Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:23, 12 November 2004

You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.

HUNGARIAN PREHISTORY

the study of Istvan Kiszely translated by Csaba Hargita with author's permission

OF HUNGARIAN PREHISTORY

The Hungarian prehistory explores the roots, the origin of our nation with exact methods. The life, the pulling off place and the stations of the wandering of our ancestors is the area of prehistorical researches. The hungarian prehistory ends popularly up by 895-96 AD (probably 890 AD); and our history is spoken from that time on. The explore of the Hungarian prehistory includes the explore of the Scythians, Huns, Avars, Jasz, Pechenegs, Kuns, etc. creating parts of the Hungarians. The real prehistory research may not serve ideologies (like monarchaic Finno-Ugrianism), can not be romantic (prehistory of the turn of 19th and 20th centuries), but being summary of researches based on facts. Present theories, political-ideological guidances gave place to the Physiological (BG, marker and mitocondric DNA), philological and source-researches, those unambigously determined above all hypothesis the origin of our nation. Of course it takes time to re write our ancient history on the basis of facts in place of old guidances. Besides the more exact exploration of the facts come many theories and most of the times on the part of non specialist so showy derivation speculations to light, those led and lead the serious explorations wrong and being very deleterious from the getting know the roots of our nation’s point of view.

The Hungarian Nation

A nation (ethnic) is determined by the corporeal marks, spiritual and material culture and the language. The biological, physiological marks are the most permanent and the language is the most variable, that can eventually also be „changed”. Looking for the origin of a nation the procedure is to go until a nation will be find having exactly or close to the same body, physiology, the same world of music, dance, faith, tales, poetry, scripts, ethnic motives, food culture, flora and fauna and language in the past or present where our nation can be derived from. These explorations are executed using the way of anthropology, musicology, danceology, pietiology, poetry, typology, ethnology, gastronomy, botany, zoology, linguistics and source researches. Beside these exact sciences is there no need for other assumptions. Wheter we can return to an age and a nation, where these criteria occurr than taking this as the base of our origin deriving from this area and nations, or we tell the most scientific phrase: „We don’t know”, „We don’t know yet”.

The Hungarian is the only europid but not indoeuropean nation of Europe. Our origin can’t be explained from Europe, as the roots (physiology, body, spiritual and material culture and the language) have no European origins. Our chronicles and traditions reckon „being Hungarian” from the Huns until Kuns, understanding a kind of group of Innermost Asian people as Hungarians, like the Huns (Szeklers) called in by the Romans in 361 AD, than in 586 AD and in two newer waves in the Carpathian Basin settling Avars and the nation of Arpad settling in 895-96 AD, than the ancestors of Jaszes settling in 1235 AD and Kuns in 1243 and 1246 AD. Being the largest in amount (about 500000 people) the nation of Arpad is followed up most of the times. The part of the Hungarians before entering into the Carpathian Basin are called as „ancient Hungarians”. Beside the Carpatian Basin consciously occupier ancient Hungarians do the remaining autochton local native population (from neolithic, copper and bronze age, iron age in the ages of Scythians, Sarmatians, Romans and the migration of the nations), and the nations settled and located afther settlement (Saxons, Svabians, Slovakians, Ukrainians, Roumanians, Serbians, Croatians, etc. ), whose significant parts assimilating into the Hungarians belong to the today’s Hungarians. The Hungarians contrary to any other European nations did not differenciated from the European native population, but arrived from the far, and is the only one of the nations arriving from Innermost Asia being able to stay, multipliying up to about 15 Millions, and could keep it’s own language, culture and physiology.

The Hungarian old country justificatory sciences

Anthropology and Genetics

The anthropology searched the Hungarian old country by morphologic searches. The old country of the Hungarians have to be searched where people lived or even live like Hungarians. The Uyghur cementery at Astana near to the Jungar Gate revealed by Aurel Stein between 1913 and 1915 grounds for this, wherefrom 1200 graves were revealed by Uyghur and Chinese subsequently in 1986 AD. The in this cementary buried people were morphologically the same as those being settled in the Carpathian Basin as „Hungarians”. Demonstartive is the fact that Turanian, Pamirian and Taurid elements got into the Carpathian Basin by the Hungarians those are typical of the Turkish nations of Innermost Asia only, but occur nowhere else in Europe. Beside the morpholigical searches the physiological searches give lately information about the origin of a nation. Within the Landsteiner Bloodgroup System the rate of the typical Hungarian „0” and „B” bloodgroup gene (31,05% and 17,90%) is off from of the europid and Finno-Ugric nations, but ranges with the rates of the Innermost Asian Turkish nations. Beside of this occurs also an other kind of bloodgroup character among the Hungarians (e.g. the Diego ) presented in no other nation of Europe. The in Europe almost unknown „mongolic spot” has 22,6% of occurrence and the also rarely occurring lactose intolerance (missing lactose digestive enzyme) is at 37% among the Hungarians „racy of the soil”, like in Innermost Asia. The skin splinter system of the Hungarians has Innermost Asian characteristic (low bend rates, but high of wortexes). The Gm-marker searches pointed out, that among the Hungarians occurring Gm abst and Gm afb3 marked genemarkers miss by the European nations. The until now done international mitochondrial DNA searches have also Innermost Asian characters, showing our merge with other European nations, but our genetic non relationship with Finnish and Finno-Ugric nations also obvious. (Semino, Ornell – Passarino, Giuseppe et al. Science. 10th November 2000.).

Linguistics

Linguistic dealth a lot with the loan-words in the language of Hungarians, but much less on objective and scientific level with our basic words and grammatics. In this theme means break-through the volume „Of the origin of the Hungarian Language other way around” of Peter Sara (1994) and the works of Laszlo Maracz (2000), but the Codex Isfahani turned up in 1860 has of capital importance, (and it’s Turkish transcription from the 10th century), that is a Hunnic-Armenian dictionary and grammatics. This contains almost the whole Hungarian basic vocabulary. The Ugric-Turkish war of the 19th century (the linguistic war of Armin Vambery and Pal Hunfalvy) between „Finno-ugrists” and „Turkists” endures to this very day, but under the facts the truth of the „Turkish camp” verified.

Spiritual and Material Culturistic Disciplines

The material and spiritual culture furnishes informations by the origin of a nation. One of these culture elements can have the highest importance, but if all can be originated in the same area, than this has decisive power. Exploring the culture is more important, as it is kept by a nation for long time in an unchanged form.

The Hungarians arrived with a specific writing into Europe. Until the Indoeuropean script is character writing, the Asian is – e.g it is still in use among Turkish – right to left syllabic writing, where the vocal regimen is signed by „ligatures”. Our Innermost Asian originated writing evolved from hieroglyphs to phonetic character writing club together in it’s actual form to the 2nd millenium BC. Our diversified spiritual script relationship binds us together with the Etruscs, the Sogds, the Bactrians, etc. This script was used not only by the monarchs, but also by the commonalty. The Innermost Asian 3000 years old scripts published by S. Tovuudorj in 1995 prove, that 13 consonants of them did not change in the past 3000 years. The settling Hungarians arrived with developed writing into Europe, and could keep the writing and it’s spirit, just as their language until today.

The folk music and instrument history play important role among the sciences searching the culture of our nation. Our music is pentatonic, quart or quint changer, descending tuned, proclitically ending Turkish music. The characteristics of Asia are zest, the diction, usage of decorative voices, the presence of glissando, narrow range of voices melodies, it’s trichord-triton-tetrachord-tetraton-pentachord modality, the existence of bard song and lamentations, the psalmodising recitation, unison, and the characteristic of rhythms (syncope, changing of sharp and prolative rhythms, etc.) first of all. The relationship of Hungarian and Turkish world of folk music pointed out by Zoltan Kodaly and based on the collection of Bela Bartok in 1939. Thanks to our folk music collectors 200000 folksongs were registered and some 100000 were published in printing. This taking the population of 15 millions of Hungarians into account means unrivalled richness on the world. Of our ancinet instruments were kept (typical drums, hit gardon, lyre, hammered-dulcimer, zither, sheperd’s pipe (csilinka), twinflute, longflute, reed, turkish whistle, or rather oboe-like shawm, bard whistle and the Hungarian bagpipe, etc.).

Among the basic motives of our folkart plays the Innermost Asian genecentric tulip an important role, beyond that the carnation, the pomegranate, the corn-flower and the peacock. Our folkart built with an unbelievable richness round the flower of tulip, those plant’s genecenter is the offset of the Gobi Desert. The Innermost Asian tulip motives can be found in the same form by the Hungarians. Our folkart held the Innermost Asian Style elements (ligamentures, „S”-shape frizzling leaf forms, doubble frizzle, rosettas, sunwheel, swivel cross, spiral, winged sun, usage of rosetta and palmetta). Our folkart symbolism is specifically Innermost Asian (peacock – immortality, tulip – woman, griffin – eternal light, heart – love, flower in flower – fertility, pomegranate – much descendants, etc.). The love symbols, the ornamentic usage of the sun and the moon, stag emblem, dragon emblem and the life tree and the attaching world of beliefs go for strange in Europe. Our ornamentalism is characterized by desultory, rich diversity, love of flowers, deep sympathy with the nature, proper sense of ratio, „the power, the rest, the serious conflicts of the lividness of big plain areas and the fire of congested frittering, the manful avoidance of slobber or risible tints...” (Aladar Fay, 1941). The specific Innermost Asian originated elemets of our folkart are the in Europe unique Szeklergate and the wooden plinth.

The dance of the Hungarians is uniquely rich in Europe; „Hungarians could keep something from the dance art brought from Asia and widely different from any other dance arts of Europe, specific Hungarian” (Laszlo Felfoldi, 1996). Many dance explorers (György Martin and Sándor Timar first of all) could save the Hungarian dance art in the next to last hour and bring it back to our everydays. The specific motion forms of our present day dances reflect the ancient sacrifical rites and the world of martial dances.

Inspite of the much of degrading gimmicks is fact that the ancestors of the Hungarians were never „pagans”. The ancient Hungarians were monotheists, as any other nations of the plains, being close to the nature – the sun and moon, rain, snow, and wind – are monotheist. Monotheism is common among the stock herding equestrian nations of the steppes, that became a very important monument in the point of the Hungarian’s religion; the Innermost Asian ruler ruled by the grace of God acting for Him. The king of Huns was the „Son of Heavens”. All our God and faith related words (esten (isten, god), lélek (soul), imád (adore), menny (heaven), boldog (blessed), böjt (feast), vétek (transgression), bűn (sin), bocsát (forgive), búcsú (saint’s day), hit (faith), teremt (create) örök (eternal), etc.) have Innermost Asian Turkic origin. Of course they respected the – the sun, moon, fire, water and earth – but the shape of the One God – Tengri – always arose from the world of spirits. Theophylactos Simocattes wrote about like this: „The Turks (Hungarians) respect the fire, air, and water, honouring the earth with Hymns, but worship and call God only the One, who created the universe...” This can be read at Anonymus: „Leader Árpád, whose helper was the God of All... prayed to God in tears... and the helper of Leader Álmos was the Holy Spirit... Tas, Szabolcs and Tétény saw as God gave them victory...” The symbol of the cross can be seen on the sabretache cover plate from Bezdéd and in the graves from the age of settling. It is very important, that our ancestors have never had samans, as like the Siberian nations have, but wise priests, táltos, having extraordinary knowledge, and „organized the spiritual world of the Hungarians under the God of Hungarians” (Imre Harangozó). „Such kind of motifs can be known in the totemism, those backbones lead us into the world of the monotheism of the Innermost Asian Turkistry” (Béla Gunda). Our ancestors got acquainted with the christianity already in the Caucasus. In about 530 AD Qaurduct, than Maq Armenian bishops converted among the Onogurs, now in 644 a Turk monarch with all his nation converted to the christianity, whereof the Armenian authors commemorate. About the christianity of our ancestors can we read in the Legends of Cyrill and Method. In 948 AD Bulcsú and Tormás (Termatsu), than headman Gyula in 953 AD in Constantinople was baptized, now Ajtony, Géza and István converted in Vidin to christianity. The honouring of our Innermost Asian Mother God cult – the Blessed Woman, or „Beauty Woman” (Babba Maria) – overrun in the cult of Virgin Mary and lives along even today.

The Hungarian folktale is a treasure in the search of our past that was not covered until today. It’s richness, diversity is unique on the world. It’s characteristic is to reflect the the universality of the bequeathed primeval knowledge in it whole purity. The people did know the history more true than the authors of chronicles. Our heroic, fairy and charmtales have Innermost Asian Turkic origin, as the lately pubilcated collection of Turkish tales accounts for this. The heroes, shapes of our folktales belong to no European tales, could not be understood by an European mind. The „far country”, the world beyond, often above the sky or under the earth can be explained by the „tree of life” and our heroic tales can be understood only by the Innermost Asian world of taltos. The Innermost Asian turul and griffin played a specific role at our ancestors. The turul legends and the imagined griff mothered by the Innermost Asian myths. The turul, that never nestled to west from the Carpathian Basin became the badge of the Hungarian rulers. A nation coming from east got the Innermost Asian religious belief here in „west”, where it was unknown anyway unlikely to know.

The toy of a child springs from the depths of the human soul, the natural manifestation of life of the primeval instincts. Katalin Lázár in the 1990’s could collect more than 300 Hungarian folk toy, that means the uniqueness of the quantity and variety of Hungarian toy treasure on the world. One of the reasons that our ancient folk toys remained is that more than half of them is vocalic, or rhythmic, uniquely Hungarian. The children by the equestrian nations have no „ready” toys, they produce them selves, using flowers, sunflower-stalk, head, acorn, conker, reed, peach stone, vaulterbone of sheeps and mainly felt. These toys are the bonefoals, sledges, tossing woods, and mainly felt balls and the felt puppets. The analogies of them can be find in ancient Innermost Asian graves (e.g. Tarlyktag).

The question is raised many times, what kept and keeps Hungarians together. The answer is triple: monotheism, conception and love of mother country, and the family structure. Our ancestors lived and arrived in an Innermost Asian structure into the Carpathian Basin, where in the 10th century monarch Géza than St. Stephen found, they can’t stay with this Aisan structure, now taking the European state form. The family, or little family (6-10 persons), the big family (25-30 persons), during the effection of incorporated towns and towns the stem (1000-2000 people in average) could remian from the ancient structure, but the tribe (50000 people in average, 40-50 stems), those for some specific goals got allied with one another (tribe alliance) with the leadership of the headman disappeared. This kind a goal was the recapture of the new country, the Carpathian Basin, the old empire of Attila, where the alliance was solemnized by the bloodcovenant as usual in Innermost Asia. The sturcture of the Hungarian society can percepted as the exact reflection of the Innermost Asian Turkic model (suit, „carry away of girls”, introduction to the parents, born practices, etc.). Our family structure and farming lived the 21st century in a unique form in homestead in Europe. In place of the degrading „equesrian nomadic” form of life the ancestors of Hungarians were stock herding equestrian nation lingering the form of life of the equestrian nations, the geographically mobile society, quest of some necessities and the ability of dislocation to a great extent a long time.

The Carpathian Basin recapturing Hungarians occupied one of the most fertile basin of the world and followed their ancient farming and stock herding. Also Our farming and stock herding related vocabularies have Innermost Asian Turkish origin (eke - plough, ásó - spade, kapa - hack, kasza - scythe, sarló – reaping hook, csépe - flail, árpa - barley, búza - wheat, arat - harvest, boglya - stack, tarló - stubble, őröl - grind, dara - breeze, ocsu - tailings, gyümölcs - fruit, alma - apple, körte - pear, mogyoró - nut, dió - walnut, kökény - sloe, som - cornel, szőlő - grape, karó - spile, kocsány - stalk, szűr – to filter, bor - wine, borsó - pea, kender - hemp, kóró – dry stalk, tiló - picker, csepű - tow, orsó - spindle, torma - horseradish, üröm - wormwood, komló - hop, csalán - nettle, gyom - weed, gyertyán - hornbeam, kőris - ashen, bojtorján - bur, gyékény - bulrush, katáng - , etc.). If our ancestors would be „nomadic shepherds”, than we would also disappear among the surrounding nations as it happened to many nations of the age of great migration of the nations. As noone pursued the Hungarians anytime, and the Carpathian Basin was not occupied by necessity, could we bring our ancient animals and plants along. Our ancient cereals were the wild einkorn (Triticum monococcum L.), common wheat (Triticum aestivum subsp. Spelta) és wild emmer (Triticum dicoccoides Körn. Auct.syn. Kcke and Triticum tricoccum Schranck), a millet (Panicum miliaceum L.), barley (Hordeum vulgare subsp. Hexastichum Zoh.), rye (Secale cereale L.), lambsquarter (Chenopodium album L.), the harvest and trashing did not happened in the European way. Ancient type of ploughs are the crooked plough, a digging plough and the bed plough. Trucks lens (Lens culinaris), lentil vetch (Vicia sativa var. Lentisperma), pea (Pisum sativum), chick-pea (Cicer arietinum L.), a galajt (Galium spurium), gourd (Lagenaria sicenaria Mol. Stadley provar. Clavata), the Asian original onion (Allium cepa L.) and garlick (Allium sativum L.), cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. convar. Capitata Alef.), kohlrabi (Brassica oleracea L. convar. Caulorapa), the Caucasian celery (Apium garveolens L. convar. Rapaceum Gaudich), the ancient world’s oldes granted parsnip (Pansinaca sativa L. subsp. Sativa), prickly lettuce Torn. (Lactuca serriola Torn.), common sorrel (Rumex rugosus L.), the spinach from Asia Minor (Spinacea oleracea L.), the cultivated radish from Asia Minor (Raphanus sativus L.) and the Innermost Asian, the best of the Chineses, the eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) etc. (Ferenc Gyulai) were known. Our own fruits were the apple (Malus pumila L. Mill.), the China originated peach (Prunus persica L.), the Innermost Asian appricot (Prunus armenica L.), english walnut (Juglans regia L.), the Asian genecentric European plum (Prunus domestica L.), cornel, the cantaloupe (Cucumis melo L.) from India and Middle Asia, the secondarily chinese genecentric watermelon (Citrullus lanatus Mansfeld), the Asian genecentric pear (Pyrus domestica Medik.), the nut, the Asian originated sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) and sour cherry (Prunus cerasus L.), etc. We had specific Innermost Asian „Turanian” knowledge about the viniculture. All our vineyarding and wine making related words are ancient Turkish. Our ancestors arrived along with winerods as the Northeast Hungarian sort of grapes and viniculture doesn’t belong to the sphere of the Roman viniculture. „Even if Roman and earlier knowledges of viniculture lived along, those were merged soon into the knowledge of the Hungarians arriving into the Carpathian Basin.” (Ferenc Gyulai). We had specific knowledge about rearing bees.

We arrived with own Asian „taki” or „Przewalski's” (Equus Pržewalskii pržewalski) and so called Achal Teke horses (Achal tekini), and the related equesrian culture (Innermost Asian wooden saddle, iron stirrup, curb). The civilized world took over the science of riding from our ancestors, the stirrup, saddle, and spur, the dirigible coach (it’s name was also overtaken) and the light horse. After lot of discussions our explorers (János Matolcsi) came to the conclusion, that the „arm horned hungarian grey ox (even if not in it’s actual form) was the domestic beef of our settling ancestors.” (The Hungarian grey ox was direct descendant of the wild ox – Bos primigenius). „The straight twirled horned sheep came along with our ancestors and stayed until today” (Béla Hankó). Nothing seems to show the evidence of our settled herding culture better, than our ancestros brought also pigs (the ancestor of salonta pig) along with them into the Carpathian Basin. Our following dogs, the Tibet dog, so the shepherd dog from Tarim Basin, the puli, the two guard dogs the komondor and the kuvasz andour hunting dogsthe Hungarian greyhound and the pannon foxhound have no European origin. The Innermost Asian two-humped camel (Camelus bactrianus) was still living in the Carpathian Basin in the 12th century.

The kitchen of our ancestors. ”Treasure like the folk music and the folkdance, unique cultural treasure resides in gastronomy. This treasury must be revealed, we have to sink into it’s depth, since the more we get to the bottom of it, the more we get to the heights of knowledge and spirit” (Pál Kövi). The settlement age Hungarian kitchen can nit be compared to the Western European kitchens, as its phylosophy was completely different and gastronomically was on a higher level, than the contemporary Western European kitchens. The Hungarian kitchen is characterized with cooking first of all, as it is also significant touch of the gastronomy of Turkic and and other Eastern nations. As more frying is used on the west, the more cooking is used on the east, and this is a basic difference in the point of gastronomy... The kitchen of ancient Hungarians used to be characterized with the pentathony of tastes, taking the strong as a separate taste to the sweet, sour, salty, bitter aspiring to the harmony of them, just as the Innermost Asian nations do. „In the sphere of gastronomy can traditions be find back to the age of Settlement and even older and more east...” (Robert Gyula Cey-Bert). The recipes of goulash and goulash soup, can be find among the descripiton of sacrificial foods (keng, ta-keng) by Chinese authors. The pastes, soups, the tradition of canning meats by curing, fermentation of sorts of milk and our still living cooking technics that differs from any European nations were brought from East.

Our ancestors’ metallurgy overtopped any other professions, being completely different to the European, sith it’s bases were not different kind of mines (like pirit), but the limonite, whereof by damascening and multiple folding were created the only samurai sword light (500 gramms) alike, by authors often referred and well wanted sabres, war-axes, spears, spontoons, kopja (spear, pike), clubs, hoes, spades. Our goldsmith’s craft had Innermost Asian motifs and technic, our jewels were famous far away. No other European nations tahn us made horsehair jewels. Our bowmasters made the Innermost Asian whipping back reflexbows, that was reconstruated after the grave artifacts by Gyula Fábián first, still belong to the „best ones”. To the bows our ancestors made the arrows with Innermost Asian specific arrowhead, wearing them in artistic decorated quivers. The „Eastern” tactics of our ancestors was detailed described in the „Tactics” titled writing by emperor Leon the Wise.

The civilized world wears not the chitons of the ancient nations (Greeks and Romans) and the leather stapled separates of Germans, but the modern version (suit) of by our ancestros into Europe brought kazak and pants made from fine lenvászon or kendervászon (this two togheter is called suit today), the three-quarter heeled mocassin (called shoe today), wearing the caftan (greatcoat today) and using underwear, that was not the equipment of the European culture. Lot of writing left behind about our ancestors’ clothes (Gardhezi, Jayhani tradition, Istakr, emperor Leon the Wise, pope Sylvester II., etc.), who all emphasized our ancestors’ „spiffingness”. There were not much differences between the clothes of men and women according to the Innermost Asian traditions; also the Hungarian women wore panths till the end of 13th century, both sexes wore underwear. Accessory manwear was the caftan, hussar pelisse, mantle, sheepskin waistcoat, szokmány (tightly fitting short coat of the peasant attire), szűr (long embrodiered cloak of Hungarian shepherd), guba (coat made of course knotted cloth), sheepskin, backskin, sheepskin jacket, busby, boots, heeled shoe (not the European sandal or shoe) and the studded belt having knife, artifical decorated bag (tarsoly) and the bow hanging on. The women’s wear was based on more fine material, than men wear; the from fine material made shirt (pendely) was stitched on both sides and tied on the waist. Women also wore three-quarter (and in waist slimmed) kazak, low uppered soft boots, coronet and unbelievable much jewels; plait trappings (breast disc), pearls, ear rings, necklets, armlets, rings, leg- and armbands. The authors emphasize the „elegant” and „always clean” clothes of the plebs; the riches used a lot of silk, brocade and velvet to their clothes.

THE OLD COUNTRY AND THE TRANSIENT QUARTERS OF THE HUNGARIANS BEFORE ENTERING INTO THE CARPATHIAN BASIN

The Hungarians’ old country – the place where morphologically, physiologically, lingustically and culturally the same people live like the Hungarians – today’s Eastern Turkestan, the „Heart of Asia” („Innermost Asia”), specifically the Northern and Western confine of Gobi Desert, the Jungar Basin and the confine of Takla Makan. In this area between the 9th – 8th centuries BC was the Hunnic (Hsiung-nu) empire from 16, 19 or 24 tribes established, among the members were Turkish, Altaic and Iranian nations; also the ethnic group, that later under the name Onogur cored the Hungarian’s ancestors. The members of the Hunnic tribal federation were stock herding equestrian nations; the Chinese almanacs remember about them, as thereof in times of need horses, neats, sheep, wheat, can be bought for silk, china, gold, silver, black ink and powder, and who the agreements gouge „with their own characters” on wooden plates and dog skins. This Hunnic tribal federation splitted in 91 AD up. At this time seceded the Western Huns from them, who dwelled by the Innermost Asian river Chu first, than Romans called them in 361 AD into the Hungarian Plain, to keep the Sarmatians and Gepids in check. Their Great king, Attila was one of the greatest European rulers of the first Millenia. After his death in 453 AD, the remnant Huns processed to the Chigle Field (Mezőség), they are the ancestors of Szeklers. The first Innermost Asian Turkic tribal federation established with this, wherefrom the juan-juan nation and uniting the Innermost Asian uar („calico horsed”) nation as Avars in 568 AD than in two new waves occupied the Carpathian Basin. The wandering of the Hungarians’ ancestors from Innermost Asia starts with the nation – later Onogurs - seceding to move to West from the second Turkic federation and lasted until recapturing Pannonia in 895/96 (890?) AD.

Our ancestors’ first transient quarter supposedly was Turan in the end of the 3rd or beginning of 4th century AD. The often mentioned Turan Plain is the huge semidesertic steppe among South Urals, the Caspian-Sea, the Aral-Sea and the Tien San playing significant role in the past, trade routes of four world met in this area; the turnout of the legendary Silk Road from East, from Mesopotamia and Byzant from South East and the Souther Iranian routes converged here with the Eastern equestrian nations. This area was the meeting point, transient quarter and a kind of ethnic melting-pot of different nations. Our ancestros not only adjourned on the area of Turan, but also dwelled in it’s Northern part for a while in the neighborhood of the famous Kharesm, Kangju, Sogdia and Bactria. (Little remaining part of our ancestors here is the „tribe” group called „Madiar” and the location Majar Kislak). There are messages from the Arabian geographical writer Al-Makdisi and Abu Rayhan al-Biruni from this area. A lot can be known about our ancestors in this area from the writings of the autors, and could be if they would be translated and handled. Among other could be known that our ancestors in this time already had irrigative agriculture and developed herding.

Our ancestors’ next quarter was in the Caucasus. Xenophon, Prokopios (490-562 AD), Agathias (536-582 AD), Protector Menandros (6th century), Joshua the Stylite (6th century), The Chronicle of Edessa, Joannes Ephesinus (6th century) and before all the Armenian authors (Agathangelos, Phaustos Byzantios and Lazar of Farp) remember about the Huns and Hungarians dwelling there. Even the Armenian ruler St. Gregorius, "the Illuminator" (Gregor Lusavoritch), mentions our ancestors there in his ecclesiastic works; sadly the researchers don’t deal with the Armenian resources too deep. Kornél Bakay (1996) finds the importance of our dwelling there in the fact that „the old name Sabir of the Hungarians leads us into the Caucasus... the ancient Hungarians came from two ethincs into being; the Hungarian speaking Sabir-Huns and the Turkish speaking Onogur Turks” (now we know that the language of the Huns was also Onogur-Turkish). The group of Hungarians broken away to the Caucasus are the Savard Hungarians, to whom also monk Julianus started, before nearing Magna Hungaria. (Their location here is Majar, whereof Samuel Turkoly attracted the attention in 1825 AD).

Than our ancestors – or according to newer assumptions only a part of them - moved from the Caucasus to North East, Magna Hungaria, where they dwelled relatively short. Magna Hungaria matches to today’s Bashkiria and the areas to west. The marker gene researches prove the dwelling of our ancestors here, showing the Hungarian specific markers among Finno Ugrian nations, those missing from the Finnish and Ugrians. The monarchist prehistory derives the Hungarians from here without so much as our physiology, language and culture could be explainable from this area. In the times of Hungarian presence there, the Finno Ugrian nations had gleaning-fishing culture, that never characterized the stock herding equestrian Hungarians. In Bashkiria, in the territory of Kama and along the river Ingul the Hungarian burying-places confirm our ancestors’ dwelling here; significant burying place is the between 850-920 AD used Bolshie Tigani with 150 graves in the Volga-Kama territory, where our ancestors buried; monk Julianus got into this area in 1235 AD. „The Hungarian tribes joined with by the tribe Megyer – as readable by Istvan Fodor – presumably moved to South than west from the Bashkirian Magna Hungaria, crossing the Volga and dwelled in the area of river Don”.

Our ancestors’ migration’s next, relatively very short stage was the area between the Don-Donec Basin and the Meotis (Azovi) Sea, Levedia (Dentumogyer – „Don Magyar”?), called after chief Lebedias. Lately casted doubt on our ancestors’ dwelling in Levedia (Kornel Bakay), telling „A mythic ancestors is seen in Levedi... Levedia can not be a separate stage of the Hungarians’ migration”. The Hungarian mythology takes two of our myths here, the dream of Emese (the „legend of turul”) and the legend of Wondrous Stag (legend of Hunor and Magor). Even if we were in Levedia – in the neighborhood of Bulgarians and Khazars – our ancestors lived there „three years” altogether, as emperor Constantin wrote. The Hungarians this time „hired” twenty thounsand riderbowers out to the Khazarian ruler, that refers to the strong army and organisation of our ancestors. Certified Hungarian burying places from this territory didn’t turn up until now.

Our ancestors’ last quarter before entering into the Carpathian Basin was the Eastern, North Eastern foreground of the Carpathian Basin, Etelköz (Etelkuzu), which area is the territory of rivers Dneper, Dnester, Bug and Seret. The Hungarians ruled in the territory between the Khazarian Khaganate and the Carpathians this time. There was nothing changed in the Hungarians’ way of living comapred with the previously; reports Ibn Rusta: „The land of Hungarians is rich in trees and waters, their land is wet. They have much tillages...” Many author writes about the Hungarians’ dwelling in Etelköz (Jayhani tradition, Gardezi, Hudud al-Alam, etc.). In Etelköz dies Álmos, in Innermost Asia common bloodcovenant was contracted, „that is a definitive event before the settlement, forming the Hungarian tribes to one nation” (Gyula Laszlo) The importance of the bloodcovenant shows that the names of the seven high men („chiefs”) (Álmos, Előd, Kend, Ond, Tas, Huba, Tétény) were even noted by emperor Bíborbanszületett Konsztantín. Árpdá was chosen as leader, who deliberatelly reoccupied the ancient empire of Attila. „The nation of Árpád was not a raggedy-ass multitude of exiled hordes, but a deliberatelly and plannedly home changing rank, having great monarch Árpád in the lead, whose stem resulted excellent kings.” (Kornel Bakay)

The word „settlement” is relatively new flattered. Simon Kezai (1283) calls the moving in of Arpad’s nation to the Carpathian Basin as „remigration”, Janos Thuroczy (1488) as „return”, Istvan Szekely (1559) and Gaspar Heltai (1575) as „second entrance”. Our ancestors dwelled some 45 years in Etelköz, and the exact date of settlement calculated after the Byzantine solar eclipse was 895. (This statement came before the diet in 1892, but as the preparations of the milleniar festivals were not ready, the Hungarian government appointed year 1896 as the year of milleniar festivals). Europe was in the form of „disintegration” in the time of settlement. After Rome, Byzant was also weakened, there was no centralized power in Italy any more, The German-Roman Empire was established some decades after the settlement, so the Hungarians entered as a strong power in the European history. The Avar Empire in the Carpathian Basni broke off for about hundred years before the settlement, Avars lived strewn their calm village life. The plain part of the basin was „empty” except the autochton natives and the remained Avars, only the land of a Moravian count of a saxon shore called Svatopluk penetrated in the northern region, the Transylvanian salt mines were guarded by Bulgarian groups and Transdanube belonged to the Eastern spur of the Frank empire. The beginning of the Hungarians’ settlement were determined by more circumstances: in 894 AD an extreme muslim attack streamed in Eastern Europe, Byzant disappointed the Hungarians dwelling on the Balkan, a minor Pecheneg attack hit our ancestors, that still not influenced the procession foreplanned home acquisition, and finally the fact of death of the Moravian count of a saxon shore called Svatopluk in 894, so the Northern area of the Carpathian Basin became „free”. The settlement itself supposedly could happen in May 895, when the Hungarian tribes from their quarters in Etelköz on the closest road (ghat) (Verecke, Tömös, Ojtoz, Gyimes, Békás pass, Lower Duna, etc.) occupied the Upper Tisa area first, the three groups splitted from Khazarians calling themselves „kabar” („rioter”) occupied the Transylvania salt mines kept by Bulgarians, than with the claim of finality pushed into the Carpathian Basin. Transdanube was occupied by the Hungarians only after the death of Arnulf, Frank ruler, in 890 AD. After the occupation of Transdanube the whole Carpathian Basin got into the hands of Hungarians, this way can this year be meant as the end year of the settlement. The European significance of the settlement is that a nation originated from Innermost Asia, evolved on the border of Europe and Asia, calling themselves Magyar – „son of man” by it’s original meaning – getting the name Turk from the Greeks and the Ungar, Hungarus, Hun from other European nations, could create a firm constitutional state in the Carpathian Basin, that created a relatively peaceful and with rights ensured symbiosis for the nations under the Holy Crown, toward the European nations making efforts today. The new home is one of the most fruitful basin of the world, where the half a million large nation of Árpád together with the 300 thousands autochton natives and avars lived in peace than with them and with the settled nations formed the Hungarian nation. On the end of May 895 AD at Ópusztaszer took the first Hungarian diet, wherefrom (or from 890 AD, afther Transdanube’s occupation) deals the history and not the prehistory with the fate of Hungarians.

FALSE THEORIES IN THE HUNGARIAN PREHISTORY EXPLORATION

Nevertheless, the Hungarian prehistory is unambigously proven, many false theories tried to change, heroize, idealize or mostly degrade this past. Large measure of these history falsifications started from linguistics, but the theories of laymen hurted also a lot. However the language of a nation belongs to it’s ethnic criteria, can change language, even it’s culture can tone, but it’s physiology in the spell of the strict regulations of genetics will remain unchanged.

The most showy mistakes of the Hungarians’ origin befell from the linguistics. Afther the fact, that our ancestors dwelled in the territory where Finno-Ugrian nations live today; taking words from them during their stay placed the origin of the Hungarians to the finnougrian area. The first major unscientific push agains the Hungarian prehistory made by Johann Eberhard Fisher (1697-1771) with his unscientific statement (1768), that „the language of Estonians, Finnish, Lapps, Permis, Vots, Cheremis, Mordvins, Chuvash and Hungarians is common”. All these nations lived „in born wildness and crassness in the near past to his mind”. August Ludwig Schölzer (1735-1809) brought Fischer’s work into notoriety in his work published in 1771 stating, that „but the Hungarians have no own history”. The Hungarian theologist and astronomist Janos Sajnovics after observing passing of Venus before the sun on the island of Vardö wrote a lay linguistic essay about the Finnish-Hungarian-Lapp relationship. Than the jurist Antal Reguly collected folksongs on the land of Voguls. In 1870 AD in Budapest was the Finnougristic established with the support of the Academy in Vienna, where not the linguistic was handled any longer, but the Finnougrian origin was proclaimed. The great Finnougrian warrior of the 19th century was the saxon from Szepes Pal Hunfalvy (Hunsdorfer), who making common cause with Joseph Budenz committed to the Hungarians’ Finnougrian origin. Opposing him stood Ármin Vámbery for the Hungarians’ „Turkish” line, having many Hungarian explorers aside. Vámbéry stressed, that „the base, the core of the Hungarian language and nation is Turkish, and where a bit of Finnougrian sparses can be find are secondary, sojourner elements”. Sadly in the works of both explorers (Hunfalvy and Vambery) – actually adjudged – can be many false elements, dilettant statements find. So in the 19th century builded the Hungarian prehistory based on the false linguistics comparisms with the ideological support of the Monarhcy up. The ideological base was double, the Monarchy could handle a nation being not proud of it’s origin more easy on one hand, the other hand they supposed we are not „presentable” enough stressing our „Eastern” origin. The power supporting finnougrisms endures today and many of it’s representatives (Peter Hajdu, Pal Engel, Janos Pusztay, Antal Bartha, Istvan Fodor, Andras Róna-Tas and many others) scrum by this false theory. The „real” Hungarian prehistory before the 18th century, that derives the Hungarians from Innermost Asia, from the melting pot of the nations takes it’s worthy place these days again. The age of the classic Finnougrian prehistory is over, the modern science is serching for the truth. As Peter Sara (1994) expresses: „About our language, origin of our nation professed false theories must be reconsidered, redrawn, because the decisive majority of the basics of our language can’t be handled as stepson because of a false conception, even if this conception is defended by the mightiest powers and authorities”. Gyula Laszlo conceived of the Finnougrian prehistory like this: „If linguistics wouldn’t draw the attention of the explorers to the Obi-Ugrians, they would never search for our ancestors, relatives there by themselves... The language separates, our human being, and our beliefs bind us...”

Many other false theories appeared in parallel with Finnougrianism. Some part of them don’t count with how different the Hungarians are comparing to all other European nations, but concentrating on the autochton natives proclaim, that „the Hungarians getting the start of any others dwelled in the Carpathian Basin” (Adorján Magyar, Lajos Marjalaki Kiss). Some people assert the „Hungarian origin of the Hungarian language” (Sándor Csőke), to others (József Cserép, Jenő Csicsáky) mind the Hungarians derive „from the culture creating inhabitants of the sank continent”. To the mind of colonel Churchward, László Vámos Tóth (Bátor) and Andor Paposi-Jobb the geographical names all around the world are mostly Hungarians. The idea of the Egyptian origin of the Hungarians in newer phrasing published in the 3 volumes book of Tibor Barath (1973) written: „Most of the Eastern nations, so the Hungarians arrived not from Mesopotamia, but from the closer Egyptian culture era to the lands of Europe”. Geza Kun stood for the Etruscan Hungarian relationship, and to the mind of Ferenc Zajti „the ancien Scythian-Hun nation gave birth to the Hungarians”.

The Sumerian-Hungarian relationship had/have many representatives and followers (+Ida Bobula, +Viktor Padányi, Ferenc Badiny Jós, Kalman Gosztonyi, Sandor Csőke, +Andras Zakar, Mrs. Hary etc.). The origin of this theory explained by Ida Bobula this way: „When in the middle of the 19th century under the debris of Mesopotamia the frist written memories, the tiletable notched cuneiform and hieroglyphic text began to turn up, professionals recognized, that those against the Assyrian-Babylonian texts were written in a non semitic structured language. The language of „artificers of writing”, as in the beginning it was named, proved to be agglitunic structured. The pioneer orientalists, Oppert, Rawlinson, Sayce spoke about ancient Scythian, ancient Turanian language; the genie French scientist Lenormant decidedly propagated, that the language of „artificers of writing”, that he called Akkadian is closest to the Hungarian. This primelanguage will be the common explanatory of the Turanian languages; the same as the Sanskrit in the Indoeuropean family.”

REFERENCES

BAKAY KORNÉL (1997, 1998): Őstörténetünk régészeti forrásai. I. P. 302; II. P. 336. Miskolci Bölcsész Egyesület. Miskolc.

BAKAY KORNÉL (2000): Az Árpádok országa. Kőszeg. P. 512.

ENCYCLOPAEDIA HUNGARICA (1992, 1994, 1996) I-III. Főszerkesztő: Bagossy László. Hungarian Ethnic Lexicon Foundation. Calgary. P. 778, 786, 888.

KISZELY ISTVÁN (1979): Rassengeschichte von Ungarn. In: Schwidetzky, Ilse ed.: Rassengeschichte der Menschheit. R. Oldenburg Verlag. München-Wien. Pp. 1-50.

KISZELY ISTVÁN (1992): Honnan jöttünk? Elméletek a magyarság őshazájáról. Új Mandátum Könyvkiadó. Budapest. P. 460.

KISZELY ISTVÁN (1996): A magyarság őstörténete. Mit adott a magyarság a világnak. Püski Kiadó, Budapest. I-II. P. 860.

KISZELY ISTVÁN (2000, 2002, 2004): A magyarok eredete és ősi kultúrája. Püski Kiadó. Budapest. I-II. P. 1500.

KISZELY ISTVÁN (2004): A magyar ember. Püski Kiadó. Budapest. I-II. P. 980.

LÁSZLÓ GYULA (1999): Múltunkról utódainknak. I. A magyar föld és a magyar nép őstörténete. P. 573; II. Magyarok honfoglalása – Árpád népe Pp. 574-1036. Püski Kiadó. Budapest.