HUN, HUNGARUS, MAGYAR - Identitásunk több ezer éve

[Dunai]

Yes the genetic doesn't lie, the nomad magyars had turkic origin, so we must search the ancient hungarian speakers somewhere else.

Not necessarily, even though even I have some reservations nowadays about whether Hungarian already arrived in the Carpathian Basin before the Magyar Conquest. I am still waiting on more debates and arguments from historians about this topic before I make up my mind, since these archeogentic results about admixture of Conquest Era Magyars are very fresh and haven't read any critical reviews from Academic members yet. I mean it is still quite probable that Hungarian was the language of these Magyar conquerors, since they migrated from a region (Volga-Ural) which is not far away from other Finno-Ugric speaking people. They had to their North and West Finno-Ugric neighbors and to their East and South Turkic neighbors. The theory that they are the result of the mixing of these two people is still pretty valid, especially that genetically they were the closest to Volga Tatars and Bashkirs who themselves have significant Finno-Ugric characteristic.

[Blondie]

It doesn't lie indeed. It confirms what was previously believed, Magyars left Siberia and on their way to Hungary absorbed Iranian and Turkic admixture, but kept the language.

This is a very outdated map, this is the real genetic map of nomad magyars:


https://m.blog.hu/ce/celpontban/image/hunok.jpg

Nomad hungarians had turkic genetic, turkic culture, turkic names and everything, the greek and arabic cources are all called them tukic and their king as "King of turkia", they were turkic in every way not uralic. This uralic origin theory has been debunked as well.

[Blondie]

Not necessarily, even though even I have some reservations nowadays about whether Hungarian already arrived in the Carpathian Basin before the Magyar Conquest. I am still waiting on more debates and arguments from historians about this topic before I make up my mind, since these archeogentic results about admixture of Conquest Era Magyars are very fresh and haven't read any critical reviews from Academic members yet. I mean it is still quite probable that Hungarian was the language of these Magyar conquerors, since they migrated from a region (Volga-Ural) which is not far away from other Finno-Ugric speaking people. They had to their North and West Finno-Ugric neighbors and to their East and South Turkic neighbors. The theory that they are the result of the mixing of these two people is still pretty valid, especially that genetically they were the closest to Volga Tatars and Bashkirs who themselves have significant Finno-Ugric characteristic.

According the newest results the Árpáds didn't speak this language what we call hungarian language today, this is the most posibble version. You cannot be uralic speaker if you have turkic culture, turkic genetic, turkic names, turkic tribal society, turkic alphabeth etc, how? Turkic tribes had military supremacy in this time in the complet eurasian steppe, they dominated everyone else, do you really think they adopted an uralic language from the "lower" class uralic speaker fishers and hunters? Don't make me laugh.

[Altaylı]

Okay, after I watched the presentations focused on the latest archeogenetic research and results about Conquest Era Magyars these are the very brand new conclusions, which according to the scientists are still in preliminary phase, since the final results will be published in the coming months, but still they are close to being very precise:

Thus far both mtDNA and Y-DNA haplogroups have proven that Conquest Era Magyars were the closest from Ancient populations to to Eurasian Scythians, while from modern populations to Volga Tatars and Bashkirs. Well, we all know these two haplogroups only constitute ca. 1% of the entire genome of an individual, while the admixture results are clearly the ones which paint the full picture of somebody's origins. Well, according to preliminary results it seems that the admixture of Conquest Era Magyars also solidify previous results, that indeed, Eurasian Scythians and Western Huns were the closest people to them, while from modern populations still the same Bashkirs, Volga Tatars, Turkmen. They also shown that there was a difference between the elite of the Magyars who had this Eurasian Scythian component, while the regular population living in Hungary after the Conquest happened, had a more European type of characteristic, but still with ca. 10-15% Eurasian and Asian background. If these results are indeed true, then it becomes even more of a mystery how did these Magyars end up speaking Hungarian, while genetically they don't seem to be very close to Finno-Ugric populations. Were Conquest Era Magyars truly the population that brought with them the Hungarian language and spread it around the local people, or did they rather find this language already here, while they only conquered and organized them into a new state, but ended up adopting their Hungarian language?

Probably magyar conquerors had oghur Turkic origin here is oghur Turkic dna:
Distance to: RUS_Nomad_MA
0.03212139 Bashkir
0.05639047 Tatar_Siberian
0.07017485 Uzbek
0.07105586 Tatar_Crimean_steppe
0.08036237 Nogai
0.08096285 Tatar_Lipka
0.08301480 Turkmen_Uzbekistan
0.08709085 Turkmen
0.09523950 Hazara_Afghanistan
0.09881207 Yukagir_Forest
0.09951208 Uygur
0.10136670 Udmurt
0.10218711 Besermyan
0.10262107 Hazara
0.10407308 Tatar_Siberian_Zabolotniye
0.10679699 Karakalpak
0.11450107 Tatar_Kazan
0.11851466 Saami
0.11961713 Chuvash
0.12865322 Tlingit
0.12866342 Mari
0.13238353 Tubalar
0.13899421 Tajik
0.14080417 Kazakh
0.14507332 Tatar_Mishar
Onogur facial reconstructions

Yes they were Turkics

[Altaylı]

Not necessarily, even though even I have some reservations nowadays about whether Hungarian already arrived in the Carpathian Basin before the Magyar Conquest. I am still waiting on more debates and arguments from historians about this topic before I make up my mind, since these archeogentic results about admixture of Conquest Era Magyars are very fresh and haven't read any critical reviews from Academic members yet. I mean it is still quite probable that Hungarian was the language of these Magyar conquerors, since they migrated from a region (Volga-Ural) which is not far away from other Finno-Ugric speaking people. They had to their North and West Finno-Ugric neighbors and to their East and South Turkic neighbors. The theory that they are the result of the mixing of these two people is still pretty valid, especially that genetically they were the closest to Volga Tatars and Bashkirs who themselves have significant Finno-Ugric characteristic.

Bashkirs are one of the closest ethnic to proto turks Today so they dont have finno-Ugric origin


PROTO TURK:
Distance to: Afanasievo_Mixed
0.05811461 Tatar_Siberian
0.07453513 Tubalar
0.07723235 Bashkir
0.07892836 Nogai
0.08123101 Tatar_Siberian_Zabolotniye
0.08523355 Karakalpak
0.09129603 Shor_Mountain
0.09229878 Uygur
0.09366362 Shor
0.09487153 Shor_Khakassia
0.09487226 Hazara_Afghanistan
0.09598066 Hazara
0.10125404 Uzbek
0.10396218 Kazakh
0.10946356 Yukagir_Forest

[Dunai]

According the newest results the Árpáds didn't speak this language what we call hungarian language today, this is the most posibble version. You cannot be uralic speaker if you have turkic culture, turkic genetic, turkic names, turkic tribal society, turkic alphabeth etc, how? Turkic tribes had military supremacy in this time in the complet eurasian steppe, they dominated everyone else, do you really think they adopted an uralic language from the "lower" class uralic speaker fishers and hunters? Don't make me laugh.

It wouldn't be the first time in history when a smaller Turkic elite was assimilated linguistically by their conquered subjects. There are very few written documents about what ever really went through in the massive Eurasian steppe during the many hundreds and thousands of years. I know there are some Hungarians who would like to completely erase the Finno-Ugric legacy of our people, and choose a strictly Turkic origin, but neither hypothesis are exclusively true. In my opinion an Uralo-Turkic origin is the most likely hypothesis, supported by archeological, genetic and linguistic studies. But I always keep an open mind for up and coming evidence that would disprove this dual origin.

[Graywolf]

t wouldn't be the first time in history when a smaller Turkic elite was assimilated linguistically by their conquered subjects.

That's why Mete Han (Son of Teoman the first han of huns ) didnt settle in China and turned back to Ötüken after qonquer of China. To not to be assimilated. Even Kublai couldnt make it. Juan dynasty didnt last long and chinised.

[Graywolf]

t wouldn't be the first time in history when a smaller Turkic elite was assimilated linguistically by their conquered subjects.

That's why Mete Han (Son of Teoman the first han of huns ) didnt settle in China and turned back to Ötüken after qonquer of China. To not to be assimilated. Even Kublai couldnt make it. Juan dynasty didnt last long and chinised.

[Dunai]

Bashkirs are one of the closest ethnic to proto turks Today so they dont have finno-Ugric origin

Bashkirs settled in Magna Hungaria and obviously have mixed with there found Magyars, who were an Uralo-Turkic group. Magna Hungaria was still mentioned by Medieval chroniclers as late as the 13th century, a few centuries after the Bashkirs already settled there. Bashkirs definitely have strong Uralic admixture and aren't pure Proto-Turks.

[Radomir]

please stop it! firstly British Paleos, now Hungarian Magyaroids....