Ancient Hungarians: Origins, Culture and Rise of the Magyars

The political history of Europe was mostly shaped by two phenomena: large, consolidated kingdoms and empires on the one hand and migratory movements from the north and east on the other. While the former is well-known to the public, the many migrations, especially from Asia, are rarely talked about if we leave out the Huns of Attila. Seemingly, after the disintegration of the Hunnic Empire, the migrations by steppe peoples lost importance. But as a matter of fact, the dissolution of the Huns paved the way for even more migrations. Beginning in the 550s, many steppe peoples like the Avars, Göktürks, Bulgars, Pechenegs, and Kipchaks entered the European continent. In between, a particular group called “Magyars” also entered the European continent. They would go on to form the core of Hungarian identity.
The Magyar’s early history was marked by interactions with Turkic empires, shaping their cultural and political development and even writing system. But the most important state was the Göktürk Empire, under which the Magyars lived for nearly a century before moving further west. Passing through modern-day Ukraine, they arrived in the Carpathian Basin - the former home of the Huns. There, the Magyar developed their language, customs, and governance with noticeable Turkic influences. This era saw the rise of important Magyar leaders and the establishment of a distinct political entity. One of the most important leaders was Árpád, who successfully conducted this conquest and founded the eponymous Árpád dynasty. Later, Stephen’s conversion to Christianity and establishment of the Kingdom of Hungary were monumental in solidifying the Magyar presence in Europe.
The subsequent history of the Hungarians is well known. But the era of the ancient Magyars is often overlooked - and complicated. It is time to shed light on these nomadic stepp warriors and establish some facts. First, we’ll explain the geographical origins of the first Magyar tribes and try to understand why they migrated in the first place. Then, we will delve into early Magyar culture and analyze if and how much it had in common with the Finno-Ugric and Turkic cultures. We’ll see how Magyar and Hungarian identity changed over time. And we’ll lastly answer the question if the Hungarians, as their name suggests, really are descendants of Attila and the Huns.
Visit my site: khansden.net
Become a member (Nöker): Patreon.com/khansden
Buy my book: amzn.to/3fwqmKR
Follow me: / thekhansden
Chapters:
00:00 Intro: Steppe Invasions and the Magyars
02:45 The Names "Hungary" and "Magyar"
05:48 Origin Theory 1: Finno-Ugric (Uralic)
08:03 Origin Theory 2: Turkic (Central Asian)
11:04 Origin Theory 3: Mixed
15:36 Culture and Religion
18:10 Parallels to Nordic and Turkic Cultures
21:57 A Word from Emre
22:31 Magyar Migration into Europe
32:10 The Magyar Conquests in Europe
35:30 The Huns and Hungarians
44:50 Conclusion

[@KhansDen]

This video was supposed to be 24 minutes long. But the more research I conducted, there more excited I got about Magyar history. So here it is, with 47 minutes runtime my longest video since 2021. Still I was forced to cut out a part about the Sarmatians and their connections to the Magyars - a remnant of that topic can be seen in the first world map at the beginning of the video. Forgive me, Magyar friends. I hope that you, especially, enjoy this one nonetheless. I might have missed an event or important person here and there. Tell me in the comments below, and I'll consider it for a follow-up video in the future. On this occasion, please consider joining my revived Discord server. Over there, we like to discuss history about the steppe and Turkic peoples, ancient primary sources, DNA research and so on. There's even a "Research" group where you can, if you feel like it, contribute to one of the future projects. --> discord.gg/mwqE8dTcFq

[@janosszentpeteri1922]

Pechenegs amd the Besenyő are the same?

[@attilatasciko4817]

​​​@@janosszentpeteri1922< igen , yes , ők a mai bosnyákok - bosnians .-> P-B= same : pecsenyegs : magyarul "becses nyék" néptörzsűnk , hátunk mögött követő " hátvédők " . -> több nyék törzsből vannak , mint mi [ 107+ 3-5 ] pesenyek -> besenyek -> bosonyákok -> bosnyákok : bősz-nyék : " bosnyákok - egyik néptörzsűk . Stb...

[@attilatasciko4817]

15:30= " non - turkic ..." muslims in general -> ‽

[@attilatasciko4817]

16:00= the very original belief of us - hungarians : cosmology: within the sun as good-"god" with respect , and the eartly made fire worship , sun who give life to every living thing , to live ! Not realy the side effect tengriism . This come from the other branch , when the iceage hit europe , one original carpatian basin people went to south to africa ( nilus river statue on it : makari people ) from there they went to middle east - sumeria , the are the s(z)aburians asfaloids branch people , those who went trought the cau( kő ) casus montains to reunite with in altai - altáj ( al talaji - not mountainious ) place with their relatives . Together they came back to the original place where they use to live before the iceage , the nowdays called carpatian basin . Etc...

[@attilatasciko4817]

17:18= not truth ! Even today folks tale clearly say = ördögűzők - ördűnglők- ördög döngölők . That's exactly the opposite of worshiping the devil - ördög ! Need to know why ? Because we present and show the evil , the devil to fight against him and his spirit , we don't hidding the represent the enemy , just like the natives in north and south america , and other continent .So this is clearly an other misconseption . Etc...

[@Horizontal77]

匈牙利人认为自己是匈奴的兄弟国家。匈奴人和匈牙利人的祖先是同一个人。另一方面，阿瓦尔人认为自己是匈奴人的后裔，特兰西瓦尼亚的塞克勒人也是如此。匈牙利人和阿瓦尔人在喀尔巴阡盆地联合。因此，匈牙利人之间的匈奴联系得到了加强。

[@laszlobalint5047]

Érdekes, hogy a kárpát medencében a dél dunántúli avar kori temetőkben fellelt emberanyag genetikája 80% ban megegyezik a mai székely emberek genetikájával. Ma is élnek avarok Dagesztánban, Kaukázusban, saját nyelvükön maglarülal "магларулал" ami highlander hegyi embert jelent. Hangzásban a "magyar" és a "магларулал" hasonló.

[@stogies3]

big stinkin’. onsense

[@abdulhakimsaid9264]

A Magyarok akarnak pihenny ,hagyon ököt csöndben maradyanak, tisztelettel ❤

[@tiborkarpati312]

值得一提的是，兄弟情不仅仅指血缘关系，还包括人们是否视对方为兄弟并以此为依据的判断。The DNA test won't show the result of this.

[@tiborkarpati312]

There is a tradition in Hungary. It is called "komaság" it can be vary. Those who have no blood in common may be familiar. I think so blood oath makes a similar connection between nations on the steppe.

[@belanagyabonyi3473]

Turk ve Macar Kardes! Not all Huns where Hungarian, but all Hungarians where Hun.

[@louisgerber]

🇭🇺❤️🇹🇷

[@stogies3]

nonsense

[@ronaldgrove3283]

Huns were early forebearers. Documentary here says the last Magyar leader in Hungary, became Christian and the first King of Hungary ?

[@oddindian1]

@@ronaldgrove3283 King Stephen (St. Stephen) was the first King of Hungary. However he was not the first King in Pannonia from his family line. Before King Stephen it was the Magyar confederacy. The title was something like Grand Prince. His ancestor Arpad was the first ruler in Pannonia (modern Hungary).

[@stogies3]

@@ronaldgrove3283 That is clearly incorrect

[@Baso-sama]

thank you for making a video about us, it is always nice to see someone putting energy into this topic. there are a couple of things which are still up to debate, but it would not be fair to pick apart the perceived inaccuracies due to the tentative nature of the finer details and the obscurity of the studies and knowledge supporting those details. all in all a well put together work with logical consistency and generally in a good direction. especially the take on türk vs ugric origins: well it can be both. lastly, i am pretty sure there will be rude comments from some of my compatriots who have lower impulse-control, but don't let those comments take away your curiosity and enthusiasm about the subject. thanks again, cheers! :)

[@viktorpal1466]

I feel the same. But i foresee some envious slavic and orc comments too..

[@turktarihi266]

I was waiting for this video since the Bulgars one, because you said you were not doing Balkan history anymore. I was exited for this video, Thanks!

[@KhansDen]

Well, as Hungary is not part of the Balkans geographically, it is still a technically correct statement ;-)

[@qwerty99730]

Thank you for taking the time to make this video! The whole truth would probably require a time machine,and even if there were, some details would probably be left out! Tengri be with you !

[@warlordaguszto5326]

I have been waiting for the Magyars to be covered for some time now. As a Hungarian wanting to learn more of my roots I am Greatful that u took the time to talk about us. 🎉🇭🇺🔥

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

I shared here hungarian chronic details and more.

[@warlordaguszto5326]

@@childabductioninitaly8946 ight I will read

[@Peter-lk3cp]

Asimilated Slavs.

[@Peter-lk3cp]

Asimilated Slavs.

[@warlordaguszto5326]

Huh

[@xogunatobrasil456]

Great video. A suggestion for future topics, you can talk about the Crimean Khanate, it has an interesting but little-known history, and it had an important relationship with the Ottoman Empire.

[@burqut]

This video was well presented, informative and engaging. Thank you for creating it and please continue to produce more.

[@a1n9t8o9]

Finally some real content on this subject! Well done!

[@danielmagyar2028]

What a well done video, brother! Thank you for covering our history!

[@umitisildak6359]

Helal olsun sana. Eline, emegine saglik.

[@louisgerber]

Nagyon szep Video ❤

[@karolysimon6106]

In 2020, new research on the genetics of the Huns appeared, which collected significantly more material on this people. French and Mongolian scientists published the results of their research in one of the most popular genetic journals in the world - Human Genetics. According to research, the Huns were a mixed Eurasian population of Siberian Scythians (originally the Andronovo archaeological culture), which included the descendants of the Aryan (R1a) and Proto-Turkic peoples (Q), as well as haplotypes that were directly related to the Hungarian conquerors - the Magyars (N ). That is, the Huns who invaded Europe united three different tribal formations of Eurasian steppe nomads.

[@lajoszsommd1526]

In forming a nation's identity, culture, religion, worldview and consequent lifestyle is way more important than genetics and language. I as a Cuman Hungarian have zero connection to Finns and Estonians, but tons of shared traditions with the great cultures of the steppe. Nearly all Hungarian folklore including music and artisanship is based on Eastern steppe tradition according to both Vámbéry's observation and common knowledge. German scholars stink of narrow mindedness, oversimplification, ignorance and provincialism, although Western science in general is hardly better ( I am a scientist, so I know). One of my son is called Árpád, the other Zoltán Hunor. I live in a Hungarian town named after a Cuman prince, Zotmaz. So it is time to abandon simplistic Western propaganda, narrative and mental constructs. They should not tell us who we are. We are children of the steppe and will remain so forever. I am even working on an entirely new philosophy displaying some traces of steppe traditions. So we live on.

[@nihadnsirov2290]

What a luck! I was just questioning myself about this topic out of blue and there it is your video on it made a week ago. :)

[@nenenindonu]

Even though Hungarians are Ugric people their historical ties with Turkic tribes like Cumans, Pechenegs, Oghurs, Kabars who were incorporated into the Hungarian nation resulted in many commonalities with Turks such as mythological beings like Turul, common names, and most importantly loanwords from West Old Turkic

[@attilatasciko4817]

You mixing up couple of facts . We magyars are not ugric ( ugró-k in our language ) but opposit way , the ugric people was mixed into some hungarians -magyar branches . Big different . You can't say the elefant jumped in the mouse mault . Etc...

[@loczfrank2027]

Exactly

[@schytoyamnaya9015]

You stated the truth.

[@ScythianDragons]

We have nothing to due with turkic or turks we loaned them 300 words during Eurasia times for trade. We shared 6000 words with Sumer Emire langugae and 10,000 words with our Ugyher brothers that also wear our Long Scythian Hats. We was just rulers in Asia origina Homeland is Carpathian Basin ;9)

[@imremaroti9937]

@@ScythianDragons Így igaz!

[@tiborkarpati312]

This is the best english language content what I ever seen on youtube about Hungarians origins. Great job, thank you! I would be happy if I could see something based on Tahiri Üngürsz. It is a book based on the library what has been looted from Székesfehérvár's library after the Ottoman conquest. (as I know)

[@user-nw5fg2mw8b]

Thanks interesting wise info makes sense science is amazing salutations

[@Szilvi79]

Thank you for this absolutely amazing video. A little fun fact to add: in Hungary we use the Eastern name order. Family name comes first, and the given name after that. This is the official way. As far as I know, no other European country uses it. Another fun fact: the word Táltos (the Hungarian name for the "shaman") also means "a horse, that runs very fast" (in some folk tales they also can fly - like the shamans souls while beeing in trans). And the name Emese (the mother of prince Álmos) is still popular here. :)

[@sandor_gyori]

Greetings from Hungary to our all Turkic𐱅𐰇𐰼𐰜 brothers🤘🏻🐺🇹🇷🇺🇿🇰🇿🇦🇿🇰🇬🇹🇲🇭🇺🇧🇬🐎🏹

[@louisgerber]

🇭🇺❤️

[@latakicsi2183]

hungarians not turks at all our dnas 95% typically european and rest of it hun,sarmatans etc

[@NationalistTurk.-nq1sb]

​​@@latakicsi2183We are know bro. Chill! We are just love Attila and he is Turk. The now hungarians not Turks. We see and love Attila the Hun as a Turk. We love you because you love Attila...

[@NationalistTurk.-nq1sb]

​​@@latakicsi2183Also, your country is a member of Turan, so we put you in the Turkish section. Not to see you as a Turk...

[@latakicsi2183]

@@NationalistTurk.-nq1sb "We are just love Attila and he is Turk" zero proof of that...he just used turks tribes in his army but even the second one in command was goth/german so the turks were his underdogs/vasals... he was just hun

[@johannesl6978]

This was EXTREMELY interesting. I've been obsessed with the steppe peoples for a LONG time! It's interesting just how HUGE the legacy of the turkic and mongolic peoples actually is! They influnced pretty much ALL of Eurasia, even Europe, or maybe ESPECIALLY Europe would be more appropriate. In conclusion: The huns and hungarians DO have a strong connection, but not in the way most probably think and it's VERY complicated. As a swede I really appreciate the connection between the germanic peoples and the huns. There is no direct genetic connection between the huns and germanics, but I do feel some kind of kinship with them just from being INFLUENCED by hunnic culture. Greetings from Sweden.

[@laszlobodis7389]

Hungarians are not mongolic.

[@johannesl6978]

@@laszlobodis7389 I know.

[@useduser]

what the does even turkic means if turkey is a recent invention

[@Userjunior2016]

Teşekkürler Emre Her zamanki gibi çok güzel video olmuş

[@norakssolucani]

video atılalı 20 dakika olmuş .d

[@Userjunior2016]

​@@norakssolucani videonun beş on dakikasını baktıktan sonra destek yorumumu yazarım Artı Emre yaptığı videoların hepisi kaliteli Yorum yazmam sizi rahatsızmı etti?

[@norakssolucani]

@@Userjunior2016 hayır videonun tamamını izlemeden böyle yorumlar yazmak bana saçma geliyor o yüzden dedim

[@Userjunior2016]

​@@norakssolucaniEmrenin kanalını uzun zamandır takip ediyorum Yayınladığı kitabıda aldım Kaliteli iş yaptığını çoktan ispatlamış benim için Ben gönül rahatlığıyla destek yorumumu video bitmeden yazıyorum

[@nikocat2008]

They always forget that among Hungarians marrige with a relative was and is a taboo. The further away your spouse from is the better. So mixing was suppoerted.

[@keteket]

It was and still is a taboo for all Turks today. In my opinion, this was taboo among both the Huns and the Scythians

[@KhansDen]

I didn't know that. It is also a characteristic that I found in sources about the Kyrgyz and Göktürk people, and virtually all other Turkic peoples to this very day. So I am not surprised that it would be the same with the Magyars. Thanks for the info.

[@schytoyamnaya9015]

This is true. A recent genetic study of 4 Avar age cemetary did total family trees of the skeletons of the graves and it showed that almost everyone of those communities were relatives to eachother, but only in father line. Their society was based on paternal heritage and clan structure based on the father line heritage, while the women in the cemetaries were of totally different communities genetically. There were barely any female descenant which shows us that the girls married to different communities and the wives came from also different communities. They even payed attention to not to marry someone who had even a little distant family realtivity. Also the genetical connections proved the existance of 'Leviarty' which is a steppe turkic tradition, if the husband of a woman died, she was kept in the family by marrying her to the brother, uncle, or to a close male relative of the deceased husband. So in Father line there was a huge blood based structure of these sociaties, but they paid high attention to marry such women who had totally no blood relativness to them.

[@tiborpurzsas2136]

You know who loves to marry their first cousins? The Pakistanis! In England they have a real serious problem because of stale blood......the British doctors are trying to talk them out of marrying their cousins to no avail. Their parents are making the decision for them. They can't go against family decision. Very backward.

[@gaborheder7686]

Hehe. I do not think I have to refer to recent Hungarian scientific researches. I think the creator of this video should do this. Two well known results from the last few yeas : 1. There is genetic link between the so called `Hun` people in the Carpathian Basin and the so called old Magyar people ceturies later in the same area. Shortly those so called `Hun` are partly ancestors of the later Magyar. 2. There are evidences for Avar-Magyar continuity and the usage of the ancient Magyar or very similar language in the Avar Empire. The Hungarian tribal confederation which entered the Carpathian Basin in the late 9th century took ten tribes, seven Magyar (about four of them had name with Turkic origin) and three Kabar (by Hungarian name). There are two theories about the language of the Kabar : They spoke Iranian language or they spoke Turkic language. It seems like that the so called Magyar people continuously appeared in the Avar territory or late Avar lands in the Carphatian Basin far before 895 (probably even in the 8th century) and there is no any sign of fight. Yes it was tribal confederation and it was far before the fake 19th century nationalism so in the Hungarian tribal confedaration people probably spoke at least two different languages (and it woukd not be surprising if even 3-4 languages) because these nomad tribal confederations were political pacts regarless the native language. Also there are opinions that the old Magyar language was present among the Pechegen so there was no such thing that the so called Hungarian `nation` entered the Carphatian Basin. I am really sick of such narrative. Before 900 AD there was no such thing as Hungarian nation. It is the fake 19th century ideology about nations. But in the ninth century there was no such ideology. OK, these sound strange, but again, these are scientific results and facts.

[@volcsiorion]

Kedves Gábor! Örülök, hogy említed az avar magyar folytonosságot! Az avarság minden bizonnyal nemzet alkotó népcsoport a magyarságban! A nemzet nation szavakhoz lenne egy észrevételem! A szó mai értelmében, hogy magyar nemzet a 9. században ahogy említed nem beszélhetünk, viszont törzsi szinten már létező dolog volt! Nemzettségfők fogtak össze kisebb törzseket, majd képezte a sokaság a törzset élükön a törzsfőkkel. Adott területen adott nyelven beszélő népcsoportokról volt és van szó, amely viszont a mai nemzet szónak is megfelel. Az már hab a tortán, hogy nekünk magyaroknak a nemzet és nemzetiség szavunk a nemzésből, a nemzeni igéből ered teljesen egyértelműen magyar jelentés és eredet. Ugyanakkor más nemzeteknél a nation szó a latin natio szóra vezethető vissza ami a nascor, születni szülni jelentésből ered. Nekünk nem kellett ez a szó kölcsönzés. Amúgy az sem elvetendő, hogy a magyar nyelv egy linga franca szerepet is betölthetett, pont azért mert pl az avarok saját nyelvükön megérthettek bennünket, mert volt egy közös korábbi alapnyelv, hasonlóan mint a szláv, ahol az ukrán megérti az oroszt, vagy részben a szerbet. A szlávok is kb 1500 évvel ezelőtt nyelvileg közelebb voltak egymáshoz.

[@Arpoxais1Ateas2]

@@volcsiorion Ezek mind féligazságok, de a legnagyobb hülyítés amit egyes történészek is propagálnak, hogy nem létezett a nemzet fogalma a középkorban! Akkor a Werbőczy István jogtudós "Unio Trium Nationum" törvénye miről szólt szerinted? Az Unio Trium Nationum azt jelenti, hogy a három nemzet egyesülése, ez volt a kápolnai unió kölcsönös szövetségi egyezmény, amelyet az erdélyi magyar nemesek, a székely lófők és az erdélyi szászok vezetői kötöttek Csicsókápolnán 1437. szeptember 16-án, válaszként az az év nyarán kitört erdélyi parasztfelkelésre. A szövetség hivatalosan az Erdélyt fenyegető mongol és oszmán veszély ellen, ténylegesen azonban a parasztok ellen irányult. De hozhatnék korábbi példákat is, például már a rómaiak is írtak a "nation" - nemzetekről, mint például Dio Cassius római író, aki ezt írta a 2. században: „Dacos Scythicam quodammodo nationem suisse", ami azt jelenti, hogy a dákok egy szkíta nemzetből valók! De Thuróczy János vagy Oláh Miklós és sok más korabeli író a magyar nemességről úgy írnak mint "Hungarica natio" - a magyar nemzet! Tehát latinul a nationum = nemzet! Akkor minek mind nyomjátok ezt kommunista mesét, hogy a nemzet az csak egy 18. századi fogalom? Ez csakis azért lehet mert valamelyik nagyokos történész kitalálta, hogy a francia forradalommal alakult ki a nemzet mint modern fogalom. De ebben csak annyi volt az igaz, hogy akkor lett a francia parasztság és a polgárság is jogilag része a francia nemzetnek, de már a középkorban is a nemesség mindig is nation - nemzetnek tartotta magát mindenhol Európában! Ezért is a történelmet nem lehet mindig a mai korhoz hasonlítani, hiszen akkor ugyanúgy mondhatnánk azt is, hogy az ókori Hellászban a görögök csak azok voltak akik szavazati joggal rendelkeztek! De akkoriban csak a városokban élő férfiak egy részének volt joga szavazni, és akkor ilyen logikával mondhatnánk, hogy akik a városon kívül éltek, vagy akár a városokban élő nők és gyermekeik sem voltak görögök, nem igaz?!

[@magnaviator]

Love the indepth study.

[@froehlichermond]

Emeğine sağlık.

[@ChristopherBowly]

Very good documentary. Interesting , detailed & informative . A lot of avenues to explore....... Many thanks.

[@ScythianDragons]

Full of False information about us Magyars which is spread on the Interent.

[@MrGTAWalkthrough]

Very interesting and informative👍

[@ScythianDragons]

bunch of false information that was spread about us on the ineternet. This is why we dont like foreigners AKA outsiders making videos about us.

[@freebozkurt9277]

1. The Hungarian legends also state the conquest of the Carpathian Basin was a RETURN to their original homeland. 2. Hungarian legends claim the leaders of the Hungarians were of Scythian descends and not Huns 3. The legend of Hunor and Magor states they were BROTHERS, thus, the Hungarians cannot be DESCENDANTS of the Huns 4. There is no historical and archeological proof of Finnic people migration, therefore, the common homeland in the Urals is absolutely baseless. Even more the Lapps (Saami) have been residing in Scandinavial for a good 10 000 years. If they are related to the Hungarians, their common homeland could be anywhere in Central-Europe as well (taking into account the last galcial age) 5. All European peoples who lived in Europe before the Indo-European invasion spoke agglutinative langauges: the Basques, the Etruscan, the Minans etc. etc. They are all considered language isolates as such an ancient connection to langauges existing today cannot be proven linguistically but on the same account it cannot be refuted either. As a conclusion from the above I have a strong belief that Hungarian is either a missing ancient link between the Finno-Ugric and Turkic people or even they are ancestral to both of them (so there is no borrowing of any kind) and further back in time they are related to the ancent extinct people of Europe predating both the Greeks and the Romans. It is certain that Hungarian langauge separeted from its closest Ugric relatives in the Iron age a good 3000 years ago, so there is a specific Hungarian langauge since then, therefore, it is more ancient than Latin, not to mention any exsiting spoken European languages.

[@CocoSon-we2rg]

RETURN ?????!!!!

[@Baso-sama]

@@CocoSon-we2rg yes, the chronicles write about a return

[@attilatasciko4817]

​@@CocoSon-we2rg< YES ! FROM THE EUROPIAN ICEAGE THEY MOVED SOUTH AND EAST AND NORTH , AND AFTER ICE AGE THE ALL MOVED BACK THEY ORIGINAL TERITORY . SOME SMALL GROUPS NEVER LEFT WITH EACH RACES AND GROUPS , RIGHT NOW MORE AND MORE PROOF THEY FIND AND FOUND . Etc...

[@gaborjuhasz5610]

​@@Baso-samaA litle mistake there. The Huns were Scythians. This information also pointed those Chronicles . Also Priscos retor call Atilla King of Scythians

[@CocoSon-we2rg]

@@Baso-sama Paul Lendvai among others says: Folklore research and modern philology recognize the popularlegends, in any case, a historical kernel: a close connection with a Bulgarian-Turanic people and with the Alans. While the name Magyar "Hungarian" that the Hungarians give themselves dates back to the Ugric era, the name of hungarus, Hungarian "Hungarian", has its origin in the Turanian tribal organization of the honor to which the Hungarians belonged for a long time. honor in- means "ten arrows", i.e. tribes. But it is also possible that the name that became common in the West from the early 9th century to remind of the union of the seven initial tribes, weakly connected them, of the old Hungarians with the three perjured Khazar tribes, with the Kabaris. In any case, it is certain that the Hungarians belonged to near the Turanic Khazar empire between the Middle Volga and the Infe river of the Danube. The old Hungarians, however, were never a "people Mongolian", as it has often been said. Beginning in 830, the Hungarians they lived together in Etelköz, in the "land between the waters", on a vast territory between Don, Danube and Black Sea, with different nomadic Turanian peoples, with Alans and Slavs. In the Byzantine and Eastern sources, they are given by those several times the name "Turks". About 200 words of original Bulgarian-Turkish give us even today the possibility to identify in becoming the tribal union of the old Turkish component Hungarians very significant." However, the Turks do not claim to have returned to Anatolia, nor do they ally themselves with the Etruscans like the Albanians or now like the Hungarians.

[@graucanal]

Great. Thanks for Brazil and subs in portuguese.

[@szalard]

Well, it is not so simple to say that Hungarians have only marginal connections with the Huns. But, as I will show you in the followings, the Hungarians are the direct descendants of the Huns! First of all, what were the Huns? Turks? Are there any linguistic proofs of this? Until we find a text written by the Huns, that proves what language they spoke, we cannot say that they were Turks or any other nationality. That some Hunnic names can sound Turkic, do not prove anything, because it could be a matter of fashion to give such names to some of people. Today the Turks from Turkey have mostly Arabic names, and the Hungarians mostly have Indo-European or Hebrew names, because of their religion and the cultural influence to which they were subjected in the last centuries. I. Genetically, the question is more interesting, and this can shed light on the Hungarian origin too. Archeogenetical mitocondrial studies of the Hunnic graves in Mongolia showed that the Huns originated from two major groups: 1. In the East, until the line of Ulan Bator, they were mostly of East Asian, Mongoloid type, 2. West from Ulan Bator they were Europid types, of the Scythian people originating from the Northern shores of the Black Sea. So the Western part of the Huns were Scythians, while the eastern part were of Mongolic or Turkic origin. The Western Huns (Xiongnu) were the descendants of the Yamnaya Pre-Scythian culture, which founded the Scythian empire, as a result of which many Scythians from the Black Sea region migrated to the East, and established themselves in Western Mongolia and the Altay mountains. Their rich archaeological finds, and great artistic creations (gold objects, rugs, etc.) were excavated from Altay, Tuva, and Mongolia, together with the mummies of Europoid, blond or red-haired people. In 48-49 AD, the Chinese chased away the Western Huns (those of Scythian origin), which migrated, after a short period of dwelling around Lake Balkash, in two directions: 1. The region which today is Bashkortostan, or in the past was Magna Hungaria. And there they remained for many centuries. From there the Huns which in the 4th century formed the European Hunnic empire, migrated to today's Hungary, then from the same region 500 years later the 7 Magyar tribes migrated to retake the Hunnic lands in the Carpathian Basin. 2. To the south: Bactria, Northern Afghanistan, and Northern India, where they founded the White Hunnic (or Hephtalite) Empire. So, the place where the Huns settled East from Ural, was the same place from where the Hungarians migrated in the 9th century, to found Hungary. And in the same place, in the 13th century, the Hungarian priest Julianus found Hungarians and called that place Magna Hungaria. So the Hungarians and the Huns lived in the same place for 800 years. But both Attila's Huns and the Hephtalites have connections with the Hungarians of today. Actually, the Avars who settled in the Carpathian Basin were not mostly of East Asian Mongol-Turkic origin, but of Hephtalite White Hun origin. Their ethnic name Var-Chunni shows this. When the Gök Türks in alliance with the Iranians, destroyed the White Hun Empire, the White Huns joined the Avars (Rourans) in the region of the Caucasus, after crossing the whole Persia and the Caucasus mountains from the South, as the Byzantine chronicler Corippus writes in his book In Laudem Iustini III. After that the Var-Chunni empire, called Avars, established itself in the Carpathian Basin. But the majority of the Avars seem to be the White Huns, but because the kaghan was Avar, the empire was called Avar Empire. When, in 895, the 7 tribes of the Magyars came, they found there huge masses of Avars, and, we can say, they reunited for the first time since the Chinese chase away their ancestors from Mongolia. An interesting thing about the Hephtalites, is that, it seems that some of them remained in the East, are the Maghar people from Nepal, who claim that their ancestors came from Central Asia, and this is proven also by the Shamanism and the wooden pillars that they put on the graves of their dead, which are similar to the funerary wooden pillars of the Székelys and Hungarians called kopjafa. This means that actually, the White Huns had among them a tribe called Magyar, which retreated in the Southern Himalayas after the Whites Huns were chased away from Bactria. III. And now, lets look at the language. It is really peculiar how this isolated language exist in Central Europe. It is told by some researchers that this language was spoken by the 7 tribes of the Magyars, when they came in 895. It is proven that these 7 tribes were not very numerous in comparation with the peoples they found in the Carpathian Basin. But if only they would have spoken this language, regarding the fact that they found a huge mass of people of other origins in the Carpathian Basin (as some say, mostly Slavs), then their fate would have been the same as the Bulgarians, who despite conquering the lands South to the Danube, they lost their language and Turkic culture, and became Slavs. Or the Viking (Varangian) Russian troops that conquered the East Slavs, became Slavs. Or the Germanic Longobards who conquered Italy, they became Italians. And the examples can go on and on, with the Visigoths, Vandals, Franks, Sveves, etc. This shows that if a nation conquers a region on which another nations live, which are more than the conquerors, the conquerors finally assimilate in the conquered peoples, and disappear completely, only their name remaining in some cases (France, Bulgaria, Russia)... But nothing else. So why only the Magyars could survive without loosing their language and culture, and, furthermore, “impose” it on the peoples they conquered, although these peoples were in majority? The only plausible explanation is, that a huge part of the people the Magyars found there, were speaking also Hungarian! So, it seems, that a part of the Avars, and mostly probably the descendants of the White Huns (Hephtalites) spoke Hungarian! And as these two people speaking the same language met, they became majority in the Carpathian Basin, and this is how the Hungarian language survived until today. Even in the Hungarian Chronicles there is proof about this: the Székelys which is said that they were waiting for the Magyars of Árpád, and united with them in the Carpathian Basin. And what is this showing? That the Huns, who departed from Mongolia in 48-49 AD, spoke a form of ancient Hungarian, and when in 895 the Magyar tribes arrived in Pannonia, their descendants still spoke it. Probably the Eastern Xiongnu, who remained in Mongolia after 49 AD, who were mostly of Mongoloid ancestry, they spoke Turkic. So, in conclusion, the Xiongnu (Asian Huns) were composed by two major components: Proto-Hungarians and Turks. The Proto-Hungarians departed in 49 AD from Mongolia and founded the European Hun and the White Hun Empires. The White Huns, after being defeated by the Gök-Türks (former Eastern Xiongnu) and the Persians, fled, together with the Avars (Rourans) to the West Later, and established themselves in the Carpathian Basin in 568. And the two branches of the Xiongnu, which fled to the West in 49 AD reunited in the Carpathian Basin in 895. As I showed, the only explanation how the Hungarian language survived in the Carpathian Basin, and did not disappeared after 895, is that the Hungarians are direct descendant of both the Huns of Attila and the White Huns (Hephtalites). Other proofs that the Hungarians are the direct descendants of the Huns. Of course the ancient legends about the origin of the Hungarians. No other nation in the world in its legends about its origin, says that it comes from the Huns, only the Hungarians! Is this just a coincidence? Today you can go at any Hungarian village and ask the people who live there, who are your ancestors, and he will respond: the Huns! And another, which in my oppinion, is the most important. The archaeological research of the graves of nomadic peoples, starting with the Scythians and ending with the Mongols, showed that from all nomadic horse-archer peoples only two burried their dead by partial horse burial: the Huns and the Hungarians.What is that meaning? While all the other nomadic people burried their dead with the whole horse, the Huns and the Hungarians burried only the horse’s head and leg bones together with the dead. This is called partial horse burrial. While we can find such kind of burials very sporadicly also among other peoples (which can be explaned that some Huns or Hungarians lived among them), but as the whole people, only the Huns and Hungarians burried their people in this way. All Hunnic and Hungarian burials are partial horse burrials, while among Turks, Mongols, Rourans, Kitans, Mandjus, etc, you can find one or two such burrials. What is that if not the decissive proof that the Hungarians of today are the direct descendants of the Huns?

[@Lawliet_____]

We could divide this into 3 components: 1.0. Xiognu ulus. - Huns. (Mongolia to Europe) 2.0. Gokturk ulus. - Mamluks. (Irak to Egypt) - Seljuk Turks (Persia) -> Sultanate of Rum (Anatolia) -> House of Osman (Anatolia). - Khazar Khaganate. - Other? 3.0. Mongol ulus. - Chagatai Khanate. - Ilkhanate. - Golden horde. - Yuan dynasty. - Timurids - Mughal Empire. - Other? All of the 3 empires were once organised towards one place namely Otuken wich was the center for all the Nomads and had as well the same religion namely Tengrism. Migrations resulted to mixing with other races and change of religions of course. Also the national monument of Mongolia illustrates this very well.

Magyars were and still much larger in numbers than all of the others all together put into the so called "Finno-Ugric" group. Scientifically this should be called the "Magyar" group. The culture was moving from the south to the less developed and more harsh north, from the more numerous people to the less. Not the reverse way. That would be quite illogical. This movement explains the relationships, but not that the Magyars learned from Finnish as the political wrong name suggests. The northen people mixed and learned from the southern neighbors who were also militarily clearly superiors. The movement is also simple to see if you look at the rivers coming from the Mongolian plateu and flowing to the north, as the cold weather slowly improved after the ice age. Rivers were used as the best roads for moving. This is the direction how people moved, cultural transition faded, and the number of people diminished. There is a clear natural arrow. If someone ignores this arrow, then I will not believe whatever crazy theory is presented...

[@martinmaltbor1290]

As a Hungarian American I appreciate your very informative and logical explanation of the Hungarians origin. It is refreshing to hear the logic and fact based history where the Hungarians came from especially in this day and age where political bias and anti Hungarian theories on this subject are endless and nonsensical. I have heard dozens of theories about the origin of the Hungarians from multiple interests and sources and non of them made too much sense to me. More often than not I sensed deliberate antagonistic viewpoints toward the Hungarian history depicting the Hungarians as uncultured, primitive, non white, non European tribes who don't belong in the European community despite the fact, that they've been in that country for over a thousand year..

[@szalard]

@@martinmaltbor1290 Thank you very much!

[@gerika73]

Thats true!!!

[@KuMiis]

kudos on the "inside deku tree" ambiance 9:11

[@KhansDen]

Someone noticed! Awesome. :)

[@redelpe1]

Thank you for a splendid video. Too detailed and complicated to take in at one go. Masses of names and information never heard of before. Today, according to my knowledge, the Hungarians still feel related to the Finns.

[@AshPlays85]

No, we don't want to do anything with finnish people as we have nothing in common in language, culture or ancestry. It's an old tale people tried to prove for more than 100 years and failed. :) Most hungarians know this.

[@veronicalogotheti1162]

Thank you

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

Extract from Neparáczki archaeogenetics: Based on Neparáczki, the following genetic distribution emerges from the 89 "occupier" graves excavated in Hungary: Scandinavian Germanic 39 (43.82%), Asian Hun 37 (41.57%), Caucasian 5 (5.61%), Slavic 2 (2 .25%), Other European 6 (6.75%). "The groups closest to the population of Karos are the early European farmers who lived 6000-3000 years ago (STR=Starcevo), the Middle Eastern Neolithic (MEN), the Szakálhát culture of the Carpathian basin (SZA), the Yamnayas (YAM, 3500-2300 BC Black steppe above the sea), the population of the Scythian kurgans of the Iron Age (KIK, 800-600 BC) and the Asian Bronze Age Scythians from the Tagar-Tachtyk culture (TAG, 800 BC - AD 400). The Central Asian Bronze Age is also close Sintastha culture (SIA, the first steppe nomads) and the population of the Iron Age Baraba steppe (BB3, southern Siberia)."

[@erikakatona4356]

Nincs skandináv, szláv, germán gén. Ez így komolytalan.

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

@@erikakatona4356 Hát igen. Nagy vonalakban csak europid gén van, de Neparáczkival nem mernék vitatkozni ezen. Biztos találtak valami apró különbséget ami populációkra jellemző és az alapján tudják felaprózni az europid génállományt.

[@timeanagy8495]

Thanks for the vid. The gy sound is a little bit different in hungarian in magyar.

[@fatihunal2713]

🐺🇹🇷🇦🇿🇰🇿🇹🇲🇰🇬🇺🇿🇭🇺🐺🤘at least the Macars are in the Turkish counsil. Are home of Kurultai and Part of Turan..

[@latakicsi2183]

hungarians not turks at all our dnas 95% typically european and rest of it hun,sarmatans etc

[@dertkuyusu]

@@latakicsi2183 Cant you see atleast?

[@gaborjuhasz5610]

​@@dertkuyusu😂 Spot on!

[@nenenindonu]

The word Yula (title Gyula in Hungarian) was the original non-Slavonic name of the Bulgar "Dulo" clan which claimed descent from Attila and had the same Tamga as that of the Oghuz Kayi tribe all this led to a theory for the Arpad, Ottoman, Dulo & Attilid dynasties descending from the Xiongnu Yula tribe

[@user-xc6co3ur2v]

Again nonsense. Why is the Dullo dynasty mentioned in Mycenaean documents, from 3240 BC? What fabrications are you quoting?😊

[@user-xc6co3ur2v]

A document -KNDD 1193

[@Baso-sama]

Gyúl means to ignite in hungarian, and gyula is an archaic word for torch, but this word fell out of use by now. This is all connected to the Sun and fire worship. I wonder if it has the same meaning in Turkic languages.

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

And Illness too.

[@BulgarChanyu]

Nonsense conspiracy shit. Dulo doesn’t have a certified symbol, besides, Dulo name comes from the ruling house of Xiongnu “Tuge”, probably “Tughluq”, just as Dulo being Tughluq.

[@petrapetrakoliou8979]

There is an error in situating the "region between the Dniepr and the Lower Danube": you put it to the west of the Don (Levedia). It is way further west, close to the Carpathians (Etelköz). By the way, that is where we find most Hungarian-type objects outside of the Carpathian basin.

[@CocoSon-we2rg]

All the mentioned are common sense from a historical point of view. Interesting and wise informations.

[@ScythianDragons]

common sense bunch of false information that was spread about us on the ineternet. This is why we dont like foreigners AKA outsiders making videos about us. Scythian-Hun Magyars same folks ;9)

[@jordanbrown929]

Are you planning to do a video on the Cuman-Kipchak Confederation in the History of Turkic States series?

[@KhansDen]

Yes.

[@attilatasciko4817]

27:38= VERY INTERESTING PICTURE OF THE TRIBES . Etc...

[@petrapetrakoliou8979]

Strangely, the "Dream of Emese" is represented on a golden vessel of the Avar age in Hungary from Nagyszentmiklós (8th-beginning of 9th century), not from the Magyar age (10th century).

[@szeklergeneral4266]

we have a lot more information about the old hungarian belief now than in the past due to recording old folk tales, the old belief has most probably an old siberian shamanic type of core which later on was influenced by tengriism, the belief of nomadic iranic peoples and possibly even from buddhism or from the bön religion.

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

Menander Protector: "When the fourth year of the reign of Emperor Iustinos began, the Turkish embassy arrived in Byzantium... The emperor asked: Enlighten us how large a mass of avarice rebelled against the rule of the Turks and whether you still have any of this people with you. ? The answer was this: There are still, oh emperor, those who faithfully cling to our country, and those who escaped from us, I believe, number about twenty thousand. Euagrius: "The Avars are a Scythian people. He is one of those charioteers who inhabit the plains beyond the Caucasus. They ran away from the neighboring Turks after suffering trouble from them. This is how they arrived at the (Kimmerian) Bosphorus. (Strait of Kerch) They left behind them the shores of the Euxeinos Pontos sea... until they reached the banks of the Danube and sent ambassadors to Iustinianos." Chronicon, Monembasiae: "In the year 6064 of the creation of the world, which was the 32nd year of the reign of the great Iustinianos, the emissaries of that strange people called the Avars came to Constantinople, and the whole city came together to see them, because such a people had never been seen before." In terms of origin, the Avars are a Hun and Bulgarian people. Their hair was very long tied with ribbons and braided. Their other clothing was similar to that of other Huns." Isidorus Hispalensis: "The Huns were formerly called Huns, but eventually they were named Avars after their king."

[@bir_cumle]

And some of them went over to the Roman ranks. And some of them joined the side of the Byzantines in 1071, when Aplarslan and the Byzantine armies met, when they saw Turkish soldiers dressing and speaking like them, they realized that they were of the same root and went over to the side of the Turks. 😊

[@BulgarChanyu]

Can you give me the source of Chronicon Monembasiae?

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

@@BulgarChanyu No sorry. I have no and I don't find it.

[@BulgarChanyu]

@@childabductioninitaly8946 well don’t send things you don’t have at the first place then. Fortunately I was able to find it by myself.

[@norbertkulcsar3755]

Thank you so much for all the work you put into this video! A few quick thoughts and additions: What is certain: the Hungarian people was formed from several parts, but we are not Finno-Ugric! 1. According to the legend, we came from beyond the Caucasus. Evilat/Ajem in Persia. We mixed with Bulgarians and Alans. (Dulo) 2. The Scythian-Hun folk consciousness is continuous. The Scythians are also referred to as the people of the Deer. (miraculous deer) The Hungarians who arrived in the Carpathian basin already found Hungarian-speaking peoples here. Maybe the Scythians and the Sarmatians and the Avars already spoke Hungarian? Some of the Scythians settled around Lake Urmia. There are also place names related to Hungarian. Did we come back from here later? 3. The residence of the Royal Scythians is the southern foreland of the Urals and the area between the lower course of the Volga and the Don corresponds to the area of Hungarian conversion. The Sarmatians will appear there. This is also a strong coincidence! 4. Based on the latest genetic research: the ancestors of Árpád's family are related to the Inner Asian Xiungnu. Their DNA was found in Mongolia. In addition, there was a mixing of the Mezovskaia-Sarmatian-Hun peoples southeast of the Urals, from which part of the Hungarians come. So the Sarmatian theme should definitely be developed better! 4. We are genetically very far from the Finno-Ugric people. Linguistically, the relationship is not completely correct either. With the early and western Turkic languages, however, it is even greater. It's not just words, if it's not conjugation, sentence editing, etc. The Ural-Altaic language kinship is more suitable. A simple example: In Hungarian: Anyám zsebében sok kicsi alma van. In Turkish: Annemin cebinde bir süru küçü elma var. Finnish: Äidilläni on taskussaan monia minäää omenoita. In English: My mother has many small apples in her pocket. 5. Why do the Uighurs consider us their only relatives? I wish you all the best and keep up the valuable work on the steppe peoples!

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

Saint Isidore (around 630) also mentions it with the following introductory lines: "The Hungarians, who before that were called Huns..." [The Latin Patrologia, volume 82, book nine, chapter two, article 66. Migne Patrologia latina Tomus 82. page 334. S. Isidori: Originum sive Etymologiarum liber. IX. chapter II § 66.], then Rubruk (circa 1254) writes the following referring to Isidorus "Isidorus says ... the Huns, who were later called Hungarians ...

[@aiziszizis2536]

Hungarians are not descendents of Huns. Hungarians barely have 2% of Magyar blood in them. Hungarians are just Magyarized Slavs, Germans, Romanians, Cumans, etc.

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

@@aiziszizis2536 What are Magyarized Slavs? The Hungarians are the Huns and the Scythians. The Hungarian chronicles are divided below. It is worth looking at the medieval reviews. Until the 18th century, the whole of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and the Scythians. But we also know that the Hungarian language is the Nostratic language, the original language of Eurasia. The Hungarian language must be spoken with 39 sounds and 44 letters are the Hungarian ABC.

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

@@aiziszizis2536 Until the 18th century, no one was interested in the Scythians. Until then, all of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and Scythians (plus Sarmatians). When the first Scythian gold treasures were found, the Hungarians were sent to Jugra, behind the Urals, and since then everyone wants to be Scythian. Since then, Germans, Bulgarians, Turks, and Persians have wanted to be Scythians.

[@vasjanos7376]

@@aiziszizis2536 :D Monkey

[@aiziszizis2536]

@@childabductioninitaly8946 _The Hungarians are the Huns and the Scythians_ 😂 Huns had a spot on their asses. Hungarians don't have it. The real descendants of Huns who live in Europe (in a remote valley in Switzerland) do have this genetic trait. _Until the 18th century, the whole of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and the Scythians._ It was a Magyar claim used since they arrived in Europe and started to grab lands from their rightful owners. They claimed, "we are descendents of Huns, give us your land!" _we also know that the Hungarian language is the Nostratic language_ Hungarian language is a Finno-Ugric language. *Nostratic is a hypothetical language macrofamily including many of the language families of northern Eurasia first proposed in 1903. Though a historically important proposal, it is now generally considered a fringe theory.* (A fringe theory is an idea or a viewpoint which differs significantly from the accepted scholarship of the time within its field.)

[@9tsankov]

Sooo ... We "the Bulgarians " are cousins with the Hungarians?

[@zoltan6451]

🤝🏻

[@zoltantoth1821]

Yes, we are! :)

[@attilatasciko4817]

9 stanko < BULG ( BOLG B= V ) BULG ÚR - VU(O)LGÚR'S = VOLGA RIVERS PLACE - ÚRAI : LEAREDS - OWNERS OF THAT TERITORY . -> " FROM THE MIDDLE DOWN TO SEA OF THE VOLGA RIVER " . Etc...

[@kingaszeleikis482]

This is not news. We Hungarians have known this for a long time. Bulgarians are not Slavs, they just lost their original language and became Slavified. Hello brother!

[@ciszegebe]

@@attilatasciko4817Today’s Volga was called Etil/Etel those days. A half millenia later the Russians named it Volga.

[@86cimbi]

Bojler Eladó :)

[@kegyetlenkolbasz2003]

Hogyé van? Milyet bír?

[@WarDogMadness]

Twin myth is very popular . In eurasian peoples... Even the avars have twin origin myth a very similar to the roman romulus remus twins and the she wolf. saxons hengist and horsa. Theres others but cant recall at this tyme... so are they copying myth or coming from the same place.. awsome video bud..

[@duyguyazar2543]

Ilk Turkic dil konusanlar Urallarin guneyindeydi, cogunlugu doguya bir kismi batiya yayildi. O bolgelerin halklariyla karistilar, dillerinin genel yapisi ( sondan eklemeli dil ) korundu

[@bir_cumle]

Dear Kaan, I would love for you to publish these videos in Turkish.

[@KhansDen]

I did in the past but did not even get 10% of the view count of the original English version. So with all due respect to my memleket, it's just not worth all the time and energy.

[@iklil539]

Did the Vandals originate from Hungary? Historians have written that the Vandals arrived in Morocco via the Strait of Jibraltar in 429, and they built a kingdom in North Africa from 439 until 533.( تحياتي لكم من المغرب)

[@schytoyamnaya9015]

The Avars and Onogurs exist in the Hungarian Chronicles if you pay attention, just they are called also Huns in the Hungarian medieval lore. For example many of the events in the Chronicles connected to the Huns of Attila didn't mentioned in the foregin historical sources, but its totally fitting for the Avar age. Noticable that the Chronicles claim that between Attila and Árpád there only 100 years gap, not 500. Also some Chronicles claim the Hunnic invasion to be around 670, which in reality was the date when Onogurs entered the Avar Khaganate after the collapse of Great Bulgaria and vica versa, in an other Chronicle the Huns arrived at the right historical date and it claims that Árpád's magyars arrived in the 670's. Also the Hungarian Chronicles calim the Ancient Hungarian homeland to the Northern Caucasus, which was the area of the Onogurs. Genetical studies now have proven that the most of the steppe immigrators in the Avar Khagante were indeed arrived from eastern europe and they were Oghuric tribes (containing a mix of Xiongnu and local iranian-eastern european ancestry), while the small numbered elite leadership where the Rourans (having fully North-east asian ancestry). Also noticable that the Sekler's folkore says that they lived in Hungary way before Árpád's magyars, and they are direct descenants of the Huns, while the magyars are the cousins of the huns. The Sekler folkore gets more intresting, when you look at the lingusitic connections of seklers, which goes to the far western border of Hungary (while they live in Transilvania now). That western area was never settled by magyars, but the local Avar/slavic population is relevant in that region in the late 9th and 10th century. Also the anthropological studies on medieval sekler cemetaries shown us that their biological ancestry is connected to the western area avar( or onogur) populations from the 8-9th centuries. We also now that most of the poulation of the Hungarian Kingdom was descended from the local population, with little ancestry from the magyars, the medieval hungarian cemeteries also show high connectiom to the previous Avar age population and little to the 10th century magyars. It shows that while the Avar Khagante collapsed, its population lived through the 9th century and gave the basic population for the Kingdom of Hungary. Also the Magyar elite continued to use the mines and trade routes, economical system of the late Avar Khagante, basiacly giving a new elite and state to a big local system and population. Considering all these its possible that the name "Hungary" comes from the local avar/onogur population (with the notible presence of slavs and franks as well) which was assimilated politically by the magyar leaders. Thus the ancient Hun related lore of the medieval Hungarian Chronicles (with some western historical source elements adopted) could be the folklore and history of the local Avar-Onogur descended population assimilated into the folklore of the Magyars. The two population melting together causes later a natural or more lilely direct folklore unification, where the new identity of the political sphera of the Kingdom is a mixture of the local and new migrators historical memories, making the two separate history unified, by showing them as two distant brother nation finding eachother. Despite from that, its very possible that the ancient Hungarian Chronicles talking about a Hun invasion before a magyar invasion is a mythical interpretation of that the people of Hungary were avare that their ethincity has a complex origin through multiple migration waves. I would also note, that the Magyar migration is now interpreted differetnly. The Archaeological evidenced around the Urals shows that the Magyars didnt migrated through centuries to Hungary, but merely just in some decades, because there are no archaeological sites between Ukraine and the Urals what would be connected to the Magyars, but there is a strong evidence of their presence in the Urals and in Ukraine. Levedia was either part of Etelköz or Magna Hungaria. Also the homeland of the Magyars were the eastern side of the urals, the area of the Baraba-steppe. Here you can find the ancient ancestors of the Magyars and Ugric people, named by archaeologival cultures called Mezhovskaya-culture and Sargat-Gorokhovo culture. The first is a post Andronovo culture representing a high cultural and genetical mixture of ugric-iranian origins, the second one is a Schyto-Siberian culture, representing the further cultural and genetical mixture of Siberians and Schytian/Sarmatians. The migrating Magyar elite had 2 genetical cores: the first is the real core of the Magyar elite, genetically characterised by: 50% ugric (mezhovskaya), 35% Sarmatian and 15% Asian Hun. It seems like the ancestors of the magyars intermixed with the Huns before they entered Europe. The second Core has no Finno-Ugric origin, they could be characterised by a Xoingnu/Turkic - Iranian and european origin (just like the majority of Avar age Oghur migrators) . This second one was possibly the Turkic element of the Magyars, who could also brought some Hunnic Folklore with themselves. So the Hunnic compoment in Hungarians is represented in different layers. One layer is possibly the local avar/onogur population which by the 9th cemtury contained very little asian acnestry becuase of the mix of the local europeans, but culturally and maybe even lingusticly were close to the Magyars which explains why the Magyar conquest was so fluent and how the Magyars kept their culture and language in the center of europe, because the local population was already similar in many ways culturally. The Sekler folkore connects to this layer. The second layer is the Árpád dinasty's Attila cult, which is a different originated layer than the nation's Hunor and Magor legend. We don't know if its true or not, but its higly possible that the Árpád dinasty was of Volga Bulgarian origin who were mixing and was neighbours to the Magyars, and the Bulgarian Dulo dinasty also claims Attila in their family tree, the Hungarian Chronicles also mention intermarriage with the Dulo dinasty (intrestingly they are alanian in the chronicles, but bulgars indeed had an iranian component). And also there could be a third layer with the Oghur-Turkic component of the magyars, who were possibly also either Volga Bulgars or Bashkirs. But the most noticable elements are the nation's medieval legend about multiple steppe waves shaping the nations origin (Hunor Magor) and the Árpád dinasty layer. In summary the Hungarians are not the Huns themselves, they are the results of mutliple migration waves shaping a unique ethnicity through history, having Finno ugric, Iranian, Turkic elements, and with that some noticable hunnic element could be part of the ancestry, but among with many many other components.

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

In my opinion, we are going the wrong way if we associate the name Bulgarian with the Volga River. First of all, they call their Bulgarian country Bulgaria. So, the use of the letter "O" deliberately draws attention in the direction of the Volga, intending to prove the Volga origin. The letter B in the word bulgar is the Slavic V sound. It is most likely that the Bulgarian folk name comes from the Latin "vulgar" "vulgaris"! This does not necessarily have a pejorative meaning. It could simply mean that he was a common (vulgar) subject of the Roman Empire. A subject who is not a patrician or plebeian, but not a Roman citizen either, but just an ordinary subject. Therefore, it can be seen that the Bulgarian prehistory, the Bulgarian "empire" is fake. Just like the Khazar Empire and the Turkic Empire. They all serve to rewrite the real history of the Scythians, Huns, and Hungarians of Eurasia. Bulgarians simply do not have anything that would indicate a desert Eastern European origin. There are Scythian-Thracian finds. Their Greek-style pottery masterpieces and Avar equestrian finds. All these together make up the great Bulgarian dream. The JafgarTarihi is simply considered a forgery and the ruling list written in it is referred to. I consider the Dzáfgar Tarihi to be a forgery in that I think they found a Hungarian ancient chronicle and in it the Hungarian folk name was transcribed into Bulgarian. Because of this, the stories in it are incomprehensible and clashed with other stories, including Hungarian ones. But if we change the Bulgarian name back to the Hungarian name in the Jafgar Tarihi, everything will immediately be round and uniform, everything will be understandable!

[@barkasz6066]

Yeah and if you substitute it with little green men then you have a scifi story about an alien invasion.

[@schytoyamnaya9015]

@@barkasz6066 Ok boomer

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

There are no onogurs in the Hungarian chronicles! In fact, there are no Avars either. The word Avar does not appear in Hungarian chronicles, nor does Onogur or Ogur. In Hungarian chronicles, only Scythians, Huns, Hungarians, Moravians, Bulgarians, Slavs and Romans are mentioned.

[@schytoyamnaya9015]

@@childabductioninitaly8946 Read again what I wrote. Their history is covered under the name "Hun" in the Hungarian Chronicles. The Hun era and Avar era melted together in the hungarian chronicle lore.

[@EzraBenKhazar]

Thank you for covering the Magyars and Kabars I view Hungary as a good successor to the Khazar Khaganate. My family were Kabar Jews in the western portion of Hungary and later came to America

[@LuthienwithoutBeren]

Thanks for this wonderful video, maybe it isn't directly related to this video but I want to share a few things. According to the DNA test performed on Saka remains, the peoples they are most closely related to are generally Saka (Tian Shan)- Bashkir (Miyakinsky), Lipka Tatar, Besermyan / Saka (Central Steppe)- Bashkir (Baimaksky), Siberian Tatar (Yalutorovsky) / Khotanese Saka- Pamiri (Sarikoli) etc... More Turkic influence than indoeuropean influence. There is only one Gandhara (Saka-Parthian Period) sample related with iranic- hindu. most of other samples are Turkic related dna. Languages can't directly prove certain relation inbetween nations. Most people continue to believe in the same story about scythians, they aren't indoeuropean either. The closest people in the Scythian (Pazyryk Culture) dna samples are; Bashkir (Baimaksky), Siberian Tatar (Yalutorovsky) / for Scythian (Western Steppe), Mishar Tatar, Balkan Turk (Deliorman) etc... I don't understand what the authorities are waiting for to update history, there is the evidence based on DNA results.

[@attilatasciko4817]

Saka people are here in hungarian carpatian basin = " the saka huns -> székely' s . Etc...

[@LuthienwithoutBeren]

​@@attilatasciko4817I am Turkish and I have 30 percent saka dna!

[@LuthienwithoutBeren]

​@@attilatasciko4817I guess, szekelys are real descents of Attila or magyars. They even have cresent and star in their flag. I didn't know that but i heard this székely name before. I wonder about their dna components.

[@attilatasciko4817]

​@@LuthienwithoutBeren< My ansistery have part of saka = székely hun too , great great father was a "lófő" ( checked out 😏)-> "kitari" saka huns = kétúri huns ( two leaders they had ) of the " red " huns , does who went down to p(h)unjab - india . Here , in hungary , mostly from all huns are here = " black huns ": north huns ( above lived the mongoloid races ) ; the "blue huns " : east huns , including the rüans : alan avars ; " red huns " : south huns - saka huns ; and the " white huns : west huns , they was leading back to the original homeland , after the europian iceage : bastards ( bask ! - car+patian ) basin . Well known ready , all europian 95% left from iceage , and moved back to their original place after iceage . Etc...

[@attilatasciko4817]

​@@LuthienwithoutBeren< székelys , just like pannons ( panhuns - med branch ) and palóc , úz people of huns , and the "jazigs" jász people = all relative branches of one race . Etc...

[@gyulaerdei3180]

Ha a Szkita nomád - hogyan alapit városokat ? Tong-van-cheng - Buda - -Magyar... - Skitopolis...stb. Viszi a kulurát, a világban ... & mindig visszatér ..... ! :)

[@Horizontal77]

In fact, the Hungarians were also related to the Pannonians and the predecessors of the Roman Empire, the Etruscans. Not only the Hungarians came from Asia, but the whole of Europe, which was resettled from Asia after the ice age. Central Asia used to be white.

[@bir_cumle]

I am a Turk, and we have never been a racist nation in our history, and we have mixed with all the peoples we have taken in. That's why we are so diverse.

[@attilatasciko4817]

Horizontal 77 < I keep writting to this channel the same thing , but they always errised that , what you wrote as same , you must have better connection with them . He or they don't like me , for my shocking truth comments . Etc...

[@Horizontal77]

@@bir_cumle That's right! Like the Turks, the Hungarians are also a mixed people. And we are both proud of our ancestors, our origin.

[@Horizontal77]

@@attilatasciko4817 I may be phrasing it differently.

[@keteket]

You are right, Turkisms and Turkic dna are found everywhere in the world.

[@mariaalmasi3374]

Scythians Huns Magyars some of the people, same culture. Horse riding.

[@unitor699industries]

Can you do cuman origin next are they Turks or something else

[@adampinter9832]

Greetings from Hungary. Justice for Hungary.

[@jaca2899]

Is it me, or is there Zelda music at around 10:00?

[@jaca2899]

11:17 okay that's definitely zelda music

[@KhansDen]

@@jaca2899 Yes! Glad somebody noticed. I wanted to sneak Zelda music in for a long time. :

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

You can see below that until the 18th century, the Hungarians and the whole of Europe knew that the Hungarians were the Huns and the Scythians. The Hungarian chronicles also confirm this. Chronicles are made for kings and lying to a king is dangerous. The chronicler can easily lose his head. So the chronicler wrote the truth. (But they did not yet know the Finno-Ugric theory or the Turkic-Onoguric theory.)

[@erikakatona4356]

The chronicles were written according to the king's taste, the truth was the last consideration.

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

@@erikakatona4356 The same is not typical of the Finno-Ugric and Türk-Onogur origin theories...

[@zsoltrolinek9554]

❤😊

[@nickmalgus5626]

The Sarmatian aspect is key to the Magyar story

[@Baso-sama]

indeed it is :)

[@gaborjuhasz5610]

Like Polish? They were Sarmatians....

[@attilatasciko4817]

​​@@gaborjuhasz5610< Polish name well know of nowdays poland , they was emigrated from underneat of todays estonia , where , they are slavic people . But the southern parts " Galicia " of todays poland are the original "lengyel - lend vel " people are mixed from the sar(+)matians - sar+mathians " ( sar+ gels, etc tribes ) -> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE TRADITIONAL BOUND BETWEEN THE POLJAKS AND HUNMAGYARS .Etc...

[@Enrawell]

As a magyar, i thank you!

[@unitor699industries]

Who are the huns where did they come from?

[@gabor247]

So the Magyars ran away from the Pechenegs in fear and then defeated pretty much every European empire in battle until 970. This two doesn’t add up as far as I’m concerned.

[@zoltan6451]

? Its written history It does add up

[@KhansDen]

It actually adds up very well. The Pecheneg, Khazar and others were using the same tactics as the Magyars. The European powers, throughout most of ancient and medieval history, had no chance against the superior steppe cavalry. So it does make sense for them to crush European sedentary societies who were simply not accustomed to this art of warfare while not being always on-par with other steppe warriors. That being said, I am merely summarizing what the sources tell us.

[@zoltan6451]

@@KhansDen hey you made a pretty nice video i like It alot , thanks brother !

[@gabor247]

@@KhansDen fair enough

[@szaboattila844]

You put a little logic and reason into your thoughts: KhansDen's explanations are pertinent, but "fleeing in fear" could have a simple explanation: the peoples allied with the Pechenegs were perhaps much superior numerically, compared to the sum of the Hungarian tribes.

[@peterjanossy7033]

Turkologist scholar Dr. Imre Baski claims that the ethnonym Madjar means 'faithful Muslim', literally 'friend or follower of Muhammad', ultimately from Muhammad-i-yar.[1] "Madi-yar that proved to be a compound anthroponym (Madi[y]-yar) of Arabic-Persian origin. The paper also provides the explanation of the anthroponyms Aldi-yar (’Allah’s friend/follower’) and Ḫudi-yar (’God’s friend/follower’), the “relatives” of Madi(y)-yar (’Muhammad’s friend/follower’)

[@jozsefszabo7839]

Thank you very much it is very accurate and interesting. I have three remarks: it is a pity that the sarmatian connection story was forced to cut out. Second, I thought there is no 100% proof of the roots of Hunnic language. The third - the Turkic underworld god Erlik is unlikely coming from the same word root as Hungarian Ördög, as the meaning of Őr-Dög is meaning the Guardian of the Dead in Hungarian.

[@EliasLaszlo-bl3zo]

❤❤❤HUN❤MAGYAR❤Grof Kubinyi Tamas.HUuuuuuuu❤❤❤❤

[@barkasz6066]

Some inaccuracies I noticed: Regarding the religion: There are no named Hungarian dieties at all. Not one. There is no vast canon of deities. There are no folk tales or myths about *gods*. It's always the one God. Other powerful, supernatural beings are mentioned in folk tales, but they are not gods and it's impossible to date a lot of these tales. It's often difficult to disentangle the "genuine" Hungarian elements from Christian, Slavic or other Western beliefs. The actual direct information we have on Hungarian paganism can be summed up in about 2 sentences. Indirect inferences can be summed up in another 2-3 sentences. Everything else is conjecture based on 19th and 20th century folklorism, a lot of which is questionable at best. The connection between Erlik and Ördög is flimsy at best. The etymology of the word is uncertain. The only mentions of the word first appear in clearly Christian contexts. Some folk tales mention him as an evil spirit almost equal to God, both having taken part in creating the world, in other stories he's the guardian of the underworld or a demon-like figure. That's not necessarily a foreign or even pagan influence, just ask your average Christian today and you'll get many different interpretations of Satan. A dualistic worldview where good and evil forces create the world together and fight one another in some fashion is a very straightforward idea you can infer even from Christianity. Hold Atya / Ay Ata and Nap Anya / Gün Ana are not figures from Hungarian mythology. They don't appear in prominent myths or folktales, they are not named, they simply don't exist. Sun and Moon symbolism does appear very early on but without any anthropomorphized characteristics or attached stories that can be validated as part of some sort of ancient religious custom or belief. It's logical to assume that the Sun and Moon played a role, but there's hardly any religion on Earth where they don't. Again, these are 19th-20th century assertions based on "it looks kind of similar to other tribal religions if you squint really hard, and it sounds cool." You can only draw vague parallels from 18th and 19th century folk tales, but you cannot leap to grand conclusions. People back then hated incomplete information so they lept to conclusions all the time. While looking for paralels can be extremely useful, it's unerasonable to think that belief systems don't change drastically over 1000 years when even in the present day people in Siberia and Central Asia have various, vastly different traditions and religions from one another. So why should a group 1000 years ago share the exact same traditions and beliefs? Göncöl is not a type of shaman. Göncöl's chariot is the name of the Big Dipper in Hungarian. There are many tales about it, only some of them are explicitly mystical or religious and it's impossible to prove which story is older or more original. A few say he was a shaman (táltos) but when his chariot's wheel broke, people didn't help him repair it so he was flown into the sky by God as a reminder to people that they should help others in need. Other myths mash him up with St Peter and say he's the guardian of the Pearly Gates of Heaven and he's the one who brings people before God on his chariot. The Érdy codex was written by a Carthusian monk in LATIN, not in runic script. It's not a codex of pagan cosmology but a collection of legends about Christian saints. The codex is dedicated to Saint Clement and contains prayers to saints for each month with special prayers for Christian holidays. It's the most extensive codex of Hungarian legends for sure and while there are possibly pagan elements in some of the legends, it's notably a Christian legendarium.

[@zoltan-atillaungor365]

Hungary(Magyars) had a Prince his name was Imre, that was in the eleventh century. Also ,In turkey there is name like" Emre.

[@attilatasciko4817]

13:03= The privious tales of huns , i wrote to you , to use the correct colors of the huns ( us ) . " white " huns : west huns ; " black " huns : north huns , " blue " huns : east huns , " red " huns : south huns . In hungary , nowdays , still you can find all of this hun branches . Etc...

[@bir_cumle]

Hello, the same is true in Turkey. My father's side has Anatolian Seljuk ancestry and they are completely blonde. My mother's side is not brunette, but she has slanted black eyes and jet black hair and white skin, and I noticed that they look like canvases. And I realized that the local eagle game in Tuva is similar to the zeybek game played in the Aegean. We are branches of a nation. We are all more or less genetically connected. And culturally😊

[@mohammedsaysrashid3587]

Super informative work about Magyarland ,ugroc stepp northern Turkik tribe's ...thank you🙏 (Khan Den ) channel for sharing this remarkable & incredible historical coverage work

[@ScythianDragons]

full of misinformation spead on the internet abot us... looks like someone continuing the Hasburgs BS

[@nukhetyavuz]

i read gesta hungarorum🐎👍🦅🌎🧿♥️🇹🇷 so proud we have a shared ancestry...

[@accaeffe8032]

Emese is pronounced Emeshe, with all the "e"s pronounced the same way as the "e" in the word "get" (more or less)

[@KhansDen]

Duly noted. I had a suspicion. Is Almos also prounced Almo-sh chance?

[@zoltantoth1821]

@@KhansDen yes, kind of... "A" in Almos is like "a" in "khan" and "s" is like "sh" is "show". Hungarian is not an easy language. :) For the "s" like in "some" we have a double letter "sz". Simple "s" is always like "sh" is "show".

[@normarendszer]

This is the Finno-Ugric concept, which cannot be reconciled with archaeogenetic and recent results. The Hungarians are the descendants of Proto-Europeans who were superimposed on a population with a steppe culture that was mixed from the Scythian-Hunavar populations. These ancient Europeans are the inhabitants of the Carpathian Basin and the Balkans since the Paleolithic, who survived the Ice Age and continue to inhabit their homeland. An integral part of Scythia is the Bronze Age Carpathian Basin, where the very first written signs appear (Tordos - Vinča culture, Tatárlaka). Here they found the first cart model (Budakalász) proving the use of wheels, and ancient smelters for smelting ores. The Hungarian language is idioma primogenitum, i.e. the oldest language of Europe. It is not Finno-Ugric based, but self-developed like Turkish, Finnish, Basque, Japanese, and Korean languages. These languages ​​were still in contact with each other during the Hunnic era.

[@serkankinden5150]

I agree with you brother. Eurasiatic language macrofamily includes all dene-caucasian, uralic-altaic, indo-european language families. According to related Jäger (2005) study, closest languages to indoeuropean languages are uralic languages. Also mitochondrial dna shows similarity of finnougric, western turkic, iranic, european people in addition to paternal ydna lineages. (We can also find these west eurasian mitochondrial + east eurasian paternal mixture in elder eurasians.) Why finnougric people may not have been the ancestors of europeans?

[@Samanyolu-ov1yk]

There is no indo european

[@serkankinden5150]

@@Samanyolu-ov1yk Evet, benim anladığım kadarıyla binlerce yıl önce ural-altay sibirya bölgesinden güney asya, avrupa, orta doğu yönüne göçler başlamış. Ural-altay halkları, bölgesel halklarla zaman içinde karışarak yeni hint-avrupa dillerini keşfetmişler. Macarlar, avrupanın en eski dillerinden demiş arkadaş, bence de öyle ve hint-avrupa dilleri ural dillerinden türemiş olabilir.

[@danvasii9884]

You are driving me nuts with your madjar pronunciation. You said it correctly when about the Central Asia relatives - it is ”Mag-Yar”, not ”Mad-gear”!!! For the rest, your video it is very good (I am Romanian and met a lot of Mad-gears! even had them as army mates)

[@KhansDen]

Duly noted. It's the AI voice that got it wrong. I'm going to narrate all future videos by myself again, like in the intro here, so that such pronunciation errors won't occur anymore. Regards.

[@Arpoxais1Ateas2]

I can prove that the Turkic peoples have little to do with the Scythians, and even more so that the Hungarians were the real royal Scythians! I have a lot of evidence, but for this you need to know the Hungarian language and the original ancient texts about the Scythians and their name! The Turkish people have no idea, but unfortunately 99% of the Hungarians have no idea that the royal Scythians lived here in the middle of Europe and spoke an ancient Hungarian language! I will describe only three very easy-to-understand examples of Scythian names, and if someone knows the Hungarian language well, they will realize how logical these names are. I will only describe three very easy-to-understand examples of the names of the Scythians, and if someone knows the Hungarian language well, they will realize how logical this is. The first is the Scythian name itself, where Herodotus already describes in detail, exactly what the well-known Hungarian chronicler Anonymus wrote about the Hungarians much later, that these tribes and peoples swore to each other with a blood pact, because the pact with blood and wine was already an ancient custom of the Scythian tribes! But this was already called an "sküth" or esküt by the Scythians, and it became the Greek sküth - sküthai = in Hungarian esküdt - oath! The name of this alliance was Aškuza or Iškuza on the Assyrian cuneiform tablets, which was then Aškuz in the Bible, but these were all written in a corrupted form, which explains why it became Szküthai (Σκυθαι) in the Greek sources. Because if you observe, "sku" or "skü" is there in all languages ​​in antiquity, which the Latins already distorted to Scyth - Scythian, and this explains why they couldn't write the letter ü, so they wrote y. So the people of Eskü was originally the Scythian name, from which the Europeans distorted it to Sküth - Skyth and finally Scythian, which is why the Hungarians of the 18th century made it Szkíta and Szittya, because they forgot the old meaning of the name! The Hungarian linguist Ferenczi Enikő of Kolozsvár has already realized this, according to whom the Greek root "szküth" can be logically connected with the Hungarian word eskü: „The Scythians could call themselves according to that address, which can be restored from today's Hungarian word esküsző(s) or esküző(s), and its meaning may be close to the phrase "the person who swears" or "the people of the oath". The original folk name is unknown, we only know the name corrupted by the neighboring nations. Most likely, the Assyrian version, Aškuza(i) or Iškuza(i), is closest to the Hungarian folk name." Source: Wikipedia - The Royal Scythians. But all this is also logical, especially if we read what the ancient writers, such as Strabo and Ptolemy, wrote about the Royal Scythians, that they often called themselves Ourgoi and Urogi. And if someone does not believe that this name contains the ancient Hungarian word ur - urak, then I will quote how these authors called the lords of the Eastern Scythians, for example: In Lucian's Makrobioi it is sakaurakai (Σακαυρακαι), in Strabo it is sakarauloi (Σακαραυλοι), in Ptolemy it is sagaraukai (Σαγαραυκαι), and in Justinian it is saraucae! All of these prove that the word urag - urak - was lords is the Scythian - for the Sküth - Esküt peoples, since Strabo also described that these were the lords of the Scythians! And then the logic in this is understandable, since the ancient Greeks and Romans also wrote that the royal Scythians were the lords of the Scythians, so the Urog - lords were kings and the Esküdt - Szküthai - Scythians, which they translated as royal Scythians = lords of the sworn peoples! And I have many other examples, but the third one I will describe is one of the most well-known river names of the Scythians in the east, the name of the Borysthenes river. If we remove the Greek transliteration and the letter s from the end, it is still an understandable Hungarian name today: Boristene! What every Hungarian-speaking person understands is bor - wine and Isten - God, but many people do not know that in the past the word "bor" also meant sparkling water, which is why it is included in the names of several settlements, such as Borszék in Transylvania. So, in the language of the ancient Hungarian-speaking European Urogi Scythians, this river meant the water of the gods or the wine water, and this is what we understand in Hungarian to this day! And if anyone doubts, there is the other great Scythian river name in the west, the Isteros - Ister, which again could be from the name of the ancient Isten - God, as well as in the name of the river Boristene. Except that few people know that Ister and Istár are already an ancient god among the Babylonians and Sumerians was. And then these name coincidences are not accidental, because there are others such as the name of the river Naporis, which is already mentioned by Herodotos, and which name, if we we cut the Greek suffix in the same way, remains the word Nap - Napos, which only meant the Sun in the sky among the Hungarians and the Sumerians! And then just to add to that, there was an ancient Agathyrs or Dacian city in Transylvania, whose name was Napos - Napoka, and this name already appears in antiquity as one of the sons of the Scythian ancestor, who was described by the Greeks as Napoxais. It is certain that these names are not understood by the Turkic peoples, and this also proves that they could only have had something to do with the Huns of Inner Asia, the Xiongnu-Huns of Scythian culture, who stayed there and mixed with their natives! And if anyone still doubts, read the relevant study by historian Horváth Csaba-Barnabás, which again starts from the results of archaeogenetics and population genetics, about the Ugrian Scythians, or the Hungarian-speaking European Scythians! Dr. Horváth Csaba Barnabás, historian-political scientist, member of the public body of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. He was previously a researcher at the MTA-ELTE-SZTE Silk Road Research Group. He worked with visiting research grants in Australia at the Australian National University in Canberra, at the Fudan University in Shanghai, China, and at the National Chengchi University in Taipei, Taiwan, and gave lectures in Malaysia at the Tunku Abdul Rahman University in Kuala Lumpur, the Penang Institute in Penang, and the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. At the invitation of the University. His area of ​​expertise is the geopolitics of the Asia-Pacific region and Central Europe.

[@askarusin8408]

Interesting, tnx. Good for the Hungarians. Greetings from a Türk.

[@jacky9590]

I think, it would be worth it to go further into the findings of the archaeogenetic research conducted by the Institute of Hungarian Research, which you did cite but talked less off. It also points out that the conquerors HAD Hunnic ancestry and that the Mansi took the culture/language with them north spreading it while the Magyar ancestors stayed in the Steppe region. Which finding contradicts the "direction" and the origin story of the Finnougric theory, but proves the validity of the language connection between Finnougric people. "All analysis consistently indicated that the ancestors of Conquerors further admixed with a group from Mongolia, carrying Han-ANA-related ancestry, which could be identified with ancestors of European Huns. This admixture likely happened before the Huns arrived in the Volga region (370 CE) and integrated local tribes east of the Urals, including Sarmatians and the ancestors of Conquerors. ..The large number of genetic outliers with Hun_Asia_Core ancestry in both Avars and Conquerors testifies that these successive nomadic groups were indeed assembled from overlapping populations."

[@latakicsi2183]

today hungarian have 4% asian dnas from conquer magyars but they still managed a country named after them and a uniqe language spread and still in use in central-europe,we know from recent dna datas that the magyar 7 tribes invasion 1100 years ago hardly made any dna changes /max 5-10%/ so was not a mass migration rather only elit change similar like when 10.000 norman/french knights ruledover england

[@borishenkel9703]

When Koguryo(高句麗) was defeated by Tang(唐) China in 668 AD, Some Malgal(靺鞨) tributes emigrated to Turk(突厥). 1,000 years later... The descendant of Malgal main tributes, Manchurian(滿州族) opened Qing Dynasty(淸朝) and conquered Ming(明)China. I think the descendant of Malgal emigrants to Turk is Magyar people. Korean history says Malgal was a harsh and unconqurable horseman warriors.

[@Baso-sama]

that's really interesting, i'm hearing about this for the first time. i will keep my eyes open to see if this hypothesis comes up anywhere. for now i will consider it wild speculation, but who knows, maybe tomorrow someone will undoubtedly prove this.

[@attilatasciko4817]

The " blue huns " the eastern huns , rüans are the avars , relative - combine brach of them . That's why traceable the avars to korea and japan ( nippon = naphon -> the ( rising ) sun country . Kishida prime minister of japan ) = in today hungarian language = the person of from the kishíd ( from the small bride ( or from around the small bridge ) of a small river ) . The " red huns " : southern huns , the " black huns " : northern huns ( above them was living , the mongolians ) , and the " white huns " western huns , are we , who came back after the europian iceage to carpatian basin , after huns , avars , and now we the magyars . Etc...

[@BulgarChanyu]

Malgal were Bulgars tho, considering they came from Buluoji(Bulgars in Chinese)

[@ElligKulugShadMaghaIsbaraKagan]

⁠​⁠@@BulgarChanyu Could you tell me which sources talked about the connection between the Buluoji and Malgal?

[@BulgarChanyu]

@@ElligKulugShadMaghaIsbaraKagan it’s not explicitly stated but, Buluoji’s old Chinese pronunciation is almost the same as Mohe’s, both corresponding to Malkar/Bulgar, also in Jin Shu the leader of Mohe had the surname Shi, just as Shi Le of Buluoji. Besides, Chinese sources explicitly state that Balhae(old Chinese pronunciation is almost “Balgar”) name came from Mohe, proving the obvious B-M change in Buluoji and Mohe.

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

The 17 scientists asked the question: The aboriginal population of Europe, in what proportion are the ancient European genes present in the sons of various peoples living today? The ancestral gene, which means nothing more than the genetic code of people living here 35 - 40 thousand years before Christ, which peoples of the European population carry the highest proportion? In Hungarian, the question can be asked as follows: who are the indigenous population of Europe? The test is carried out by determining the Y chromosome. The male chromosome can be better researched because it can be determined from any cell fragment. An intact mitochondrion is required for the female chromosome test. The result is astonishing. Based on Y chromosome research, this group of scientists found that the European ancestor is present in 95% of the population living here in the truncated Hungary today. This means that 95% of the Hungarian population carries proto-European genes. It is at least as interesting as to what proportion of the other European populations carry the European ancestral gene? Who carries the European ancestral gene in a high percentage after the Hungarians? The Poles, the Croats and the Ukrainians beyond the Eastern Carpathians. (50-60 %) The other ethnic groups do not carry the European ancestral gene even in a fraction" Renowned geneticist Dr. Endre Czeizel Genetics of Hungarians c. in his book, he writes about the conclusions that can be drawn from the Semino study: "60% of Hungarian men are descendants of the EU-19 - Paleolithic - ancestor. ...A further 13.3% of Hungarian men are from the EU-18, 11% a is EU-7, and 8.9% are descendants of EU-4 ancestor. All this means that 93.3% of current Hungarian men originate from four ancestors, and 73.3% already here in the Paleolithic era the offspring of living men." Given the outstanding importance of this study, the names and locations of all its authors are published below: Ornella Semino,1,2 Giuseppe Passarino,2,3 Peter J. Oefner,4 Alice A. Lin,2 Svetlana Arbuzova,5 Lars E. Beckman,6 Giovanna De Benedictis,3 Paolo Francalacci,7 Anastasia Kouvatsi,8 Svetlana Limborska,9 Mladen Marcikiae,10 Anna Mika,11 Barbara Mika,12 Dragan Primorac,13 A. Silvana Santachiara-Benerecetti,1 L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza,2 Peter A .Underhill2 The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective; SCIENCE VOL 290. NOVEMBER 10, 2000.

[@erikakatona4356]

The genetics of today's "Hungary": - 45,000-year-old prehistoric Aurignacian Paleolithic hunter-gatherer Europeans, extant branch of M170-I1 8.5% - M173-M17-R1a from 30,000-year-old Late Stone Age Gravettian hunter-gatherer Eurasians, this is the most characteristic haplogroup that has survived to this day, 30% - 8,000-6,000 years ago in the Neolithic, from farmers who settled here from the Middle East: - M170 I2a, Kőrös-Stracevo cultural people, today 16% - Yap M35-E1b, Mediterranean type male, today 8%. - J2, Anatolian origin, Caucasian origin, Transdanubian Polish culture, today 6.5% - The population of the Bronze Age and Iron Age Eastern settlements (Kurgans, Scythians, Celts), M173 R1b is 18% today, most of them moved to Western Europe, where today the most typical By the end of the Iron Age, 87% of the gene pool of today's "Hungarians" had been assembled! There are also smaller superstratifications, genetically related settlements: Sarmatians, Jaszians, Dacians, some Far Eastern genes (N1c) with the Huns, Avars, Griffins, Árpáds. Mostly R1a+R1b markers from the eastern neighbor.

[@renatoszakal4315]

Hey! I really appriciate what you trying to do by covering the history of the steppes, that is why I decide to leave some objective criticism under this video of yours that might be helpful in the future. In case of this magyar video I happen to know alot about from historical texts. The part about their religion is full of errors, I assume the source for it was wikipedia because you won't find the same information anywhere else. There is 0 proof there was a sun mother and moon father in magyar religion, the only magyar god/godess we got proof for is Boldogasszony. It's literally the only god recorded by name there is no other one (her name roughly translates to joyous/happy woman and become synonimous with Mary mother of Jesus). If you wanted to, sience you brought up the bashkirs, one of the muslim writers decided to describe all the gods of the "bashkirs" so you could have mentoined that. He don't name them but tells for each one what they are the god of (there was quiet alot of them). You can also find other informations about their practices, pretty much all of them can be connected to tengrism. You bringing up ördög for elrik is only etymological so its a bit strange to base the tengrist connection solely on that. About their writing system is also super errorous. There were 3 runic scripts in the carpathian basin all of them separete from each other. There is the avar script, khazar script and székely-hungarian script (which this latter one mostly got prescedent alot later in time when hungarians were already christian for more than hundreds of years, the khazar and the avar script however converge with the time of the magyar invasion). It would be nice to see historical youtubers genuenly base their videos on direct sources rather than extremely errorous ones and fictious ones so I hope you don't take it the hard way and I could help improve your content. I also think your own voice narrating rather than ai voice would be alot better, you got nothing to be ashamed of. Either way good luck for your future videos!

[@unitor699industries]

I had such a real dream it was 2024 but not 2024 and a I was in the Hungarian army and a steppe army was coming from the steppes of Russia coming to raid us, I went to scout them got captured and then they were friendly and it was weird I became friends with them and we started drinking and I met a beautiful steppe girl started talking to her and then I wanted to ride their horses and I impressed my parents with my horse skills, i told one of the soldiers you are the only one who look like a steppewarrior the others look more Slavic, and then I woke up

[@ScythianDragons]

We have nothing to due with turkic or turks we loaned them 300 words during Eurasia times for trade. We shared 6000 words with Sumer Emire langugae and 10,000 words with our Ugyher brothers that also wear our Long Scythian Hats. We was just rulers in Asia origina Homeland is Carpathian Basin ;9)

[@user-pp6fx7si4g]

When the Magyars moved in, there were still lots of Hunnish people in the area. So they mixed and became one nation.

[@KhansDen]

Seems plausible. The Huns (and Avars) did not disappear overnight, afterall.

[@latakicsi2183]

@@KhansDen today hungarian have 4% asian dnas from conquer magyars but they still managed a country named after them and a uniqe language spread and still in use in central-europe,we know from recent dna datas that the magyar 7 tribes invasion 1100 years ago hardly made any dna changes /max 5-10%/ so was not a mass migration rather only elit change similar like when 10.000 norman/french knights ruledover england

[@barkasz6066]

Regarding Emese and Álmos: Anonymous says that since Emese had a dream about her progeny becoming great kings, she named her son Álmos after the Hungarian word for dream "álom". Álom is an ancient Uralic word, cognates with Mansi olem, Khanty álem, Mordvinic udem (sleeping). No Turkic connection. Emese means 'nursing mother'. In certain dialects 'emse', older form eme means female pig or more broadly female animal. Cognates with Finnish and Estonian emä (mother), Selkup eme (mother). Again, no Turkic connection.

[@Optimistic7718]

Skita,Avar,Hun,Magyar👍🇭🇺

[@Arpoxais1Ateas2]

Mind esküdt népek, mert a vérszerződés már a szkíták törzseinek ősi szokása volt, de ezt eskünek nevezték már a szkíták, és ebből lett a görög szküth - szküthai = esküt! Ennek a szövetségnek az asszír ékiratos táblákon Aškuza vagy Iškuza volt a neve, ami aztán a Bibliában Aškuz, de ezek mind rontott alakban voltak leírva, amelyekből érthető miért lett aztán a görög forrásokban Szküthai (Σκυθαι). Mert ha megfigyeled a "sku" vagy "skü" minden nyelven ott van az ókorban, amit aztán a latinok már Scyth - Scythai-ra torzítottak, és akkor ezzel is magyarázható, hogy ők nem tudták az ü betűt leírni, ezért y írtak. Tehát az Eskü népe volt eredetileg a szkíta név, amiből az európaiak Sküth - Skyth és végül Scythian-ra torzították, ezért már a 18. századi magyarok ebből szkítát és szittyát csináltak, mert elfelejtették a névnek a régi jelentését! Ezekre már Ferenczi Enikő Kolozsvári magyar nyelvész is rájött, aki szerint a görögös "szküth" szótövet a magyar eskü szóval lehet logikusan összekapcsolni: „A szkíták nevezhették magukat ama megszólítás szerint, mely visszaállítható a mai magyar esküsző(k) vagy esküző(k) szóból, és jelentése »a személy, aki esküszik« vagy »az eskü népe« szóösszetételhez állhat közel. Az eredeti népnév ismeretlen, csak a szomszédos nemzetek által elrontott elnevezést ismerjük. Legvalószínűbben az asszír változat, az Aškuza(i) vagy Iškuza(i) áll legközelebb a magyar nyelvből alkotott népi névhez.” Forrás: Wikipédia - A királyi szkíták!

[@szakaattila7899]

It is very interesting that almost all neighboring and more distant peoples in Europe try to rewrite the origin of Hungarians, and I could say that we are almost used to this, but now they are trying to do this from other continents as well and it is outrageous! After all, this is what the Habsburgs - Austrians did for more than two hundred years, then the Germans, the Czechs and the Romanians, more recently the Slovaks and the Ukrainians have been doing, and even today there are those who do this from the inside. But it is unbearable that now the Turks have started to rewrite our history, when they were the ones who kept half of Europe in Muslim captivity and slavery for centuries?! And by what right do they do this to us? I don't think it's just about building a Turkish influence here in the middle of Europe, proclaiming the Hungarians as the younger brother of the Turkic people who entered Europe, even if there are many Hungarians like Orbán Viktor and some historians who believed in this nonsense, with the Turanian peoples! I believe that these propaganda films are paid for by the same people who are ruining the whole of Europe from the outside and the inside! And here I am thinking of those who at the same time force and finance uncontrolled immigration from the east and the south, and at the same time promote lmbtq - gender and vok ideologies from the west, actions that sooner or later will lead to anarchy and civil wars in Europe! Today, Hungarians are one of the strongest bastions in Europe that oppose these artificially stimulated processes, which is why there are probably already plans for how to disrupt the Hungarian people, the Hungarian secret services have already indicated the attempts! That's why I find it very suspicious that only in the last year, many more Hungarian prehistory and Trianon-related videos have been uploaded to KZbin, made by foreigners, than in the previous ten years, or since KZbin existed! And what's wrong with this video? It's just that he takes up those old fixed narratives that have already been completely disproved by the archaeological and archaeogenetic, linguistic and toponymic research of the last 20 years. But my biggest problem is that he turns all of this around at the end, as if the supposed Gokturks were a civilization that spread a powerful culture all over Asia and Eastern Europe, and the Finno-Ugric Hungarians people of northern Siberia would was he just a kind of apprentice, who then invaded Europe and assimilated the peaceful inhabitants here?! I don't think that more nonsense have been invented about any people in the whole of Europe than about the Hungarians, who coincidentally and disturbingly for many, somehow live right in the middle of continental Europe! I have all the data that contradicts this whole narrative of the conquering Hungarians from the 9th century, but I will not give data for now, I will only ask everyone who reads this to think seriously about the following very logical questions! Why would the Hungarians have come even here and stopped right in the center of Europe, in this area called the Carpathian basin, and did not go further west or north just a little, or further south in the Balkans, because from all real data they were much stronger than the surrounding peoples?! Couldn't it be precisely because the Huns, the Avars and the Onogurs only came this far, or before them the Yazigs, Sarmatians, Dacians and the Scythians also only expanded this far in the west and did not want to settle, for example, in the northern or southern half of the Alps?! If anyone doubts now, then answer why Attila and those who followed after them, such as the kings of the Gepids such as Ardarik, Trasericus and Turisendh, or also the kagans of the Avars such as Bajan, all of them were always established itheir headquarters in the middle of the Carpathian basin, just like Árpád and his successors?! Why don't people think about this? For example, according to all data, the Pechenegs, the Uzians, the Yasians and the Cumans only wanted to settle in the Carpathian basin, and they did attack the Hungarians, but most of the time without success, which is why it looks like were they just waiting to be allowed in here?! And then it is very interesting and relevant what historians have proven with the latest research, that Batu Khan's Mongol armies in 1241 also attacked Poland for the first time in order to make it easier to support the conquest of the Hungarian kingdom from the north, and above all to cut off the help of the Poles, since then they could have helped the Hungarians! Because today most historians say that the Mongols only wanted to conquer Hungary, so the Carpathian basin, and not so much the whole of Europe, because then they could have gone as far as the Germans in the north, and for this they would have only to bypass the Hungarians and defeat the Poles! Or in the south they could have conquered the entire Balkans and even reached Italy, but the main army didn't even go there! And then, is it also a coincidence that the Ottomans only made it this far, but were never able or wanted to conquer the entire Carpathian basin? But few people know that the Romans also got their teeth into this, that they tried to keep this entire region in their hands, but for example they were never able to conquer the parts between the Tisa and the Danube and finally they withdrew from the Transylvanian parts quite early, until the Pannonian teritory was also given up during the time of the Huns! And where is the Roman Empire now? Or where are the Frankish and German empires that later did the same? And finally, where are the Mongols and the Ottomans today, who needed this territory in the same way for centuries, or where the Habsburg empire is today, which still benefited the most from these parts?! And then let's not forget the Soviets, whose first wound was cut in the leg by the Hungarians in 1956, and also the last one, when the Hungarian authorities cut down the wire fences and allowed hundreds of thousands of East Germans to flee across the border to Austria, and a year later the Soviet Union broke down!

[@Nastya_07]

7:30 It would be better to distinguish Altaic (without Uralic) from the wider Ural-Altaic, especially since a close genetic link between Uralic and Altaic is obsolete, I'd also like to mention that the authors of the article mentioned in 7:48 actually support a closer link between Indo-European and Uralic then between Uralic and Altaic, though according to them Indo-Uralic and Altaic could still be related through Narrow Nostratic. But of course, all of this is very tentative.

[@attilatasciko4817]

PLEASE NOT MAKE A COMMON MISTAKE = TURC(K)'S PEOPLE ARE NOT TÜRK'S PEOPLE . DID THEY MIXED , SOME OF THEM YES , BUT THE BANCHES MUST KEEP SEPARATE ,WE DON'T SAY , THE SCYTHIANS ARE TÜRKS , JUST LIKE THE SARMATIANS ARE TÜRKS TOO ‽ NO WAY . Etc...

[@KhansDen]

I neither stated that the Scythians nor the Sarmatians had been Turks.

[@attilatasciko4817]

​@@KhansDen< i did it , that was a suggestive comment , for the comparization .

[@KhansDen]

@@attilatasciko4817 Ah, now I get it. Nevermind then.

[@Kuzguni]

Nope, you are wrong:First ancient DNA analysis of mummies from the post-Scythian Oglakhty cemetery in South Siberia

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

Prof. Grover S. Krantz Geographical development of European languages "... the Greek language, therefore, was present in 6500 BC, Celtic language was born in 3500 BC in Ireland. The greatness of the Hungarian language in the Carpathian Basin is equally surprising; I find that its origin leads to the mesolithic, before the Stone Age. "

[@attilatasciko4817]

Missing the numbers !

[@keteket]

The Turkic language was used even under the Scythians, as a silver bowl with Turkic runes was discovered. Not to mention the fact that their gods and names are quietly translated into Turkic with the preservation of meaning and sound.

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

@@keteket Impossible. Because the Scythians existed from bc. 900 to 300, and the first Turkish was ad. 520. It is logical that the Scythians could not use the language of a people that was created at least 800 years later! The Scythians had their own Scythian language and Scythian runic writing. The Türk rune was created from the Scythian-Hun rune and not vice versa.

[@anttwo]

​@@childabductioninitaly8946 dude you just claimed ancient indo-europeans existed 10 thousand years ago. Surely you sound like a white nationalist boomer than a reliable debator. Turks existed way before the Göktürks, and greeks only came to exist around 3000 years ago

[@childabductioninitaly8946]

@@anttwo And how do you know this?

[@larpad1]

Very detailed and informative video but unfortunately it contains a lot of false or scientifically obsolete, unproven information. On the other hand regarding the turkic connection it is unnecessarily detailed which leads to false conclusion 1.) If you want to understand the story of the steppe people and culture, you have to look back not just to the 4th century when the Huns hit Europe but to the Scythians thousand year earlier at least. They invented and mastered mounted archery and warfare, bronze and goldsmith and were settlers of the Eurasian steppe. They have very significant archeological legacy from the Carpathian basin, too with mythological golden stag findings which are not the only very clear cultural connection to Arpad's Hungarians. Medieval chronicles, mythological and folk tradition is also refer back to the Scythians. Genetic studies show a strong connection between Arpad's Hungarians and the pre-Scythian Mezhovskaya culture. That time pre-turkic people were not yet steppe people 2.) Finno-ugric theory of origin is partially true and partially contradicted: language origin is proven, common genetic ancestry is proven but the formation of the language and later separation of the tribes were in the steppe zone. That means that the ancestors of the Khantys and other finno-ugric tribes migrated from the south to the north not the ancestors of the Hungarians in the other way around. 3.) Álmos is a Hungarian (finno-ugric) name that has a meaning actually (Emese álma - Dream of Emese) not a Turkic one. That's a proven fact, check it. 4.) It is not proven that the Huns were a turkic tribe and spoke turkic language exclusively. If you understand how steppe people integrated several tribes than it is most likely they had turkic, finno-ugric, german (proven) and maybe even iranian-sarmatian-alan speaking tribes. The same way as Arpad's Hungarian integrated several tribes 5.) and finally to the commenters who even deny the genetic continuity of the current Hungarians to Arpad's: the time didn't stop in the 9th century and it keeps running nowadays... Check the genetic map of Europe: each country is genetically the closest to its neighbours. that means that people mix with each other which is a good thing. Slavs also integrated many steppe people: Polish have strong sarmatian, Bulgars turkic connection. Romanians integrated a lot of Cumans. Current Solvakia and Romania has a significant Hungarian population, partially assimilated already...The only difference is that Hungarians kept his language and some of the traditions. That can only be possible if the Hungarian language came to the Carpathian basin not just with Arpad but with former waves of steppe people.

[@CocoSon-we2rg]

To me, the very clear evidence you stated seems the most dubious. To make the Hungarians the main people of the Scythians based on the horseshoes of dead horses in the graves when so little is known about them seems to me deceitful. I agree that the Khanty-Mansi language was the ancestor of Hungarian, but why did you leave where you were thousands of years ago requires the instinct of a migratory bird. Almos and his descendants were Khazars. The Huns would not have spoken Turkish, but we can no longer ask Hunor and Magor Hungarian. Finally, keep the genetic analyzes out of the eyes of the Slovaks, because Budapest will also claim them.

[@ScythianDragons]

he is an outside to us this is why us hungarians dont like outsiders talking about us they read the interent and think aliens are real ...lol

[@somorjai]

Álmos = Dreamy - because of divine dreams, clearly Hungarian and not Turkic origin, most common word. Álmos also can be translated as Sleepy, but not that is the case at a leader.

[@FireflyThereIsHope]

Russians made Hungarians forget what they were. Bulgarians and Hungarians have Turkic origin even if they don't want to admit it.

[@latakicsi2183]

hungarians not turks at all our dnas 95% typically european and rest of it hun,sarmatans etc

[@FireflyThereIsHope]

@@latakicsi2183 Turkic I said. And yes they are. It’s proven after checking the tomb of Hungarian kings.

[@latakicsi2183]

@@FireflyThereIsHope google it then:The genetic origin of Huns, Avars, and conquering Hungarians... it is genetic result after 3000 skeletons not 1 king and royals unique anyway english having germans as kings

[@Khagun_Kalki]

It always saddens me when Tibet is shown as proto tibetan, there was zangzung at a later date and at ancient times the Tibetan platue was called monyul and the people monpa and followed a shamanic religion called BON that later turned BON bhuddist , Mon people still exist and even spread as far as Southeast Asia establishing the kingdom of Mon , there are districts in India called Mon and the monpa people still exist though they mostly identify themselves as Tibetan bhuddist after the 6 century. Sadly historians seem to recognise Tibet only after songsten gyalpo in the 7 century , I’m sure they interacted with all the nomadic empires and Samarkand India China etc are next door neighbours 😊😢

[@SultanBrokenClock]

I like the voice… the ai videos hurt my head 🙂‍↕️

[@KhansDen]

So should I narrate the whole video myself next time...? I thought about it, actually.

[@SultanBrokenClock]

@@KhansDen yea if it doesn’t take up to much of your time but it sounds much better. Allowing me to absorb the information more efficiently.

[@u9vata]

Proper origin theory: Neither "finno-ugric" and neither "Turcic" - but Scythian / Europid component of Huns (supported by both archeogenetics and the original 20-ish chronicles of ours)