|
|
Post by MagyarTanhu on Mar 6, 2010 17:29:19 GMT 3
The same "proofs" you use to complain about others saying there is no relation are the same for why you can't say there is a relation. We can't believe something is true until there is proof. You're trying to believe there is something true and then go looking for proof. What if proof was found that showed that Magyars were directly related to Avars? It would go against your belief of a relationship with Huns. Would you change your belief or would you think with an open mind? Look, before I knew anything, I used to think Magyars were Gypsies because of popular American cultural beliefs. Cultural beliefs certainly wasn't proof. Please read and educate yourself more and more. How can you say such things? Deductive logic is fine but how can you mix up here or make comparison of popular American cultural believes with a thousand year long cultural tradition? I see the whole situation more complex and does not exclude relation with the Avars - yes there might be, Professor Laszlo Gyula could be right with his theory of dual conquest but that is not excluding the Hun relations too. Why do you think that if the Hungarian were related to Avars than they could not be related to Huns? Shall we start to write about the Yuechi's, or Ruan-ruans (juan-juan)from where possible the Avars were forming or what do you want to indicate? As I said earlier Huns did not consist only from one nation. In the time of Mao-Tun, Modu there were at least 24-26 tribes united. Otherwise if your Hungarian is good enough for now, try to read these books: "A magyarok története - Tárih-i Üngürüsz" or "Madzsar Tárihi" by Mahmúd Terdzsüman or modern edition by Prof. Dr. Blaskovics József. Other book, rare by Szász Béla: A húnok története, Attila nagykirály |
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 6, 2010 19:12:42 GMT 3
Actually, the Magyars have more heritage from the Onoghurs, Khazars, Qabars, Pecheneks and Qypchaq-Cumans rather than the Huns, that was my point  The relationship between the Huns and Magyars is stuck at the legendary levels, plus there is indeed an important time gap between the two, and the Magyars were culturally closer to the groups I listed above. |
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Mar 6, 2010 21:20:16 GMT 3
OK if you didn't like my first analogy, here is another. Native Americans have thousands of years old legends about their origins, about how they were created on American land. There are tribes here who actually are hostile to scientists who come and ask for some DNA samples from them because they see it as just another form of Anglo-American imperialism. Why? Because the DNA can prove that they came from Asia in contradiction to their thousands of years old legends and they don't like that. Just because something is old or traditional doesn't mean it is right or the truth. I've been reading on this subject for close to ten years now what information is available in English. Most scholars I've read are the mainstream ones with peer-reviewed work like Andras Rona-Tas, Gyula Laszlo, Denis Sinor, Geza Roheim, etc. As Ihsan points out, there's much more relationship and heritage with Onoghurs, Khazars, Cumans, Pechenegs than with Huns (through which a possible Hun relation in the Arpad royal house comes from). You really have to wonder when Simon Kezai writes in the second paragraph of the entire Gesta Hungarorum:
As it was a matter dear to your heart to learn of the deeds of the Hungarians, and I had ascertained this fact for certain, I set about to bring together in one volume the stories of that nation scattered and spread in various sources through Italy, France, and Germany.
What?! No stories sourced from Hungary herself? Italy, France, and Germany, all Roman Catholic, had an interest in Hungary being Roman Catholic to stand against Byzantine and the East and respected the royal house land claim rights to Hungarian lands through this Attila story! What did we lose? What were the stories from Hungary that we lost, that were burned and destroyed? But one has to ask what does it really matter this idea of a connection with Huns? Would not having a relationship make Magyars any less Magyar, any less of a horse nation? I chose instead not to obsess over the Magyar-Hun connection because I'm interested in how people actually lived, what they actually believed. If someday real evidence comes to light proving such a relationship through the good peer-review process, then you'll see me and many others agree with it. |
|
|
|
Post by MagyarTanhu on Mar 6, 2010 21:50:38 GMT 3
Actually, the Magyars have more heritage from the Onoghurs, Khazars, Qabars, Pecheneks and Qypchaq-Cumans rather than the Huns, that was my point The relationship between the Huns and Magyars is stuck at the legendary levels, plus there is indeed an important time gap between the two, and the Magyars were culturally closer to the groups I listed above. Ok, Ihsan, these are known facts. But how can you explain me, that after 5 months of study in China, I have found Chinese mandarin words that are having sense and some are even identical with Hungarian - specially if you look at the fact that if the splitted xiong nu, specially the northern part which later supposedly turn to the hun or were hun than go westward etc... And all the story is dating back at least 1800 yrs lot of change in the chinese and lot of change in the hungarian language since than but just for studying 5 months Chinese were able to find 8-9 words similar sounding and 10 more related to each other? For this you did not answer. Is it just accidental? Why do educated Chinese know something about that Hungarians were related to Huns, why do the yughars - yellow uyghurs (very few now) have very similar pentachon sounding songs some arts, why did a girl told me from Donghuan that the folktale figures I were talking about were almost identical (flying magical horse, dragons with more heads, griffins, etc.) There are more and more questionmarks. Just want to clarify - I do not belong to those who claim that the only successors of Huns are the Hungarians. Again, NO! Think are more successor nations - including Mongolians, Turks, some Ugrians, even Iranids. Again I attach some of the words: Chinese Hungarian Englishnü 女 nő woman lian 链 zi - lánc chain pronounce liancö suan 酸 savanyú sour xí 吸 szí(v) suck ge 鸽子 gerle, galamb dove, pigeon chuan 船 csónak boat Here can be argument it is taken from slavic "cln" but how sure is it? tsui száj mouth chōu 丑（醜） csúnya ugly hen 恨 nagyon, hőn very, very much Why is an expression in Hungarian "teng-leng": leng 冷 hideg cold teng 疼 fájdalom pain Why do you threat a little child "lesz dá-dá" if is behaving badly: From Slavic "dat" to give? - I do not think so: dá 打 üt, ver hit Why we Hungarians say "kong az ürességtől": Just simply onomatopoetic (repeat the sound) word? How interesting... in Chinese: kong 空 üres empty Very similar case with the ringing of little bell "csi lingel" líng 铃 csengő bell These expressions, non native speakers hardly know More samples: ji 鸡 csibe, csirke chicken - yes, I see the sarcastic smile of English speakers mao 猫 zi macska cat che 车 kocsi carriage,cart,wagon,gig,trap Yes, here you can argue that from Slavic(macka, koc) is originated but why not vice versa? They were under Hun,Turkish rule for centuries...and ok also had interaction - why only the nomads have learned from them? One more: chui 吹 fúj blow Here Slavic cuj - "shut up" does not make sense So, anyone can write on this issue? |
|
|
|
Post by MagyarTanhu on Mar 6, 2010 22:26:42 GMT 3
OK if you didn't like my first analogy, here is another. Native Americans have thousands of years old legends about their origins, about how they were created on American land. There are tribes here who actually are hostile to scientists who come and ask for some DNA samples from them because they see it as just another form of Anglo-American imperialism. Why? Because the DNA can prove that they came from Asia in contradiction to their thousands of years old legends and they don't like that. Just because something is old or traditional doesn't mean it is right or the truth. I've been reading on this subject for close to ten years now what information is available in English. Most scholars I've read are the mainstream ones with peer-reviewed work like Andras Rona-Tas, Gyula Laszlo, Denis Sinor, Geza Roheim, etc. As Ihsan points out, there's much more relationship and heritage with Onoghurs, Khazars, Cumans, Pechenegs than with Huns (through which a possible Hun relation in the Arpad royal house comes from). You really have to wonder when Simon Kezai writes in the second paragraph of the entire Gesta Hungarorum:
As it was a matter dear to your heart to learn of the deeds of the Hungarians, and I had ascertained this fact for certain, I set about to bring together in one volume the stories of that nation scattered and spread in various sources through Italy, France, and Germany.
What?! No stories sourced from Hungary herself? Italy, France, and Germany, all Roman Catholic, had an interest in Hungary being Roman Catholic to stand against Byzantine and the East and respected the royal house land claim rights to Hungarian lands through this Attila story! What did we lose? What were the stories from Hungary that we lost, that were burned and destroyed? But one has to ask what does it really matter this idea of a connection with Huns? Would not having a relationship make Magyars any less Magyar, any less of a horse nation? I chose instead not to obsess over the Magyar-Hun connection because I'm interested in how people actually lived, what they actually believed. If someday real evidence comes to light proving such a relationship through the good peer-review process, then you'll see me and many others agree with it. Tracey, I understand what you want to pass. Some of the origin theories are ridiculous. From the authors you listed - I know, you surely have more, I acknowledge from them Laszlo Gyula. In my point biased and less reliable is Rona Tas, other two do not know. Just recently have read on another forum how terrible image is about Hungary and it's culture abroad - because of the poor benevolent marketing and reliable sources in libraries. I will take a look on the Gesta Hungarorum for the quote you displayed here. And I am also saddened of the fact that lots of ruinic scripts were burned. But that time literacy was just the right of elite. The stories and epochs of common folks were passed by stories and songs as it was the case of Iliad and Odysseia - when finally Homeros has poured in final form. Than in the 19th century came Heinrich Schliemann - everybody was laughing at him he wanted to find Troy. Or Evans who has found the Minoan palace on Crete. Will be Platon usable to find Atlantis?  Who knows ... I do not think it is on the island of Thera-Santorini. Or just take other heroic epochs of other nations - like in the case of Vikings, English - Arthur, German - Niebelung or Welsh - the bards kept famous stories or even it is recent in Asia - passing by events by mouth song from father to son ... Otherwise was long-long time fan of old faith of Hungarians, now still respect but am really happy that we belong to Catholic part now ... Lot of elements from ancient faith in the current: Boldogasszony - Virgin Mary, Baba Mária - at Csangó's, Jó Isten - Good God... I had God quest through my life(was interested in Shamanism, Taoism, Zoroastrism) but would like not to lose my faith as Catholic - God already helped me in lot of cases... Respect to you but probably we will keep to argue |
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 7, 2010 12:49:20 GMT 3
Your list of Chinese-Hungarian words is very interesting indeed. However, if you check Chinese in a detailed way, you can find many similarities and common words between that language and Altaic and Indo-European languages as well. Even in Modern Anatolian Turkish, there are a few attested Chinese loanwords  Throughout history, horseback-riding nomads migrated both westwards and eastwards until the recent times, and it is normal for words to travel all the way from China to Hungary and maybe even further. Maybe it was the Huns that brought those Chinese words to Europe, maybe it was the later nomads, who knows? Since we don't have any written stuff left from the Huns (for now), we can never be sure  And those mythical motiffs can be found among other Turkic mythologies as well The flying horse is a common figure in Eurasia that can be found in Greek and Arabic mythology (Greek Pegasus and Islamic Buraq are examples that came to my mind now). Dragons (sometimes called "Flying Snakes living in the Sky") are an important figure in Oghuz mythology, as can be found in the "Book of Dede Qorqud" and Abu'l-Ghazi Bahadur Khan's "Familytree of Turkmens". And regarding mythologies. They are very important elements of cultures, but sometimes we see the transmittion of mythologies among different peoples. A typical example of this is the Wolf-origin stories found among Central Asians. The earliest reference to wolf in Central Asian mythology dates to the Asian Hun period when after a battle between the Wusun and the Huns, the Huns found a Wusun baby being fed by eagles and wolves. Later, the Gaoche people (the early Uyghurs were a tribe of these) believed that they were the descendents of two girls of a Hunnic chanyu and a male wolf. The Gokturks believed that their ancestors' maternal lineage was from a female wolf. The Mongols first believed that they were the descendents of a male wolf and a female doe, but they later adopted the Turkic version in the 14th century. The Turks later re-borrowed this Mongolified Turkic version and Turkified it again in the following centuries. So, my point is that, to whom does this motiff really belongs to? The Hunnic stories in Magyar mythology are, as I guess, a case like this. |
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Mar 7, 2010 20:17:16 GMT 3
|
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Mar 7, 2010 22:07:47 GMT 3
Hmmm...
First of all, it is very possible that some of the words listed above are of Altaic origin. In fact, Chinese does have a lot of words adopted from Altaic language, despite the fact, how surpsingly, it may seem for some.
In fact, even the word Heavens i.e. tian in Chinese is an Altaic borrowing. Actually, the whole Chinese concept of heaven is borrowed from Altaics. By that I mean the "will of heaven," "heaven's mandate etc." I had been thinking it was vice versa and was surprised that it actually was a Chinese borrowing from the Steppe people.
Regarding the rest of the Chinese words there should be a thorough ethymological study of each of them to determine its origins.
We also should bear in mind that the words in Ancient Chinese were pronouced differently than in modern Mandarin. Like, for example "ji" was pronounced something like "gai" or "kai" in Ancient Chinese. That ancient pronouncation is still kept in Southern Chinese dialects like Cantonese and Hokkien, but not in Mandarin, that, in fact, bears a strong marks of Mongolic-Manchu linguistic influence. So, I wouldn't be surprised if "ji" is in fact of Manchu origin.
Secondly, some of the words listed actually have clear cognates in the languages that georgraphically are much closer to Hungarian than Chinese.
macska - cat, for example, in Russian musska is a common synonim and a nick name for cat.
kocsi - carriage,cart,wagon,gig,trap. I believe it's a Turkic or Mongolic word it's used in Southern Russian tonque especially among Cossacks and also in Ukrainian in a form "Kosh" which means cart, wagon, and also camp or settlement. Cossacks settlements were called "kosh" meaning "the place were carts are encamped"
csibe - chiken, Russian, Ukrainian, etc. tsypa - chiken
"csónak boat
Here can be argument it is taken from slavic "cln" but how sure is it?"
In Russian, Ukrainian it's actually, also chelnok - a small boat
|
|
|
|
Post by MagyarTanhu on Mar 8, 2010 0:52:39 GMT 3
Thank you all for contributing! Ihsan, interesting your points; already did quick research on Buraq, Oghuz mythology and Book of Dede Qorqud… Does it have in the Turkmen or Oghuz mythology or tales importance the “Tree reaching to the sky” ? And just for curiosity do you have a superstition like if you break a mirror you have 7 years of unluck? Actually what are your mythical numbers? As far I know for Hungarians is 3,7,12,77 ... Otherwise returning back to the influence on Hungarians the list you have written before is reaching back approximately to 7th to 14th century AD. Anyway Seljuk or Osman was also influenced by Kazars… and even longer. Were not they? But what kind of influences were before the 7th century? Which Turkic nation nomadised the Hungarians if they were hunters- gatherers as Manysi and Khanti? Onugors ? The proto-Bulgarians ? Aah… And why the other Ugro-Finnian groups were not nomadized and did not become steppic nation? Sarmat, thank you also for your contribution! Hjernespiser, Very impressive link. If you are not on guard – easily to be confessed by your right. As I see, you are very strongly opposing any little possibility of relation between Hungarians and Huns and you are “fighting with teeth and claw” to prove your truth or you are right. However the devil hides in little details. As Mr Rosenfelder writes in his proposal of probability model this could be applied clearly in the case of “far-flung languages” – which means cultures having absolutely nothing common with each other. Like this model will perfectly fit if you compare Namibian Xhosa or other Bushman language with for example the Slovak language. Or if you compare one of the Papuan or New Zelandan Maori Language with the Swedish language  In this cases are crystal clear that these nations had surely nothing in common. But you cannot exclude similarities for example between Hebrew and Coptic or Ethiopian language or if you look at Spanish and German language(Visigoths, Vendals) or Lakota and Ancient Mongol language. I would be careful with the comparison of English and Chinese too – since the Sarmatian link? But with this I might be wrong. So, if I apply this model to all the foreign originated words in the Hungarian – by this way I can question, challenge also some words of Iranic, Alan origin – that already has been approved by the Hungarian linguists. Or can even challenge the Turkic and Slavic originated words in the Hungarian? They are just accidentally there? So if I look at some Uyghur – Hungarian comparison is it just a mere incident like this Mr.Rosenfelder states? Ok, Hjernespiser, fight for what you believe to be right – but you do not convince me 100%-ly unless you have clear evidence that Hungarians are not absolutely having anything common with Huns. I believe they had – maybe I am wrong – but need much more clear crystal clear evidences that can persuade me that they had not. And what Ishan will also confirm to you, the Gok-Turks originally under the rule of Rouruan's - at least a link to avars - proclaimed themselves to be the successor of Xiong nu! The Rouran and the Hephthalites had a falling out and problems within their confederation were encouraged by Chinese agents. In 508, the Tiele defeated the Rouran in battle. In 516, the Rouran defeated the Tiele. Within the Rouran confederation was a Turkic tribe noted in Chinese annals as the Tujue. After a marriage proposal to the Rouran was rebuffed, the Tujue joined with the Western Wei, successor state to the Northern Wei, and revolted against the Rouran. In 555, they beheaded 3,000 Rouran. European history books commonly claim that the Rouran then fled west across the steppes and became the Avars, though this is probably a mistake, or at best, an oversimplification. The remainder of the Rouran fled into China, were absorbed into the border guards, and disappeared forever as an entity. The last Rouran khagan fled to the court of Western Wei, but at the demand of Tujue, Western Wei executed him and the nobles that accompanied him. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rouran_KhaganateThe dominant nomad people in the Mongolian steppe in the 7th century, the Tujue, were identified with the Turks and claimed to be descended from the Xiongnu. A number of Xiongnu customs do suggest Turkish affinity, which has led some historians to suggest that the western Xiongnu may have been the ancestors of the European Turks of later centuries. Others believe that the Xiongnu are the Huns, who invaded the Roman Empire in the 5th century. www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/273960/Xiongnu |
|
|
|
Post by MagyarTanhu on Mar 8, 2010 2:13:17 GMT 3
|
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Mar 8, 2010 8:09:31 GMT 3
First thing, think about how you've accepted unsatisfactory evidence as unvetted Chinese-Hungarian wordlists but then you write that you need more crystal clear evidence to believe otherwise. How does that make sense?
Second thing, I'm not trying to prove anything. At one time I believed the legends because that's all I knew. Then I came to believe that they were not related. But later as I read more I learned that Arpad's house is possibly of Turkic origin and that could include Hunnic as well. It is not much different from the pattern in other steppe tribe federations where the ruling class was different ethnically (by our modern understanding of ethnicity) than the majority of the people.
My point to you only is that there's a logical thought process that scholars use to make "proofs". It is only when the logic is sound that consensus by the experts is reached. That logic is tested by peer review. What you've presented as evidence so far doesn't pass that muster at first glance.
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 8, 2010 15:07:20 GMT 3
Ah yes, I forgot to mention all these. I forgot to mention one more important example from Anatolian Turkish mythology. In the Epic of Köroğlu, the hero's horse Kırat is described as a horse with wings, which hides from the humans so that they wouldn't discover them, but only shows up to Köroğlu, who makes Kırat his horse. Trees are important elements of Turkic mythology and Siberian Turks have "Tree of Life" figures in their mythology, but I couldn't find it in Oghuz myths. However, trees are mentioned in some Oghuz epics, like in the Oghuz Qaghan, where he finds one of his wifes inside a tree. Some trees are also considered sacred among the Oghuz. In his book Türk Mitolojisi ("Turkic Mythology"), Bahaeddin Ögel has gathered all the available myths and beliefs regarding trees among the Turkic peoples, including the Anatolian Turks. Yes, we have. 3, 7, 9 and 40 are sacred numbers among the Turks Khazar influences on the Oghuz were mostly in the field of the useage of Hebrew names, there wasn't that much of Khazar influence over the Oghuz. The state organization of the Oghuz, for example, was closer to the Qarluqs than to the Khazars, Gokturks and Uyghurs. As for who nomadised the Magyars, as far as I know it was the Onoghurs. For the final question, I don't know, but I too wonder why |
|
|
|
Post by MagyarTanhu on Mar 8, 2010 17:07:33 GMT 3
First thing, think about how you've accepted unsatisfactory evidence as unvetted Chinese-Hungarian wordlists but then you write that you need more crystal clear evidence to believe otherwise. How does that make sense? by Hjernespiser Maybe I did express myself wrong. Very impressive link. If you are not on guard – easily to be confessed by your right. As I see, you are very strongly opposing any little possibility of relation between Hungarians and Huns and you are “fighting with teeth and claw” to prove your truth or you are right. I have NOT accepted that ... I wanted to write "If I AM not on guard -than easily to be confessed you are right" - sorry for the wrong English. But probably you did not read further just only the first sentence. Definetely did not introduce that word list as evidence - just raised to think about... Second thing, I'm not trying to prove anything. At one time I believed the legends because that's all I knew. Then I came to believe that they were not related. But later as I read more I learned that Arpad's house is possibly of Turkic origin and that could include Hunnic as well. It is not much different from the pattern in other steppe tribe federations where the ruling class was different ethnically (by our modern understanding of ethnicity) than the majority of the people. by Hjernespiser I do not comment this. My point to you only is that there's a logical thought process that scholars use to make "proofs". It is only when the logic is sound that consensus by the experts is reached. That logic is tested by peer review. What you've presented as evidence so far doesn't pass that muster at first glance. by Hjernespiser It matters who are those scholars - "experts" and who are making the peer review. And I repeat, I did not display yet any evidence - for proving 100%-ly that Huns are Hungarians. Please read more carefully what I have written so far yet. What you've presented as evidence so far doesn't pass that muster at first glance. by Hjernespiser This sentence is my favorite! It is shouting from it the sulkiness, offendedness. All I tried was some effort for independent thinking and challenging some "concreted" theories that are excluding any relations between Hungarians and Huns. But if somebody wants to have sheep mentality and just rely purely on the experts opinion without the abilty of independent, logical and creative thinking, challenging some cloudy misty theories than everybody is free to do so. By this way the world would surely not move forward. |
|
|
|
Post by MagyarTanhu on Mar 8, 2010 17:55:07 GMT 3
|
|
|
|
Post by MagyarTanhu on Mar 8, 2010 18:08:15 GMT 3
Ishan! Is it possible? if you belong to Oghuz - and within the Kara Koyunlu part, that we were neighbours around 450-480 AD? |
|
The relationship between the Huns and Magyars is stuck at the legendary levels, plus there is indeed an important time gap between the two, and the Magyars were culturally closer to the groups I listed above.
Who knows ... I do not think it is on the island of Thera-Santorini.
Throughout history, horseback-riding nomads migrated both westwards and eastwards until the recent times, and it is normal for words to travel all the way from China to Hungary and maybe even further. Maybe it was the Huns that brought those Chinese words to Europe, maybe it was the later nomads, who knows? Since we don't have any written stuff left from the Huns (for now), we can never be sure 
In this cases are crystal clear that these nations had surely nothing in common.
