|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 26, 2008 17:56:55 GMT 3
I've met quite a few Hungarians in my lifetime, all the ones I've met don't seem to have any bitterness whatsoever when it comes to my Mongol peoples and our invasion of them.
In any case the Hungarians still hold proudly they are descended from both Finno-Ugric and the Altaics by blood mix with Attila's Huns who settled in the danube as well as the Mongol invasion in the 13th century, and Ottoman invasion in the 16th-17th century. Nationalists hate both Turks and Mongols though I've heard - go figure heh - European brainwashing.
My first girlfriend at 16 - was Hungarian herself. She had clear indo-european features but very dark hair. Her heart was definitely not indo-european though, she had a composure of a predator - not prey, and we saw each other as nomads.
I knew her quite well, in fact she hates Christianity and Europe more then anything else - even invasions of her country!
She feels her people lost their power when they were forced to christenise and westernise. Quite educated too - she recounts the battle of Mohi where she told me that King Bela rode from one line to the next clanging swords urging his soldiers to remember their nomadic roots to face us. The only reason they lost was because though the spirit to be nomad again was there, their hearts were already sedentary. They sure as hell put up a good fight until we flanked them however.
Also note that there was a saying in Europe in reference to the early Hungarians. In Euro swordsmanship it is encouraged to "Fight like a Hungarian" - tribute to the skill and ferocity of the nomad. Sad that over the years the nomadic fires has been quenched.
|
|
|
|
Post by Azadan Januspar on Jun 26, 2008 18:39:23 GMT 3
Does it ever mean you are predators and IE preys.No way!  . besides there are more steppe nomadic hearts not being Mongols at all. |
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jun 26, 2008 21:49:34 GMT 3
I don't like it when Hungarians try to link themselves with the Huns, who have 0% nothing to do with the Magyars.
|
|
|
|
Post by ALTAR on Jun 27, 2008 0:06:28 GMT 3
I also think that Avar, Pecheneq, Cuman influence is more then Huns in Hungarians. However, they still hold Hun identity as a historical identity or cultural heritage which came from Arpads ancestry. Many of Hungarians are closer to Turks physically. But I heard and read that Szekely people are genetically very closer to Huns.
My grandparents visited Hungaria a few years ago. They were surprised because Hungarians had many common words(Alma) and names(off course Atilla) with Turks. And also Hungarians behaved warm to them when they leran my grandparents were Turk.
Of course there are also some Hungarian people who think or behave different.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 27, 2008 1:36:52 GMT 3
Uhuh - and Englishmen, Frenchmen are steppe nomads too as are all Indo-Europeans... nice wild myth  I don't like it when Hungarians try to link themselves with the Huns, who have 0% nothing to do with the Magyars. They aren't exactly claiming that the Magyars were just Altaic - descendants more like, but do note that though they were Uralic peoples they were part of the Turkic Khazar Khaganate for quite some time. As nomadic peoples it is very very possible for language, genes could have been shared between the two (Language link is undeniable by anyone). And they are settled where Attila's huns settled. The Hungarians I've met reject European sciences. How much can sedentary people really research about steppe peoples? We are too different - oil and water, it is almost impossible for them to understand us. Sure we are all human but nomadic and sedentary thinking is completely different. Personally considering most of the historical inaccuracies are due to majority of us refusing to write a lot (or just not having the time) - I believe you have to be aware of sedentary people's use of propaganda as their weapon against the nomad and especially Altai nomads. Ne ways my gf in particular believes that European "sciences" are trying to destroy their people's heritage, identity, and nomadic history. They are descendant from Huns/Scythians/Sarmatians through the Khazar Khaganate and the fact that they migrated through Ukraine. You can't deny the many links in terms of linguistics, nor can you can't deny the look of modern day Hungarians whom many still have Altai ancestry - especially when the ancestry is 'refreshed' by Mongol and Ottoman occupations. I don't believe in denying them their own mixed heritage. The result of European "sciences" has resulted in: 1) Hungarian nationalism which hates nomads and worshipping their European masters. 2) Nomadic people rejecting Hungarians who think differently to the nationalists. This includes rejecting their link to Attila's Huns. European "sciences" have a tendency to be attached to political goals. You can't deny this and this is how sedentary peoples wage their own silent war against the nomad - under the belief that the pen is mightier then the sword. |
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jun 27, 2008 13:50:43 GMT 3
Well, the Huns left Pannonia a short time after Attila's death and re-migrated to the Pontic Steppe, where they integrated into the Oghurs and disappeared as an ethnic-political groups. At that time, the Magyars were an Ugric people living in the forests west of the Urals, far away from there. It was much later when the Magyars moved south, mixed with On Oghurs (of whom they got their name in Europe - Hungarian, which means "Ten Tribes" in Old Western Turkic) and then crossed to Pannonia. The Magyars were heavily influenced from On Oghurs, Khazars (some Turkic titles used by them passed to the Magyars) and the later Pechenek-Qypchaqs, followed by the Ottomans (the Mongols didn't have any influence over Hungary because their stay was very short). But they have nothing to do with Attila's Huns. That was my point  |
|
|
|
Post by Azadan Januspar on Jun 27, 2008 15:12:27 GMT 3
Englishmen?!!! Frenchmen?!!! !I can't see the relation to the nomadic life? funny, where did you get those infos? interesting
Besides numerous branches of IE inhabited the steppes (even Mongolia and the eastern steppe) and are considered to be the protagonist of the steppe nomadic life.
As for France, some kind of steppe traditions especially horsemanship, was introduced by the Hunnic, invasions and later throughout Alans.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 27, 2008 21:22:48 GMT 3
Well, the Huns left Pannonia a short time after Attila's death and re-migrated to the Pontic Steppe, where they integrated into the Oghurs and disappeared as an ethnic-political groups. At that time, the Magyars were an Ugric people living in the forests west of the Urals, far away from there. It was much later when the Magyars moved south, mixed with On Oghurs (of whom they got their name in Europe - Hungarian, which means "Ten Tribes" in Old Western Turkic) and then crossed to Pannonia. The Magyars were heavily influenced from On Oghurs, Khazars (some Turkic titles used by them passed to the Magyars) and the later Pechenek-Qypchaqs, followed by the Ottomans (the Mongols didn't have any influence over Hungary because their stay was very short). But they have nothing to do with Attila's Huns. That was my point As nomadic people I doubt it is fair to say the Pontics was the only place Attila's huns re-migrated to. All Kings of Hungary considered themselves descendants of Attila, whether that's true or not is difficult to find out. However I do know that the Altai ancestry is there and the proof is in many of their faces. Mongols didn't have much cultural influence over Hungary sure - what could have been changed? Whether Altaic or Ugric or Ugric mixed with Altaic, the Hungarians were nomads. However the short stay seemed to be enough for Hungarians to share our direct genetic link (Some of my gf's relatives themselves looked even more Mongolic then her). Direct link to Attila's Huns is questionable but nothing is proven so far, all I know is that many Hungarians share our genetic link and Altaic features. Either way their hearts are closer to us then the rest of Europe - and that's what's most important admist all this controversy and talk over their heritage. Your quote, gave me the impression that you believed that  Steppe traditions? France? Simply because a nation uses cavalry does not mean they got that from the nomads. You can count Sarmatian auxilaries in England and say that England got their horsemenship from Sarmatians even but that's false. European cavalry and Knights were closely related with the ideals of European Feudalism and the Catholic Church. As horses were expensive, only feudal lords could afford them, and they became knights as well with a code of chivalry closely linked to the ideals of the Catholic Church. Ne ways this is off-topic |
|
|
|
Post by Azadan Januspar on Jun 27, 2008 22:11:04 GMT 3
It's not that simple, there surely were influences during times of the great migrations. Besides you led it to the shores of England and France...I was simply trying to say that IE held a great role in the history of the steppes and they were good predators having hearts of lions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 27, 2008 22:18:21 GMT 3
Norsemen have way more claim over predatory nature then England or France, and the Celts have my respect as well. Sarmatians and Scythians as Iranic nomads too - I give credit where it's due However, majority of sedentary Europeans, don't seem to appeal to me much. |
|
|
|
Post by nanman on Jun 28, 2008 0:31:11 GMT 3
Well, the Huns left Pannonia a short time after Attila's death and re-migrated to the Pontic Steppe, where they integrated into the Oghurs and disappeared as an ethnic-political groups. At that time, the Magyars were an Ugric people living in the forests west of the Urals, far away from there. It was much later when the Magyars moved south, mixed with On Oghurs (of whom they got their name in Europe - Hungarian, which means "Ten Tribes" in Old Western Turkic) and then crossed to Pannonia. The Magyars were heavily influenced from On Oghurs, Khazars (some Turkic titles used by them passed to the Magyars) and the later Pechenek-Qypchaqs, followed by the Ottomans (the Mongols didn't have any influence over Hungary because their stay was very short). But they have nothing to do with Attila's Huns. That was my point If the On Oghurs and Oghurs were the same people (if I have not misunderstood). Doesn't that give some connection at least between some Hungarian peoples and Attila? This is almost like some aspect of the Chinese peoples having a Southern Xiong Nu connection. |
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 28, 2008 1:04:20 GMT 3
It is possible for Northern Chinese to have some nomadic roots, but as you well know China is a sedentary culture and people, and considers Altaics barbarians. Hungary at least proclaims their nomadic roots proudly.
|
|
|
|
Post by nanman on Jun 28, 2008 1:37:20 GMT 3
It is possible for Northern Chinese to have some nomadic roots, but as you well know China is a sedentary culture and people, and considers Altaics barbarians. Hungary at least proclaims their nomadic roots proudly. Once a Chinese studies his own history from sources beyond nationalistic propaganda and cultural arrogance. It would be heresy for Chinese to dis-own their nomadic roots or at least the nomadic element that made up their people. You are correct in the generalisation that Chinese regarded some Altaics as barbarian but one must take into consideration the history is recorded from the angle of a sedentary "Sage King" like person. Anyone in that position would generally refer to a stranger as barbaric. I have to admit there is hippocracy carried out by the Chinese in that they themselves have commited possibly more acts of barbarism than anyone. |
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 28, 2008 6:31:27 GMT 3
Even if the nationalist propaganda and cultural arrogance is broken - Chinese culture is completely sedentary and is too completely different for nomadism. For a Chinese person to choose nomadism, he or she has to disown almost all of his or her cultural heritage and traditions. This is made even harder with Chinese family values and collectivism.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Jun 28, 2008 10:39:22 GMT 3
Well. But does nomadism really exist now?
Most of the former Nomades are sedentary now as well, except some in Mongolia.
And actually Chinese traditional emphasize of family values and blood connection with the relatives it's quite close to Nomadic values, the same thing is with the worship of the ancestors.
Chinese traditional geneologies via male ancestors are very similar to Kazakh shezhires for example.
Also modern Mandarin Chinese is very influenced by Mongol and Manchu languages...
Just wanted to give my alternative perspective... :-)
|
|
. besides there are more steppe nomadic hearts not being Mongols at all.
