Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 26th, 2016, 04:48 PM   #1

Valens's Avatar
Imperfect Perfectionist
 
Joined: Feb 2014
From: Colonia Valensiana
Posts: 7,672
Blog Entries: 17
Were Magyars a Turkic tribe?


Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin in the IX century is usually regarded as the last major invasion event in European history in which the peoples from the east (Asia) permanently settled in Europe, though various other peoples from the steppes of Asia invaded Europe during the later Middle Ages, such as the Pechenegs of Cumans for example.

My question is, were the original Magyar (Hungarian) tribes which settled the Carpathian Basin of Turkic origin? Some sources claimed that the Magyars and their leaders were descendants of Attila's Huns, but can we consider them reliable?
Valens is offline  
Remove Ads
Old March 26th, 2016, 05:50 PM   #2
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Western Eurasia
Posts: 3,426

The 9th century Magyar tribal federation was heterogenous, there were both Finno-Ugric and Turkic tribes among them, the known early personal and tribe names show that. There could be other auxiliary peoples too from other nations. But apparently the Finno-Ugric element had to be dominant (majority or otherwise more influental) since we speak Hungarian, an Uralic language, though Constantine Porphyrogenitus also reports bilinguality existed among them. The political organization was Turkic, Khazar influenced.

Quote:
Some sources claimed that the Magyars and their leaders were descendants of Attila's Huns, but can we consider them reliable?
no, they are medieval tales. There is simply no historical data on what really the Hungarian tribes did before the 9th century, was any of them part of an earlier tribal federation or not, we can just speculate on it, but nothing is known what they did in the 4th-5th century. Árpád's father is already mentioned by Constantine to be Álmos, but the rest is legendary.
Though the first signs of an "Attila cult" apparently already existed in the later 11th century (there is a mention of an "Attila's sword" given as a gift by the Hungarian king), but what was its background, unknown. The rest of the Hunnic tales are only documented first time in the 13th century hungarian chronicle, most of it could be made up or just adaptation of other stories, partly western import etc.

Last edited by Tulun; March 26th, 2016 at 05:56 PM.
Tulun is offline  
Old March 26th, 2016, 05:51 PM   #3

oszkar777's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Apr 2013
From: spirits in a material world
Posts: 430

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valens View Post
Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin in the IX century is usually regarded as the last major invasion event in European history in which the peoples from the east (Asia) permanently settled in Europe, though various other peoples from the steppes of Asia invaded Europe during the later Middle Ages, such as the Pechenegs of Cumans for example.

My question is, were the original Magyar (Hungarian) tribes which settled the Carpathian Basin of Turkic origin? Some sources claimed that the Magyars and their leaders were descendants of Attila's Huns, but can we consider them reliable?
According to the main official theory being the Finno-Ugric theory, they were not of Turkic origin. But I think the Finno-Ugric theory mentions that they had encountered Turkic and Iranic peoples and that they had through these contacts made some developments with learning crop growing and quite a few words relating to agriculture seems to have entered the language. Interestingly Turkic people in history are generally asscociated with horse riding nomads but the word for horse in Hungarian is not of Turkic origin but Ugric/Uralic.

Perhaps there was quite a bit of ascociation with Turkic tribes and even assimilation of some Turkic tribes so maybe in that sense it could be said that in a sense the Hungarians were at a certain time at least partly Turkic, there is also the Onugur/ ten arrows asscociation theory too.
But its hard to say how much of these ideas have been exagerrated or embelished in the Turanian nationalistic consciousness thingy.The Finno Ugric theory was not well recieved in general by a lot of Hungarians.

I tend to think they were most likely not of Turkic origin , if they were then we must have an explanation for why they do not speak Turkic language and didnt join with other Turkic peoples. Possibly to some extent through asscociations and some assimilating of certain tribes they were at best part Turkic, but the Hungarians as we know assimilated lots of different folk I.E Slavs, Germanics etc. still Hungarians remain Hungarian so ultimatly I dont see them as being Turkic.

The Hunnic origin is even more controversial as well as the more out there alternative Hungarian origin theories like the Sumerians etc.

I still meet a lot of Hungarians in my fathers and uncles generations that dont seem to like the Finno-Ugric theory. I think many Hungarians still prefer the Hunnic,Turkic, Orientalists theories.

Last edited by oszkar777; March 26th, 2016 at 06:00 PM.
oszkar777 is offline  
Old March 26th, 2016, 08:46 PM   #4

Valens's Avatar
Imperfect Perfectionist
 
Joined: Feb 2014
From: Colonia Valensiana
Posts: 7,672
Blog Entries: 17

Thanks for the very interesting answers!
For me, the Finno-Ugric theory seems quite satisfying, as the language is perhaps the only solid argument for us to construct a somewhat viable theory about the origins of one people.

Also, what Tulun wrote about the Fino-Ugric element being dominant among the Magyar tribes, but the political organization being of Turkic origin.

Based on what I've read, we don't seem to have firm evidence of Árpád's historicity, nor of the early Hungarian leaders so much about the first century of Hungarian conquest is shrouded in mystery.
Valens is offline  
Old March 27th, 2016, 05:46 AM   #5

Barbarossa's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
From: Iudaea
Posts: 900

The Magyars were Finno-Ugric tribes from the Volga basin. The Hungarian language is part of the Uralic language family, spoken both west and east of the Ural mountains, and also featuring Estonian, Karelian, Finnish and the Sami languages among others.

The Uralic and Altaic (which Turkic is part of) language families are distantly related.

There were Daco-Ilyrian (Pannonian), Celtic (Cotinii), Iranian (Iazyges), Turkic (Huns, Avars, Cumans) and Slavic (Slovak, Chorbat) influences on the Hungarian culture, probably less so on the Hungarian language.

Hungarians are truly diverse.
Barbarossa is offline  
Old March 27th, 2016, 06:25 AM   #6

History Craft's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2015
From: Romania
Posts: 1,637

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbarossa View Post
There were Daco-Ilyrian (Pannonian), Celtic (Cotinii), Iranian (Iazyges), Turkic (Huns, Avars, Cumans) and Slavic (Slovak, Chorbat) influences on the Hungarian culture, probably less so on the Hungarian language.

Extremely small influences on the language as well.

Last edited by History Craft; March 27th, 2016 at 06:28 AM.
History Craft is offline  
Old March 27th, 2016, 07:31 AM   #7
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Budapest
Posts: 177

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valens View Post
Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin in the IX century is usually regarded as the last major invasion event in European history in which the peoples from the east (Asia) permanently settled in Europe, though various other peoples from the steppes of Asia invaded Europe during the later Middle Ages, such as the Pechenegs of Cumans for example.

My question is, were the original Magyar (Hungarian) tribes which settled the Carpathian Basin of Turkic origin? Some sources claimed that the Magyars and their leaders were descendants of Attila's Huns, but can we consider them reliable?

Than ask the population geneticists, why have all surrounding countries (exc. Austria) higher ratio of typically non-European haplogroup markers than Hungarians.

Last edited by JanosPeter2; March 27th, 2016 at 07:43 AM.
JanosPeter2 is offline  
Old March 27th, 2016, 07:34 AM   #8
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Budapest
Posts: 177

These lunatic ideas grew up from ridiculous fairly tales like Hunor Magor myth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunor_and_Magor
JanosPeter2 is offline  
Old March 27th, 2016, 07:38 AM   #9
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Budapest
Posts: 177

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbarossa View Post
The Magyars were Finno-Ugric tribes from the Volga basin. The Hungarian language is part of the Uralic language family, spoken both west and east of the Ural mountains, and also featuring Estonian, Karelian, Finnish and the Sami languages among others.

The Uralic and Altaic (which Turkic is part of) language families are distantly related.

There were Daco-Ilyrian (Pannonian), Celtic (Cotinii), Iranian (Iazyges), Turkic (Huns, Avars, Cumans) and Slavic (Slovak, Chorbat) influences on the Hungarian culture, probably less so on the Hungarian language.

Hungarians are truly diverse.

The problem of the rejected ural-altaic theory, that there are no more proofs for the relation between uralic and altaic languages, than between uralic and indo-european languages.


Pannonia name came from an ancient roman province (Pannonia), however . only the western part of the territory of modern Hungary (the so-called Transdanubia) formed part of the ancient Roman Province of Pannonia; this comprises less than 29% of modern Hungary, therefore Hungarian geographers avoid the terms "Pannonian Basin" and "Pannonian Plain".

There were no dacians in Pannonia (western Hungary)


"Iranian (Iazyges), Turkic (Huns, Avars, Cumans)"

Huns disappeared centuries before the Hungarians arrival, Avars also disappeared before the arrival of Hungarians, Cumans were exterminated by Ottomans and Hungarian forces during the "great Turkish Wars" in the 1680s.

Last edited by JanosPeter2; March 27th, 2016 at 08:26 AM.
JanosPeter2 is offline  
Old March 27th, 2016, 09:10 AM   #10

Valens's Avatar
Imperfect Perfectionist
 
Joined: Feb 2014
From: Colonia Valensiana
Posts: 7,672
Blog Entries: 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by JanosPeter2 View Post
Than ask the population geneticists, why have all surrounding countries (exc. Austria) higher ratio of typically non-European haplogroup markers than Hungarians.
We don't discuss genetics here, nor I believe that the study of genetics is relevant to historic research.
Valens is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
magyars, tribe, turkic



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I don't get the Magyars Piccolo Medieval and Byzantine History 106 April 1st, 2016 06:31 AM
Did Alexander the Great ever fight against a Turkic tribe? Temple of time War and Military History 1 January 27th, 2014 11:51 AM
History of the Magyars Mischef_Managed History Book Reviews 0 December 18th, 2011 08:48 AM
Magyars in Europe. BrowniesRule Medieval and Byzantine History 4 May 12th, 2010 07:22 AM
The Magyars CelticBard Medieval and Byzantine History 2 September 23rd, 2009 02:39 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.