiai kontinens földrajzi, néprajzi, gazdasági stb. kutatása múltban és jelenben. Politikai és felekezeti kérdések kizártak. Céljait a nem turáni népekkel egyetértve óhajtja elérni."
"The goal of Turanian Society is the cultural and economic progress, confederation, flourishment of all Turanians, i.e. the Hungarian nation and all kindred European and Asian nations, furthermore the geographical, ethnographical, economical etc. research of the Asian continent, past and present. Political and religious issues are excluded. It wishes to accomplish its objectives in agreement with non-Turanian nations."
You do not represent or refute these statements in good faith, because you do not wish to be associated with these peoples. To an extent, that's fine. Nobody will chain you to a horse and take you to Kurultaj to have fun enjoying the day. You should be free to associate and disassociate as you please. But you're misrepresenting the entire idea, and that is the issue. It is also very noticeable and only hurts your "argument", though it changes frequently.
You are again, cleverly attempting to blur the topic. Horses are valuable for transportation and combat. You do not see our ancestors riding oxen into battle or for transportation. Oxen do not need training and are stocky and strong, so they are much better plowing than horses, usually. The larger horses would come in time to be used in combat as our tactics became western. Your own lack of Hungarian equestrianism knowledge might be showing, because you would know that there are different horses for different roles in combat and field work. We used lighter, more agile horses in order to skirmish and for horse archery, while the west used a larger, muscular horse, the "destrier", for their military tactics because their offensive charge was based on the knight and heavy cavalry. It was not until we became more westernized that we adopted this style of combat with heavy destrier horses as well, which was of course reserved for the knightly elite. Before this, we fought in loose lines without solid divisions to be commanded and that required a smaller, more agile horse to accomplish.Quote:
I speak about horses in general. 90% of peasants did not have Horses in Hungary,because horses were expensive that's why peasants used oxen to plow before the early 20th century.
By the way, Stearsolina has added me as a friend, how about you as well so I can accept together? Then you can keep up with the posts so that we do not always speak in circles. Well, unless we "forget"... haha
None of them had Turkic name! Some of them had Turkic origin Hungarian (magyarized) name.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
Some examples from the Árpád-house:
Levedi (father of Álmos, grandfather of Árpád): from the Slavonic lev (lion) with Magyar diminutive: "i"
Álmos (father of Árpád): from the Finno-ugric origin Magyar álom (dream) word with Magyar suffix: "s" (álmos is an adjective)
Árpád: from the Turkic árpa (barley) with Magyar diminutive: "d"
Liüntika (son of Árpád): from the Slavonic louanta (hunter) with Magyar diminutive: "a"
or
Gyeücsa (Géza): from the Turkic yaβγu title with an Magyar diminutive: "csa"
etc.
All of these names were clear Hungarian names. Sometimes from not Hungarian origin words or titles, but Hungarian native speakers created, with Magyar grammar rules. These natives were the members of the Árpád-house. Fathers, mothers from this family.
sources:
Zimonyi István: A magyarság korai történetének sarokpontjai - Szeged, 2012
Berta Árpád: Keszi és társai - Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 101., 2004
So his result makes a lot of sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by blogen
Also if it would turn to be Z280 would make also.
You understand exactly what I meant. You are also leaving out the fact that Vajk, Géza, Sarolt, Emese, etc, are also all Turkic and not substantially changed in any way, if at all. Our alphabet is a child system of Old Turkic. You even illustrate how Turkic the given names above already are. Do not just select slightly Magyarized versions of Turkic names and ignore the fully Turkic ones as well, then say "none of them had a Turkic name". That makes no sense and you know it. That, or you need to explain your point far, far better than you have.Quote:
Originally Posted by blogen
I don;t reconzied it. How it is slavic?Quote:
Originally Posted by blogen
Origin was in Manchuria anyway (or in Yunnan according to "science"),Quote:
Originally Posted by Stearsolina
so there is no point in arguing where did they come from in mentioned
area. It was just a bus-stop for them in long jouney, where they could
absorbed some foreign element, like for example Arpads. (They, I mean
speakers and N people, becasue what should be consider Hungarians
when you reject this, I clearly don;'t know, because there is coming
out over and over again an Indoeuropean element. Majority one, which
did play a main role through 90% of written history of that country).
Lets add, what the Adalbert III (Bela III) had to say in this matter,
under who's protection the history of the family was written:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cgyek
In the year of Our Lord's incarnation 819, Ügek, the noblest chieftain
of Scythia descending from the great house of Magog, took to wife in
Dentumoger the daughter of Prince Eunedubelian, called Emese, from whom he begot a son,
who was named Álmos. But he is called Álmos from a divine event, because when she was
pregnant a divine vision appeared to his mother in a dream in the form of a falcon that seemed
to come to her and impregnate her and made known to her that from her womb a torrent would
come forth and from her loins glorious kings be generated, but that they would not multiply in
their own land. Because a dream is called álom in the Hungarian language and his birth was
predicted in a dream, so he was called Álmos. Or he was called Álmos, that is holy, because
holy kings and dukes were born of his line.
He himself claimed to be an Indoeuropean, Scythian, descendat of Japheth.
So his result to be R1, is perfectly fine and agreeable with his own claimed history.
In addition it is worthy to add, that according to the same medieval
legends, Hungarians as a folk were descendants of Ham and Nemrod.
So, if they knew the difference, then we shouldn;t be surrprized also.
?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
He was a mythical ancestor only.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
Ügyek: From the Finno-Ugric origin Hungarian word: üd/üg (holy) with the Magyar diminutive: "k" or from the Turkic üge/öge (prudent) with the Magyar diminutive: "k". The Turkic origin loanword is the less probable, but grammarly proper. The Finno-Ugric origin world is presumably version, because the mythical role of this person: the holy ancestor.
If guy was bearing slavic name, and he would have slavicQuote:
Originally Posted by blogen
haplotype it would be self explainable, wouldn;t it?
.... did you read the rest of your link? There is no Slavic name origin here either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
"It is said, speculated or at least possible that the earlier Grand Princes of the Hungarians were also descendants of the Hun Khans, as well as other Turkic peoples, and through them from some daughters of Emperors of China. Simon of Kéza's Gesta Hunnorum et Hungarorum narrated that royal lineage that makes Hunnic ruler Attila the sixth-generation ancestor of Árpád, conqueror of the Pannonian Basin, through Attila's son Csaba, his son Ed, his son Ügyek, his son Előd, his son Álmos. Álmos was ruler of the Magyars and the father of Árpád."
The naming origin from your own wiki source says it's either a uniquely Magyar name, or Turkic/Uyghur:
1) Öge/Üge - Turk dignitary name, according to historian György Györffy. The meaning of it is "wise" and "sage", also "councillor". The word is also used by the uyghurs.
2) Üge - The last ruler of the Uyghur Empire, also a contemporary to Ügyek. He was murdered in 846 in the Altai Mountains.[5] It is speculated, that when the Empire fell apart, some Uyghur fragments could have escaped westward.
Wrong, clear Hungarian name with meaning between the Hungarians only.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
Łowęta name from 1136 From the old Slavonic lovъ (hunting) +ęta.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
source: Old Polish Personal Name Dictionary, SłSNO. 3: 336
R1ETHELITES WUZ KANGZ N SHEEEIT!!!!!!
Doesn't matter, he was or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by blogen
The matter is that the story fits
and that their awereness was correct.
:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
:picard2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Martnen
You said is of slavic provenance...Quote:
Originally Posted by blogen
Then ok.Quote:
Originally Posted by blogen
Hard to get from louanta.
PICAR1D2 EMOJI!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
Your wikipedia link had much more to say about the name origins and highly favored Turkic-Magyar roots in both evidence and number of examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
What story? Scythian = steppic in the medieval terminology and not an ethnicity, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
Where? The name is Hungarian origin. The word was Slavonic origin, not the name!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
The HUN Levente came from a SLV Louanta form, like the HUN köszméte from the SLV kosmata and lot of other loanwords.Quote:
Then ok.
Hard to get from louanta.
:picard2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
AR1PADS WUZ R1ETHELITES N SHEEEIT
He is not understanding because he is seeing if he can link the name origins (not the word) to Slavic ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by blogen
But I was talking about different thing and subject.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
Scythia means Scythia in the first order and he was from there, no matter what tribe he belong toQuote:
Originally Posted by blogen
Secodnly, 1/3 of Turks has IE (mostly Scythian) origin. The same with "steppians" what is not a real thing.
Thirdly, the source saied, that he was an IE as well, no matter scythian or other provenance.
Thats all.
Aha. But the name could be implemented as well, as originaly slavic, transmutating later.Quote:
Where? The name is Hungarian origin. The word was Slavonic origin, not the name!
Ok.Quote:
The HUN Levente came from a SLV Louanta form, like the HUN köszméte from the SLV kosmata and lot of other loanwords.
If someone has the name of foreign etymology, then it is probable, that he is of that origin too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turul Karom
If you would find a person in Poland in Xth century who was named Otto or Henry, the he would
be on 99% a German. High probability was also in next centuries, and with some names is still
today. If you would find for example someone who is named Mściwoj in Hungary, he would be
in 99% a Pole, not Hungarian. The same was in other folks, the oldest the more.
:picard2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rethel von Rethelsky
Nobody know nothing about the Scythians ethnicity in the medieval times. This was a meaningless name, but a clear marker for a lifestyle.
Levente's name was never Slavonic. His name is a Hungarian name. The Hungarian name is Slavonic origin, but Levente was not Louanta.Quote:
Aha. But the name could be implemented as well, as originaly slavic, transmutating later.