Huns and Hungarians

A jenyiszejiekkel kapcsolatban, mindössze egy hsziungnu–jenyiszeji etimológia alapján, elsőként Ligeti (1950) feltételezte, hogy a hsziungnu nép leszármazottai voltak. Pulleyblank (1962) ugyanezt állította több fonológiai és etimológiai bizonyíték felmutatásával. Jelen tanulmány megállapítja, hogy tíz magyar alapszótőnek ténylegesen van etimológiai megfelelője a jenyiszeji nyelvekben. Ésszerű azt feltenni, hogy ezek az etimonok egy hun szubsztrátumhoz tartoznak, amely rokonságban áll a jenyiszejivel. Ezen tíz újonnan felfedezett magyar és jenyiszeji közös etimológia között szabályos hangváltozást lehet kikövetkeztetni három szónál: A magyar -ó (-ava-) rím összefüggésbe hozható a proto-jenyiszeji *-Vgǝ rímmel (tó – *degǝ, hó – *qogǝ ’jég’, só – *t’ǝgǝ). A szabályos hangváltozás megerősíti az etimológiai kapcsolatot a magyar és a jenyiszeji között. Az összes újonnan azonosított magyar és jenyiszeji közös etimológia az alapszókincshez tartozik, és a magyarban alapvetően használatos. Ezek nem lehetnek kölcsönszavak sem a jenyiszejiből a magyarba, sem a magyarból a jenyiszejibe a két nyelv nagy földrajzi távolsága miatt. [The Hungarian version of Gao 2012-2013 "Huns and Xiongnu identified by Hungarian and Yeniseian shared etymologies"]

Bulgar diye anılan boylar birlikteliğinin oluşumunda ve Magna (Büyük) Bulgar ile Tuna Bulgar devletlerinin kurucu unsurları arasında yer alan Onogurlar, Oğuzların kardeşi ve batı kolu olan Ogurlara mensup idiler. Avrupa Hun Devleti’nin yıkılış sürecinde Onogurlar başta olmak üzere Ogur boyları kolayca Karadeniz’in kuzeyin- deki bozkırlara yayıldılar. Onogurlar, Macarlarla beraber Hazar Bozkırı’ndan geçip Kafkaslar’a Kuban Bozkırı’na göçtüler. Onogurlar, Ugor-Macarlara siyasi, askeri ve kültürel bakımdan tesir etmişler, onları da kendileriyle beraber güneye sürükle- mişlerdir. Orta Asya’dan Doğu Avrupa coğrafyasına göç eden Ogurların yaşadıkları yerler İtil Nehri ile Karadeniz arasındaki bozkır bölgesinde Hazar Denizi’nin kuzey- batı kıyısında ve Kuban Nehri civarındaydı. Onogurlar Karadeniz’in kuzeyindeki ticarette rol oynamışlardır. Doğu Romalıların tahminen VII. yüzyılda başladıkları misyonerlik faaliyetleri sonucunda Onogurlar arasında Hristiyanlık yayılmaya baş- lamıştır. Bunun sonucunda Onogur Piskoposluğu dahi tesis edilmiştir. Onogurlar, yaşadıkları sahalarda askeri ve siyasi olarak değil, ticari yönleri ve şehirler kuracak sosyo-kültürel birikimleriyle dikkat çekmişlerdir.
Tarih Dergisi, Sayı 65 (2017 / 1), İstanbul 2017, s. 1-18

COMPOSITION OF BULGARIA AND THE POSITION OF
ONOGURES ON THE COURSE OF THE BULGARIAN STATES
The Onogures, the brother of the Oguz, and the Ogur, the west line, were among
the founding elements of the Bulgarian union called the Bulgarians and the founders of the Magna (Great) Bulgarian and Danube Bulgarian states .In the process of
the collapse of the European Hun State, Onogures, especially Ogur, spread easily
to the steppes in the north of the Black Sea.The Onogurs, together with the Hungarians, passed through the Caspian Steppe and emigrated to the Kuban Steppes in
the Caucasus. Onogurs , Ugor-Hungarian political, military and cultural influence,
they have dragged them along with them to the south. The places where the Ogur
migrated from Central Asia to Eastern Europe were located on the north-west coast
of the Caspian Sea and near the Kuban River in the steppe region between the Itil
River and the Black Sea. The Onogurans played a role in the trade in the north of
the Black Sea. As estimated, the Eastern Romans in VIIth century, as a result of the
missionary activities they started in the century, Christianity began to spread among
Onogurlar. As a result, even the bishop of Onogur was established. The Onogurs
attracted attention not only military and politically, but also their commercial aspects
and their socio-cultural accumulation in cities

The present paper is a continued and enlarged version of the same title by the same author published in Central Asiatic Journal 56 (2012/2013). This approach identifies Hungarian and Yeniseian shared etymologies (etyma) and discusses their common Hunnic origin (including Huns and Xiongnu). Using etymological methods, the present study has demonstrated 30 Hungarian and Yeniseian shared etymologies. Some of them form six (6) consonant correspondences and two (2) vowel correspondences, altogether eight (8) regular sound correspondences with sound changes. These regular sound correspondences validate the etymological connection between Hungarian and Yeniseian. This Hungarian-Yeniseian etymological connection supports the Hunnic language continuum.

Line of Red Dragon:A few years ago, in 2007, two fortresses situated between Iranian Highland and Gumisan city, were found by the archaeologists of Edinburgh, Durham and Iranian Universities, in Iran. They could not find its name in historical sources, and thus christened it "Red Dragon" because of colour of the bricks. These were also called Gorgan wall, after the geographic name Gorgan that was erected to protect Persian soldiers and inhabitants from White Huns or Hephtalites, who invaded the eastern borders of Persia. It's another part, the Tammish-fortress, spread over the southern part of Caspian Sea, defended Persian Empire from Huns through the shore of Caspian Sea and Elburz-mountain passes. The fort is in modern Tammishah on the eastern border of Tabaristan adjoining Gorgan. Emperor Khusrou Anushirvan built a causeway to Gorgan and Khurasan over the marshes facing the Caspian to protect or to block the nomadic incursions into Persia, and it worked well even ti...

In this paper, the author shall deal with the Hungarian variants of dualistic world creation myths. The aim of this paper is to shed some light on the nature of the connection between the Central‐East European Hungarian and South‐East European Romanian and Bulgarian myth variants. The Hungarian pieces are the westernmost variants of the dualistic creation myth‐group. Geographically, they stand close to the Romanian variants, but the serious motivational differences between the Romanian and Hungarian variants show that the descent of the two oral narrative groups are distinct. Both the Hungarian and the Romanian variants show similarities with the Bulgarian world creation myths, however, geographically they do not relate tightly. This is why a possible explanation of these correlations is, that the Hungarian and the Bulgarian myths have common Central Eurasian, South‐Eastern Siberian origins, upon which starting from the sixth to the seventh centuries the super strata of various gnostic influences have settled.

The ancient Hungarian chronicles, written in the royal court, mention that ancestors of the Hungari-ans, namely Scythians and Huns, lived in the regions of Caucasus, and belonged to Nimrod, the first legendary king of the world. He could have been a real powerful king, because other nations of the region claimed relationship with him. Hungarians said that Nimrod's two sons, while chasing a magical stag, approached northward, kidnapped the daughters of the Alanian kings and settled down near the Meotic swamp. According to the Hungarian tradition, a large group of Savards/Sabirs left the Trans-Caucasus region and preserved their ancient culture and language as well. They lived there for a short period of time due to overpopulation. Huns gathered their elected leaders and decided to move westward to Pannonia, where they established the centre of the Hun state. Some scholars think that story was preserved as an epic and was sang by storytellers in the royal court. From the late 19th century some German and Hungarian scholars questioned the authenticity of the Hungarian chronicles, but at the end of 20th century the contemporary archaeological finds and local historical sources certified the accuracy of their reports. The modern sciences such as anthropology and DNA profiling also proved the ancestors of Hungarians lived in the regions of the Caucasus. Аннотация. В древних венгерских хрониках, написанных при королевском дворе, упоминается, что предки венгров, а именно скифы и гунны, жили на Кавказе и происходили из рода Нимрода, первого леген-дарного правителя мира. Он действительно мог быть могущественным правителем, так как и другие народы региона утверждают о своем родстве с ним. Венгры говорят, что два сына Нимрода в погоне за магическим оленем забрели на север, «похитили» дочерей аланских царей и основали новое поселение на Меотийских болотах. Согласно венгерским преданиям, большая группа людей, Саварды/Сабиры, покинула Закавказье и сохранила свою культуру и язык. Они жили там непродолжительное время из-за перенаселения. Гунны во главе со своими вождями решили двинуться на запад к Паннонии, где основали центр государства Гуннов. Некоторые ученые считают, что эта история сохранилась в виде эпоса и пелась сказителями при королевском дворе. С конца XIX века венгерские ученые сомневались в правдоподобности венгерских хроник, но в конце XX века археологические находки и местные исторические источники подтвердили сведения хроник. Современ-ные науки, такие как антропология и генетические исследования, также подтвердили, что предки венгров жили на Кавказе.

The empires from the Altai to the Khingan mountains never refered to the dynasties that preceded them as their ancestors. Every empire started a new page in history. Every ruling house of these empires traced back their origin to a mythical ancestor, Chinggis khan and his descendants, and never mentioned the (Asian) Huns as their ancestors or as the source of their legitimacy. In the 13th century the Mongols considered that Chinggis’ ancestor was a bluewolf born by the order of Heaven. From the 17th century on, Chinggis’ origin, due to Buddhist influence, was traced back to the first Indian king. During the same century the main part of the Mongols submitted to the Manchus and started to read old Chinese works about the Asian Huns. They recognized that the Huns lived in the same place as the Mongols, thus they made connection between the Asian Huns and the Mongols, except for the the elite, who, assuming different origins for the elite and the common people, traced back their origin to India via Chinggis khan. The idea of Hun–Mongol connection appeared in Rasipuncug’s Bolor Erike (1775), but could not become widespread among the Mongols, because the Mongol elite was not interested in the origin of their subjects. Thus, the Asian Hun tradition can not be seen as an old heritage. Demonstrably based on Chinese sources, this idea appeared and flourished only in the 18th century.

СЛЕДЫ ГУННОВ В ИБЕРИИ Великий союз всадников-гунны-создали сильную империю во Внутренней Азии. Некоторые их ветви постепенно переместились на запад с I века до н.э., и достигли края Европы или Кавказского региона, где и обосновались. Многие уче-ные отрицали, что гунны долгое время оставляли следы в этом регионе, несмотря на то, что считается, что его населяли сарматы и аланы. Недавние археологические сравнительные исследования и антропологический результат подтвердили их при-сутствие не только в северной части Кавказа, но и на Южном Кавказе. Основываясь на этих результатах, я искала дополнительные доказательства древнего поселения гуннов, поскольку была уверена, что там жили гунны, ввиду того, что венгерские хроники средневековья фиксировали историю маеотического региона, связываю-щего странствия венгерского народа. Во время моих исследований я выявила обще-го предка кавказских иберийских и венгерских королей-великого охотника Ним-рода. Между тем, венгерская хроника связывала Нимрода с гуннами, грузинские археологические находки-полихромный стиль-показали сходство с небротидных сокровищ с гуннами, что не может являться совпадением. Более того, я обнаружила три значительных сходных мотива как на Кавказе, во Внутреннем Азии, так и в Карпатском бассейне, которые связаны с гуннами. Таким образом, древнее присут-ствие гуннов на территории Южного Кавказа, современной Грузии, было подтвер-ждено четырьмя дисциплинами позднего античного периода.

Second issue of new academic journal. Studia Turkica Mongolica Tibetica Manchurica Sibirica Russica et cetera.

Tartaria Magna is a peer reviewed e-journal in Russian. Editors accept papers and reviews in English and provide Russian translation. We may consider publication of the papers and reviews that have been published in other journals within the period of 3 years. More info: www.tartaria-magna.ru

Mátyás Bél (1684–1749), the famous historian from Hungary, paid a good deal of
attention throughout his life to the genesis of the Hungarian language and alphabet, as
well as to the origins of the Hungarian nation itself. As for the roots of the Hungarian
language, Bél’s most important means of inquiry was Hebrew comparison on a Biblical basis (that is, comparing the individual languages to Hebrew), a method which had long been dominant in Europe but was already on the wane in the time of Bél. In support of it he elaborated a particular theory of his own. According to it Japheth, the ancestor of the Scythians and (in his interpretation) of the Hungarians, did not take part in the construction of the tower of Babel, and consequently his descendants preserved the “Adamic language”, that is, Hebrew, which would account for the “relationship” between Hebrew and Hungarian. The aim of Bél was to find a, possibly illustrious, place for the Hungarian language, generally unknown and thus regarded as barbarous, on the great linguistic tree, and to determine its position with regard to Hebrew and other languages. The same aim was served by the supposed relationship between the Székely (Szekler) runic writing and the ancient eastern alphabets, before all Hebrew; the Hungarians, and their supposed ancestors, the Huns and the Scythians, could thus be presented as nations of a very ancient culture.
As for the origins of the nation, Bél stuck to his opinion throughout his life,
proclaiming as he did that the Hungarians were of a Hun–Scythian–Avar origin. His
stubbornness should presumably be accounted for by the fact that the new theories
arguing for the Finno–Hungarian linguistic and ethnic relationship (Leibniz, Bayer)
were then still far from solidly established. Consequently, Bél continued to adhere to
the old theory, but wished to present it in a new form. Making use of the ancient and
medieval narrative works, he intended to breathe new life into the concept of
Scythian–Hun–Avar–Hungarian identity, and thereby to offer a critical prehistory of
scientific character, by elaborating similarities in lifestyle between the Hungarians and
their Scythian and Hun predecessors. The model he followed was probably Clüver’s
Germania antiqua. By attenuating the descriptions of Ammianus, and emphasizing the
neutral or positive remarks by Priscus, he tried to neutralise the negative overtones of
Scythian, and especially of Hun origins, for the negative image of the Huns was utterly
detrimental to the contemporary view of the Hungarians. Bél, of Slovak origins,
attributed a role to the “Slavs” (Slovaks) as well in his prehistorical conception: he
identified them as the Sarmatians and accordingly regarded them as indigeneous.
However, he argued that the Slavs had entered into an alliance, and even merged, with
both the Huns and the Hungarians, a reflection of the concept of the “host nation”
which characterised contemporary Slovak thinking. The origin of the Slovaks is but an
additional element in the theory of Bél, his major aim being the elaboration of a
representative and at the same time apologetical prehistory of the Hungarians.
The scholarly stance of Bél is in keeping with that of the so-called contemporary
Hungarus intellectuals: he regarded as his task to fight off foreign critiques and to
represent the Hungarian point of view in the international scientific discourse. Yet, in
contrast to his contemporaries, he took the field of history instead of literature and the
history of science. It is thus a protagonist of “Hungarus historiography” and “Hungarus
historical linguistics” that we have every reason to admire in his person.

The European Hun Empire, which determinates the late ancient European politics, established its centre in the Carpathian basin, from where Hun Emperors governed both the Eastern and Western wings (The western wing stretches from present-day Austria to Rhone-river, the eastern wing stretches from Tisa-river to Caucasus-mountain). The late ancient chronicles gave us a detailed report on Attila’s deeds and campaigns. Unfortunately, only some fragments remained on those Huns, who settled down in the Carpathian basin. In the second half of the 19th century some Western-European historians created a special theory on the fast disappearance of the Huns from there, but it lacked any real evidences. In my paper I am trying exploring the traces of the Huns in the Carpathian basin or former Hungarian Kingdom. I recline upon some late ancient sources and Hungarian historical chronicles of Middle Ages, reports of contemporary Byzantine and Gothic sources and I used archaeological findings and anthropological surveys.

A reexamination of the story of Attila and Honoria, published in a Festschrift for Walter Kaegi: Christian Raffensperger and David Olster, eds., Radical Traditionalism: The Influence of Walter Kaegi in Late Antique, Byzantine, and Medieval Studies (Lanham: Lexington Books, 2019): 97-114.

Attila, frequently called Attila the Hun, was the ruler of the Huns from 434 until his death in March 453. He was also the leader of a tribal empire consisting of Huns, Ostrogoths, Alans and Bulgars, among others, in Central and Eastern Europe.

During his reign, he was one of the most feared enemies of the Western and Eastern Roman Empires. He crossed the Danube twice and plundered the Balkans, but was unable to take Constantinople. His unsuccessful campaign in Persia was followed in 441 by an invasion of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, the success of which emboldened Attila to invade the West. He also attempted to conquer Roman Gaul (modern France), crossing the Rhine in 451 and marching as far as Aurelianum (Orléans) before being stopped in the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains.

He subsequently invaded Italy, devastating the northern provinces, but was unable to take Rome. He planned for further campaigns against the Romans, but died in 453. After Attila's death, his close adviser, Ardaric of the Gepids, led a Germanic revolt against Hunnic rule, after which the Hunnic Empire quickly collapsed.
He would live on as a character in Germanic heroic legend.

The communication was one of the most important elements for great empires from the ancient times, the kings or rulers were able to get connected their provinces. The relay system was established in antiquity, it was one of the great innovations of the equestrian steppe empires , and at certain intervals stops were established, reserved specifically for equestrian envoys. The earliest source data on communications in the Inner-Asian region is found in the Chinese Chronicles, where in relation to the Huns and their descendants, it says that on arrival at the emperor's court, the envoy had to provide a certain object in order to prove their identity. It was the first diplomatic passport, which provided exemptions and special rights for their holders. We find data on the fact that not only in Inner Asia, but the Huns living in Europe have also operated such an advanced communication system.

In diesem Band, der die Ergebnisse eines gleichnamigen internationalen Symposiums an der Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz bietet, versuchen WissenschafterInnen der Universitäten Graz, Wien, Bonn, und Münster einen fundierten und allgemein verständlichen Überblick über Aspekte steppennomadischer Herrschaftsbildung. Beiträge über die Reichsgründung und deren Folgen bei den Hunnen Attilas (Klaus Tausend) sowie bei den Awaren und Ungarn (Walter Pohl) liefern Grundlagen zum Verständnis über Entstehung und Verfall steppennomadischer Imperien. Der Schwerpunkt des Bandes aber ruht auf den Mongolen und dabei insbesondere auf Tschinggis Khan, der 1206 zum Gebieter über die Völker in den Filzwandzelten erhoben wurde. Auf Basis reich fließender Quellen beleuchtet Veronika Veit die Person des mongolischen Reichsgründers genauer. Daran anschließend fragt Johannes Gießauf, was wusste Europa von Tschinggis Khan bzw. was glaubte man von ihm zu wissen? „Eroberungen“ ganz anderer Art thematisiert Johannes Steiner, wenn er das Verhältnis Tschinggis Khans zum weiblichen Geschlecht beleuchtet. Hartmut Rüß liefert in weiterer Folge eine Analyse der Auswirkungen des „Mongolensturms“ auf die Kiever Rus’ und der Rezeption desselben in der russischen Literatur- und Geschichtswissenschaft. Zum Abschluss des Bandes gibt Katharina Ganster einen profunden Überblick über steppennomadische und insbesondere mongolische Bewaffnung.
Bestellungen zum Preis von € 15.- sind jederzeit möglich unter: johannes.giessauf(at)uni-graz.at