Brand new genetic study on the origins of Huns, Avars and Hungarian Conquerors

[Scandal]

It varies from Hungarian to Hungarian and what a personal definition of "conqueror ancestry" is, both culturally and genetic. Genetically it is present in most Hungarians (both Asian and European conqueror admixture as the Conquerors were not exclusively East Asians as if they all came from the Chinese coast).

Hungarian conquerors looked like Jackie Chan. Fact.
Bruce Lee, being 1/4 White, would've looked too western to fit among hungarian conquerors.

[Blondie]

No serious academic believes that the Hungarian language didn't arrive into the Carpathian Basin together with the Conquerors. There is no other candidate population that prior could have brought it here, except them. All fields of science point to Conquerors as the obvious candidate for bringing Hungarian here. Also it is not unheard of at all that small populations can assimilate much larger ones. Look at how few Spanish colonizers managed to linguistically assimilate large parts of the Americas.

You still didn't answer for these hard questions, what are facts and refute you. If you want to say that conquerors had uralic genetic origin, then you must post a genetic result of conqurors when they were mostly uralic, but there is no such thing, the genetic results showed a different pic:

We did not find Finno-Ugric genetic connection, so our data do not support the FinnoUgric origin of the conquerors

http://doktori.bibl.u-szeged.hu/id/e...is_english.pdf

even the MTA (Hungarian Academy of Sciences) said "we have no finno-ugric origin, only our language is finno-ugric":

https://mta.hu/tudomany_hirei/nem-mi...nyeirol-108820

Every serious scientist and prof agree that conquerors had turkic ethnic origin not finno-ugric.

And there is other candidate population, the hungarus what Anonymus mentioned. The spanish example is bullshit because the latinization of America happened for centuries, it was pretty long process (unlike the hungarian case), there were schools, and the national identity was much stronger than in the 9. century. In fact, most of native americans learned spanish only between the 19-18 century when the national awakening started, before that they used mostly the local tribal language.

[Jana]

I never stated that they spoke exclusively Hungarian, but what I said was that even genetics prove without any doubt that they had very-very strong links to the Ugric branch of the Uralic family, with Mansis, just as linguistics showed all along. They even kept relations with their Uralic homeland hundreds of years after moving into the Carpathian Basin. This supposition that the Conqueror came from Central Asia and they were Turkic people doesn't hold any ground in factual reality. They mixed with Central Asian elements but they never lost their Uralic character.

This was known years before genetic studies though, if anyone read actual Hungarian academics from MTA. Dual conquest theory was always weak and illogical.
It's simple really:

Hungarian most original base is Ugric from SW Siberia, than they moved south to the west Kazakh steppe and started contact with Iranics (Scytho-Sarmatians), than Turks, than Germanics and latest Slavs as they moved west into Pontic steppe and finally Carpathian Basin. Ugric was always the base and they heavily intermixed along the way, but kept the language.

From oldest to youngest layer Hungarian ethnogenesis was like this more or less:

1) Ugric
2) Iranic
3) Turkic
4) Germanic
5) Slavic

than the rest.

[Hektor12]

Hungarian conquerors looked like Jackie Chan. Fact.
Bruce Lee, being 1/4 White, would've looked too western to fit among hungarian conquerors.

I always question this "homogeneously foreign looking people" story. Especially, in a very diverse and mixed people like this.

[Scandal]

I always question this "homogeneously foreign looking people" story. Especially, in a very diverse and mixed people like this.

It was a joke.

[Hektor12]

It was a joke.

Ah, sorry. Topic was so serious i couldnt think that.

[Jana]

You still didn't answer for these hard questions, what are facts and refute you. If you want to say that conquerors had uralic genetic origin, then you must post a genetic result of conqurors when they were mostly uralic, but there is no such thing, the genetic results showed a different pic:

Conquerors were in minority Uralics genetically, because they split from other Ugrics extremely long time before arrival to the Carpathian Basis. They were heavily mongrelized by the time of their arrival but language persisted. Point is that they were originally Ugric people and not any kind of Turks, Turkic admixture is just something they picked up along the way, like many others (and Iranic admix preceeds Turkic as well).

Hungarian language arrived with conquerors, there is no any kind of evidence nor indication that it was there before.

[Leto]

Turul Karom, you don't speak a Turkic language natively, therefore you aren't Turkic. Period.

That's a great study, I hope there will be some G25 samples from it later.

[Turul Karom]

even the MTA (Hungarian Academy of Sciences) said "we have no finno-ugric origin, only our language is finno-ugric":

https://mta.hu/tudomany_hirei/nem-mi...nyeirol-108820

This is why, when modern Hungarian genetics are compared with only Ugrics, or looking for only haplogroup N in Hungary, you will hear people try to make the argument that modern Hungarians have no DNA connection to conquering population. When including Turkic conquerors, modern Hungarians can match much more. This is shown again even on TA, as I said, where many Hungarian members have non-negligible Turkic results across many calculators.

[Turul Karom]

Turul Karom, you don't speak a Turkic language natively, therefore you aren't Turkic. Period.

That's a great study, I hope there will be some G25 samples from it later.

Great criteria for what constitutes belonging to a meta ethnicity. I guess Africans who speak English fluently as a first language are Anglos according to you lol