20220525
Last updateK, 24 máj. 2022 4pm

rovas logo

Our history

László IV – a Hungarian of Kipchak origin

László IV – a Hungarian of Kipchak origin

Tens of thousands of Hun-Turkic peoples gathered in the small town of Bugac, Hungary, in 2012. Guests included representatives from Kazakhstan.

For what purpose, a stranger might ask?

Hungarian scientists report a blood-relationship between Kazakh and Hungarian peoples, a finding based on the results of their latest research. The descendants of these peoples, they claim, migrated from the territory of modern Kazakhstan in the IXth century.

It is undeniable that a sense of kinship and cultural ties have always existed between Hungarians and Kazakhs and, despite various centrifugal forces and separation, continue to exist. This fact is exemplified by the life and times of a Hungarian king of Kipchak origin, King László IV, known in his time as László III and Kun László.

The Dasht-I-Kipchak steppe, also known as the Kipchak, Great or Polovtsian steppe, has been from time immemorial a home to nomad peoples of Eurasia. In the territories of modern Kazakhstan, the Volga region, the Caucasus and Eastern Europe, states formed and dissolved, heroes and legends were born. According to European and Byzantine historic sources, the Kipchaks, Cumans – Polovtsy in the Russian chronicles – were such a nomad, Turkic people who became an integral part in the formation of modern nations such as Kazakhs, Nogais, Kumyks and many others.

Over the centuries, Huns, Sarmatians, Scythians, Pechenegs and Kipchaks fell upon the European countries like an avalanche. They entered these countries as they moved west, bringing with them their traditions, philosophy, military arts and crafts. With time, Eastern Europe became a melting pot where the local European and the new nomad, mainly Turkic, elements intermixed. The arriving waves exerted a cultural influence on the local population, specifically on the inhabitants of Hungary, a country founded by Árpád Khan who, along with other tribes he also led, migrated from the territory of modern Kazakhstan to the territory of today's Hungary in the IXth century. These tribes included the Magyars and also, later, the Kazakhs of Argyn's clan (Middle jüz).

Several centuries later, in 1272, a descendant of the Kipchaks, the ancestors of the Kazakhs, László IV, the Kun, whose history has been closely associated with the Kipchaks, ascended to the throne of the Kingdom of Hungary. By then the Hungarians, or as they call themselves, Magyars, have abandoned much of their once-common culture including their once-common Tengrian faith, which they maintained up until the beginning of the XIth century. Nevertheless, the Hungarian king, Béla IV, gave the Kipchaks – numbering several tens of thousands of families – land holdings within the kingdom.

László's story begins with one prominent Cuman (Kipchak) figure to arrive in Hungary, Erzsébet (Elizabeth), the daughter of the Polovtsian khan, Kötöny (Kotyan). Following her father's defeat by the invading Mongol armies of Batu Khan in 1238, her family moved to the territory of the Hungarian Kingdom with the approval of Hungary's king, Béla IV, and married the king's son, István - later István V (Stephen V). László was born from this marriage.

The young László identified with his mother's culture. He preferred the company of the nomadic Polovtsy over that of the Magyar's nobility, who were by that time much westernized. He expressed his preference in both his attire and in his customs. Consequently, he earned the nickname “Kun” (Kuman, Kipchak), a name Hungarians used to refer to the ancestors of the Kazakhs, the Polovtsians (Kipchaks) of the Eurasian steppe.

In 1277 the Magyars convened a National Assembly during which they acknowledged 15-year-old László as their king. And so László ascended to the throne of the Kingdom of Hungary at an early age to endure the hardships of civil wars and attacks by neighboring states. Tired of the constant wars and hardship, the people rejoiced with one voice at the coronation of the new king. Henceforth, László began managing one of the largest states of medieval Europe.

The following year, in 1278, the Czech king, Ottokar II was killed in the Battle of Moravian Field. His forces were scattered, and the lands he previously captured were returned to the Hungarian crown. Young King László's successes in the struggle against foreign enemies raised his status and the importance of his power among the Kipchaks who settled in Hungary. He, in turn, relied on their allegiance, the same loyalty they had shown earlier when the country was in peril. Given his and his mother's roots, the Kipchaks willingly supported the king in all his endeavors. In fact, during László's reign, Kipchaks were the main strike-force of the Hungarian Kingdom – the military elite. Their loyalty was due in part to László's status and origin, and to a certain social status, guarantees and privileges they enjoyed during his reign.

Although László tried to accommodate the Church of Rome, that organization, nevertheless, considered him a defector to paganism, placed an interdict on him, and thereby drove a wedge between his major allies – those of the old faith and those converted to the new ideology. The result was the destruction of all that he had achieved. The country was left without a part of its army. Eastern Hungary was looted by the former wards of the King, the Cumans, who rebelled against him for betraying his heritage. Only after the suppression of the rebels was László readmitted to the Church. However, a mere five years later, in 1287, he was once again excommunicated. The Church of Rome even called for a crusade against the "negligent" Magyar king.

Thus, by age 25, László had been twice interdicted, overcame internal and external enemies, strengthened the Magyars state, and lost it all. In the summer of 1289, after a series of unsuccessful attempts to re-establish relations with the Church and to restore a strong royal power in Hungary, László distanced himself from public affairs. In his final years, he re-embraced his Kipchak identity and returned to his original traditions, faith, language and way of life, and thereby confirmed his Cuman self-image. Henceforth, his Polovetsian background governed most of his actions and, ultimately, formed his legacy. László IV, the Kun, was the last king of the Árpád male blood-line, a dynasty that ruled Hungary for more than four centuries. After the loss of its power, foreign kings began to foment a strong bias towards the Hapsburg Empire. A great story that had just begun ended suddenly, resulting in the loss of Hungary's independence.

All this shows that the Kipchak culture significantly influenced the Hungarian Kingdom, a culture which left its mark on the history of present-day Hungary. As a result, the first Kurultáj of Magyars was convened in Kazakhstan, in 2007, which provided the basis for the creation of kin-conventions of Hun-Turkic peoples. This event has been held continuously for several years in Hungary. Such events once again confirm the centuries-old cultural ties between our peoples, the Kazakhs and the Hungarians.

tm laszlo 01

Picture by Hungarian artist Than Mór The meeting of Laszlo IV and Rudolf I after Battle on Moravian Field

***

Timur V. Mussin


Hozzászólás   

#22 16...leszerelt 2014-04-19 17:24
...16

László's story begins with one prominent Hun figure to arrive in Hungary, Erzsébet (Elizabeth) of the Fair Haired people, Kötöny (Kotyan) khan's daughter. Following her father's defeat by the invading Mongol armies of Batu Khan in 1238, her family relocated to the territory of the Hungarian Kingdom with the approval of Hungary's king, Béla IV, and married the king's son, István - later, István V (Stephen V). László was born from this marriage in 1262.

The young László identified with the Eastern variant of his mother's Hun culture. He preferred the company and lifestyle of the free-spirited Fair Haired herdsmen and herd owners over that of the Magyar's nobility, who were by that time much westernized. He expressed his preference in both his attire and in his customs. Consequently, he earned the nickname Kun, a name Hungarians used to refer to their Eastern European and Western and Central Asian Hun brethren, including the ancestors of the Kazakhs of the Eurasian steppe, called Fair Haired or Blond People by outsiders.

In 1277 the Magyars convened a National Assembly during which they acknowledged 15-year-old László as their king. And so László ascended to the throne of the Kingdom of Hungary at an early age to endure the hardships of civil wars and attacks by neighboring states. Tired of the constant wars and hardship, the people rejoiced with one voice at the coronation of the new king. Henceforth, László began reigning over the largest state of 13th century medieval Europe.

The following year, in 1278, the Czech king, Ottokar II was killed during the Battle of Moravian Field. His forces were scattered, and the lands he previously captured were returned to the Hungarian Holy Crown. Young King László's successes in the struggle against foreign enemies raised his status and the importance of his power among the Blond People who settled in Hungary. He, in turn, relied on their allegiance, the same loyalty they had shown earlier when the country was in peril. Given his and his mother's roots, the Blond People willingly supported the king in all his endeavors. In fact, the Blond People were the main strike-force of the Hungarian Kingdom – the military elite - during László's reign. Their loyalty was due in part to László's status and origin, and to a certain social status, guarantees and privileges they enjoyed during his reign.

Although László tried to accommodate the Church of Rome, that organization, nevertheless, considered him a defector to "paganism"(24), placed an interdict on him, and thereby drove a wedge between his major allies – those of the old faith - the Faith of Light taught by Scythian magi or its simplified variant, Tangriism, and those converted to the new ideology of the the Church of Rome. The result was the destruction of all that he had achieved. The country was left without a part of its army. Eastern Hungary was looted by the former wards of the King, those Huns Hungarians called Kuns, who rebelled against him for betraying his heritage. Only after the suppression of the rebels was László readmitted to the Church. However, a mere five years later, in 1287, he was once again excommunicated. The Church of Rome even called for a crusade against the "negligent"(25) Magyar king.

Thus, by age 25, László had been twice interdicted, overcame internal and external enemies, strengthened the Hungarian state, and lost it all. In the summer of 1289, after a series of unsuccessful attempts to re-establish relations with the Church and to restore a strong royal power in Hungary, László distanced himself from public life. In his final years, he re-embraced his Blond People identity and returned to his original traditions, faith, language and way of life, and thereby confirmed his Eastern Hun self-image. Henceforth, his Fair Haired background governed most of his actions and, ultimately, formed his legacy. László IV, the Kun, was the last king of the Árpád male blood-line, a dynasty that ruled Hungary for more than four centuries. After the loss of its power, foreign kings began to foment a strong bias towards the Hapsburg Empire. A great story that had just begun ended suddenly, resulting in the loss of Hungary's independence.

All this shows that the Blond People's culture significantly influenced the Hungarian Kingdom, a subculture which left its mark on the history of present-day Hungary. As a result, the first Kurultáj of Magyars was convened in Kazakhstan, in 2007, which provided the basis for the creation of kin-conventions of the Hun peoples of Central Eurasia. This event has been held continuously for several years in Hungary. Such events once again confirm the centuries-old cultural and blood ties between our peoples, the Kazakhs and the Hungarians.

In closing, Timur V. Mussin's research enriches the knowledge-base regarding the history of the Hun people in general, and that of the Kazakhs and the Magyars in particular. One can only hope others of the Hun family of nations will also accept such a challenge in the blossoming age and spirit of free cultural exchange between our peoples.
_____________________

(24) The Church of Rome called "pagan" everyone it could not convert to its ideology.

(25) The Church of Rome called "negligent" anyone, who refused to carry out its orders.


An edited version of this commentary is also available as a PDF file here:
magyarmegmaradasert.hu/files/k_aktatar/laszlo4.pdf
#21 15...leszerelt 2014-04-16 02:01
...15

Several centuries later, in 1272, a progeny of the Blond People, László IV the Hun, whose history has been closely associated with his ancestors' lifestyle, ascended to the throne of the Kingdom of Hungary. To put his life and reign in perspective, a look at 13th century Hungary is necessary. Starting with Vajk (later István I, Stephen I), a segment of the Hungarian aristocracy, emasculated by western influence and put into power by foreign (German) troops, began to distance itself from its ancestors worldview, traditions and beliefs, and forced the Hungarian population to do so as well. Whereas the Hungarians' eastern brethren drifted away from their once common comprehensive Faith of Light to Tengriism(22) gradually over the millennia, the Magyars of Hungary were converted by force to the ideologies of the Church of Rome(23) relatively quickly after the 10th century. By the early 13th century, Hungary's aristocracy was under total western influence. This lead to the devastation of the country and the decimation of its population as a consequence of its western policies which opposed Genghis Khan's attempt to reunite Central Eurasia. Following the devastation, Hungary's king, Béla IV, needed to repopulate the country. This need coincided with the arrival of waves of Blond People from the East who elected not to join Genghis Khan and were seeking refuge in Hungary. A mutually advantageous solution was to settle them on Hungarian soil. And so Béla IV gave his eastern brethren – numbering several tens of thousands of families – land holdings within the kingdom.
_________________

(22) The faith of Central Eurasia's autochthons has been since time immemorial the Faith of Light taught by their magi, often symbolized by a cross in a circle - Hun cross, Avar cross, Celtic cross, etc. (magyarmegmaradasert.hu/kiletunk/hitunk/item/3604) - found throughout the world, e.g. in gnosticism and also in the culture of the Sioux nations of North America, whose belief and worldview closely resembles Tengriism. It is also the foundation of Manichaeism Mani founded but adapted to his culture. Tengriism, like Manichaeism, is a later derivative of the Faith of Light. It is a simplified version which has kept only one of the original three forms of divine manifestations, namely life and its observable effects in nature. Its central tenets, the Sky (Heaven in abstract thought), the Fertile Earth and a benevolent caretaker Spirit are variants of beliefs retained from the Faith of Light. Originally, these names personified one of three divine manifestations, variably referred to as Queen of Heaven, God the Mother or Mother-Goddess, Virgin Mother and Holy Spirit, also known as Astarte, Ister, Innana, Anahita, and other names, all of which refer to giver of life, source of life, and the intangible energy that drives man, called Spirit (Badiny Jós Ferenc, A káld-pártus hagyomány és a magyarok Jézus vallása, (The Caldean-Parthian Legacy and the Magyars' Jesus-Faith) 2006, also Grandpierre Atilla, Ancient People of the Royal Magi: the Magyars, magyarmegmaradasert.hu/in-english/our-beliefs/1669). Her name in the ancient Fertile Crescent is often appended with the modifier Dingir, used to denote names associated with divinity. Its Hungarian variant is Tündér, an appearing and disappearing fairy of the Heavens, always a beautiful maiden (from the verb tűn, appear). Also Babba Mária (Beautiful Mary) among the Székelys and the Csángós. She is symbolized by the number 40 - and called by that name, Nin - (four cuneiform wedges in texts from pre-Semitic Mesopotamia, and also still visible on the only remaining Lion of Esztergom, Hungary) in memory of her recurring resurrection after 40 days, a symbolic number Tengriism has retained and even placed in a central position. Judaism considers her its archenemy, the personage it detests most and attacks most vehemently. The Church of Rome calls her Lucifer, Latin for "light-bringer", a name used by early Latin writers for the Morning Star, and subtly identifies her as Judaism's evil being, Satan, while overtly teaching reverence towards her when she is associated with Mary, Jesus' mother. (Such self-contradicting notions and similar logical absurdities typify the doctrines of the Church of Rome.)

The magi's Faith of Light is a belief based on the cosmic worldview of natural sciences. It is founded on the principle that the source of all that is known and unknown to man is a living benevolent triple uni-triune energy-complex Hungarians called Isten (God) before their forced-conversion to the religion of the Church of Rome. This energy-complex is the interlaced and inseparable oneness and wholeness of three forms of divine energy that permeates the Universe, life-spirit-feeling, consciousness-soul-thought, matter-body-atom (Grandpierre Atilla, Ancient People of the Royal Magi, Selected Studies in Hungarian History, 2008, p. 352, www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEHI7KtNvKE&feature=player_embedded). Whenever the Scythian magi associated divine manifestations with life, fertility or spiritual experiences (feelings), they called God Boldogasszony, "married woman in (a state of) bliss", among other names. Alternatively, they called her Virgin Mother, a cosmic association with Venus and "her" cycles between her virgin state when she is the Morning Star, and her nine-month state of bliss (carrying a child) after her union with her "mate," the Sun. When Venus appears directly between the Earth and the Sun and is seen "in front of the Sun," - Venus Transit - "she" is called Napbaöltözött Boldogasszony, "married woman in a state of bliss clothed in (the) Sun". The basis of the number 40, which occupies a central role in Tengriism and also significant in several cultures worldwide, including the Aztec and the Mayan, is Venus' 40 year and also 40 day cyclic behavior. This same tendency to personify abstract phenomena can still be observed today in such names as Mother Nature, known among North American natives - as in Tengriism - as Mother Earth. This is the only form of cosmic energy Tengriism recognizes. The significance of the symbol on the Kazakh Khaganate's flag, the interlaced endless knot - also known as the Celtic Knot and clearly recognizable on the Royal Scepter of Hungary and in Celtic art - symbolizes the interlaced and inseparable oneness of these three forms of divine energy, though the meaning of that symbolism appears to have been lost in Tengriism over the millennia. Therefore, the statement that the Magyars were followers of Tengriism - as advanced in the original text of this article - is only partly correct. Tengriism was only a part of their faith.

(23) The religion founded by the Church of Rome, more precisely, by rabbi Saul, Christianity's Saint Paul, is the largest of the three Abrahamic religions of the world, Christianity. It is a Jewish sect fabricated by Jews for non-Jews, a hijacked and judeized aberration of the Scythian magi's Jesus Faith of the Parthian Monarchy (often incorrectly called Parthian Empire) and much of Scythia. This new Jewish sect was forced on the populations of Europe under the political control of the Church of Rome and the enforcer of its policies, the Holy Roman Empire.
#20 14...leszerelt 2014-04-05 06:02
...14

Over the centuries, Asian Huns, Scythians and a people called their Brothers-in-Law, all of whom were also known as the Blond People, maintained close ties with their European kinfolk. They regularly traveled to their brethren nations' lands during their routine trade and cultural expeditions along their traditional east-west routes, exchanging goods, traditions, philosophy, military arts and crafts, and to help their kindred drive out foreign invaders and bandits. Eastern Europe continued to be the melting pot of Huns of Central and Western Asia and their relatives, the Huns of Eastern and Central Europe, who shared parts of a common belief and a related language. These waves exerted a cultural influence on the sparse, primitive population of Western Europe during its Dark Ages, to whom they eventually brought civilization. One such wave was Árpád's(19) homecoming. His had(20) returned from its Etelköz base (the Dniester River basin) to Hungary along with six other had-s (hadak) where he organized his brethren there to restore order in his great, great, great, great, grandfather's, Atilla's, land, Hungary(21), just as his ancestor had done earlier, but without going as far west. Large groups of other Hun nations also joined him as his allies, including Middle jüz Argyns. The year of Árpád's return is hotly debated. Mainline historians claim it was a conquest which took place in the late 9th century. 13th and 14th century Hungarian chronicles, however, mention a return to an ancestral land and tie it to the 6th century, more precisely, to 100 or 104 years after Atilla's death.
________________

(19) Árpád's title in Hungarian, fejedelem (from fej, head, principal), refers to the elected head of a confederacy of hadak (See footnote 20). Attaching the "khan" title to his name - as in the original text of this article - is difficult to support for several reasons. While it is conceivable that it might have some connection with an ancient Hungarian word, no such connection has been found to date. Its origin remains unknown; there are no records of its use for the intended purpose before the 3rd century. Since it is inconceivable that Hun leaders and commanders did not exist before that time and that they did not have titles that defined their ranks, the word "khan" in its present form must be considered a relatively recent term. Its variant, "han" (e.g., adopted later in Ottoman Turk to label a similar concept) first appears in Chinese sources in the name of the Xia Hun nation - in an earlier spelling - whose Scythian magus-king, Huang Di, founded the first Chinese monarchy, the Xia Dynasty, and the Chinese civilization in the 3rd millennium BC. Later (3rd century BC), it also referred to the Han Dynasty, named after the Hun territory conquered by its founder, Liu Bang (Gauzu). "Khan" is not a Hungarian word, and there are no records that suggest it was ever used by Hungarians as a title before, during or after Árpád's time. No known contemporary source mentions such a title attached to his name either. His father, Álmos, wore the title, táltos king. There is no equivalent word in English for the word táltos, though it is often inadvertently or deliberately mistranslated as "shaman." The concept the word táltos labels is most closely related to that of the Celtic "druid."

(20) There is no equivalent word for had in Western cultures. Originally, it meant a large group of Magyar-Huns, not related to each other except randomly by chance, and functioning as a unified autonomous member of a confederacy maintained for mutual defense and the pursuit of other common goals. It is a concept closely related to "army" and activities associated with the military, and includes both combatants and non-combatants and their property (the concept of land ownership was alien to all Hun nations before their contact with foreigners became commonplace). A had was led by an elected hadvezér, had leader, commander. This word is often incorrectly translated to English as "tribe," and carries the connotation of primitive societies composed of large related families and clans. The root of the word "tribe," is Latin "tribus", the name of the original tripartite ethnic division of Ancient Rome. Since such a tripartite concept did not exist outside the Latin world, attempts to translate the word "tribus" to non-Latin languages produced translations that have little or nothing to do with the meaning of either the original Hungarian word had, or with the later Latin name of a Roman tripartite. In the case of translation to Hungarian, the word törzs, English "stock, trunk, staff, torso" came into use during the Roman occupation of Dunántúl (Transdanubia, Roman Pannonia). As a consequence, the word had lost part of its original meaning, and is today associated only with military concepts.

(21) Kálti Márk's, Képes krónika (Illustrated Chronicle), 1360, traces Árpád's uninterrupted direct bloodline back to Atilla - and beyond - and lists the names of his ancestors forming that link as Álmos, Előd, Ügyek, Ed, Csaba. Kézai Simon's, A hunok és a magyarok cselekedetei (The Acts of the Huns and Magyars), 1282-83, written specifically for László IV the Hun, mentions the same genealogy except the Ed-Ügyek link. The Hungarian Chronicles also mention, that Árpád arrived in the Carpathian Basin 100 or 104 years after Atilla's death, and that Atilla's grandson, Edömén (Ed's brother) was still alive and returned with his people to his grandfather's land, Hungary, with Árpád's wave.

15...
#19 14...leszerelt 2014-04-05 05:37
...14

Over the centuries, Asian Huns, Scythians and a people called their Brothers-in-Law, all of whom were also known as the Blond People, maintained close ties with their European kinfolk. They regularly traveled to their brethren nations' lands during their routine trade and cultural expeditions along their traditional east-west routes, exchanging goods, traditions, philosophy, military arts and crafts, and to help their kindred drive out foreign invaders and bandits. Eastern Europe continued to be the melting pot of Huns of Central and Western Asia and their relatives, the Huns of Eastern and Central Europe, who shared parts of a common belief and a related language. These waves exerted a cultural influence on the sparse, primitive population of Western Europe during its Dark Ages, to whom they eventually brought civilization. One such wave was Árpád's(19) homecoming. His had(20) returned from its Etelköz base (the Dniester River basin) to Hungary along with six other had-s (hadak) where he organized his brethren there to restore order in his great, great, great, great, grandfather's, Atilla's, land, Hungary(21), just as his ancestor had done earlier, but without going as far west. Large groups of other Hun nations also joined him as his allies, including Middle jüz Argyns. The year of Árpád's return is hotly debated. Mainline historians claim it was a conquest which took place in the late 9th century. 13th and 14th century Hungarian chronicles, however, mention a return to an ancestral land and tie it to the 6th century, more precisely, to 100 or 104 years after Atilla's death.
________________

(19) Árpád's title in Hungarian, fejedelem (from fej, head, principal), refers to the elected head of a confederacy of hadak (See footnote 20). Attaching the "khan" title to his name - as in the original text of this article - is difficult to support for several reasons. While it is conceivable that it might have some connection with an ancient Hungarian word, no such connection has been found to date. Its origin remains unknown; there are no records of its use for the intended purpose before the 3rd century. Since it is inconceivable that Hun leaders and commanders did not exist before that time and that they did not have titles that defined their ranks, the word "khan" in its present form must be considered a relatively recent term. Its variant, "han" (e.g., adopted later in Ottoman Turk to label a similar concept) first appears in Chinese sources in the name of the Xia Hun nation - in an earlier spelling - whose Scythian magus-king, Huang Di, founded the first Chinese monarchy, the Xia Dynasty, and the Chinese civilization in the 3rd millennium BC. Later (3rd century BC), it also referred to the Han Dynasty, named after the Hun territory conquered by its founder, Liu Bang (Gauzu). "Khan" is not a Hungarian word, and there are no records that suggest it was ever used by Hungarians as a title before, during or after Árpád's time. No known contemporary source mentions such a title attached to his name either. His father, Álmos, wore the title, táltos king. There is no equivalent word in English for the word táltos, though it is often inadvertently or deliberately mistranslated as "shaman." The concept the word táltos labels is most closely related to that of the Celtic "druid."

(20) There is no equivalent word for had in Western cultures. Originally, it meant a large group of Magyar-Huns, not related to each other except randomly by chance, and functioning as a unified autonomous member of a confederacy maintained for mutual defense and the pursuit of other common goals. It is a concept closely related to "army" and activities associated with the military, and includes both combatants and non-combatants and their property (the concept of land ownership was alien to all Hun nations before their contact with foreigners became commonplace). A had was led by an elected hadvezér, had leader, commander. This word is often incorrectly translated to English as "tribe," and carries the connotation of primitive societies composed of large related families and clans. The root of the word "tribe," is Latin "tribus", the name of the original tripartite ethnic division of Ancient Rome. Since such a tripartite concept did not exist outside the Latin world, attempts to translate the word "tribus" to non-Latin languages produced translations that have little or nothing to do with the meaning of either the original Hungarian word had, or with the later Latin name of a Roman tripartite. In the case of translation to Hungarian, the word törzs, English "stock, trunk, staff, torso" came into use during the Roman occupation of Dunántúl (Transdanubia, Roman Pannonia). As a consequence, the word had lost part of its original meaning, and is today associated only with military concepts.

(21) Kálti Márk's, Képes krónika (Illustrated Chronicle), 1360, traces Árpád's uninterrupted direct bloodline back to Atilla - and beyond - and lists the names of his ancestors forming that link as Álmos, Előd, Ügyek, Ed, Csaba. Kézai Simon's, A hunok és a magyarok cselekedetei (The Acts of the Huns and Magyars), 1282-83, written specifically for László IV the Hun, mentions the same genealogy except the Ed-Ügyek link. The Hungarian Chronicles also mention, that Árpád arrived in the Carpathian Basin 100 or 104 years after Atilla's death, and that Atilla's grandson, Edömén (Ed's brother) was still alive and returned with his people to his grandfather's land, Hungary, with Árpád's wave.
#18 13...leszerelt 2014-04-04 14:13
...13

We can now recast this article using the definitions and events believed to be accurate. It should be kept in mind that no attempt was made to verify the accuracy of the author's statements beyond those addressed in the definitions section.

László IV – a "Blond" Hungarian

Tens of thousands of the Huns of Central Eurasia gathered in the small town of Bugac, Hungary, in 2012. Guests included representatives from Kazakhstan.

For what purpose, a stranger might ask?

Hungarian scientists report a blood-relationship between the Kazakh and the Hungarian peoples, a finding based on the results of their latest research. The descendants of these peoples, they claim, migrated from the territory of modern Kazakhstan in the 9th century.

Can this be true?

There is little doubt, the Kazakhs and the Hungarians are related, certainly culturally, and most likely genetically as well. But the claim that Hungarians are the descendants of peoples who migrated from the territory of modern Kazakhstan in the 9th century, before, or after, seems to be pure fabrication. It has no historical, archeological, anthropological or linguistic basis. This claim appears to be an example of politically motivated disinformation fabricated by foreign interests to deny Hungarians their birthright to the Carpathian Basin. All evidence(18) to date points to the current Hungarian population's continuous existence in the Carpathian Basin at least since the Neolithic, possibly much earlier.

It is undeniable that a sense of kinship and cultural ties have always existed between Hungarians and Kazakhs and, despite various centrifugal forces and separation, continue to exist. This fact is exemplified by the life and times of a Hungarian king, descendent of the Blond People, King László IV, known in his time as László III and Hun László.

The steppe of the Dasht-I Blond People ("desht-i" = "steppe" in Islamic sources), also known as the Blond People's or the Fair People's Great Steppe, has been from time immemorial a home to the peoples of Central Eurasia who lived off animal husbandry on open ranges. In the territories of modern Kazakhstan, the Volga region, the Caucasus and Eastern Europe, states formed and dissolved, heroes and legends were born. According to European and Byzantine historic sources, the Blond People, the Huns – called the Fair People in the Russian Chronicles – were such herdsmen and herd owners. Their belief was rooted in a divine being symbolized by the Sun and its never-ending rebirth. They were the autochthonous people of Central Eurasia who spoke a common language distinct from that of their neighbors and the foreigners amongst them. They became an integral part in the formation of modern nations such as the Kazakhs, Nogais, Kumyks and many others.
________________

(18) E.g., Semino, at. al., 2000

14...
#17 12...leszerelt 2014-03-26 19:41
...12

Modern Age historians have a particular tendency to jump to conclusions, either inadvertently or deliberately, regarding peoples' origins, race, ethnicity or culture. At times, they are not even satisfied with absurd leaps of logic: they bypass it completely. A good example of inadvertent faulty conclusions is a proposition according to which the origin of the Hungarians can be traced back to the so-called Sumerians - whom mainline history often credits with the forming of the first civilization - and that they brought their culture with them from Mesopotamia to the Carpathian Basin. Whereas the research this proposition was founded on is sound, and proves that these two peoples are related, maintained close ties over the centuries, and that a significant movement of Scythians did take place from Mesopotamia to the Carpathian Basin following the collapse of the Parthian Monarchy (3rd century), it does not prove that the Hungarians' origin is Mesopotamia, that they are the descendents of the autochthonous Scythian population there, or that the direction of their culture's propagation was what the proposition advanced. What these researchers were unaware of or failed to take into account, is that both these peoples share a common ancestry that leads much farther back. Consequently, their relationship is that of siblings. As for cultural flow, these two peoples did share a common culture except that it was the Mesopotamian Scythians' Carpathian brethren who bought them writing, not the other way around (c. 3000 BC, the Jemdat Nasr people, A.H. Sayce, J. Oppert, F. Lenormant and C. Rawlinson). Reports of this relatively brief period of unidirectional but significant migration of Scythians from Mesopotamia to the Carpathian Basin created quite a havoc among historians. Those under Western influence immediately condemned it to death by silence for political reasons. Others formed theories the findings simply did support and were, therefore, ignored. The end result was that few scholars are even aware of the relationship between the Scythians of Mesopotamia and those of the Carpathian Basin - and elsewhere (e.g. Eastern Europe, the British Isles and Gaul). (See, Book Review: Bobula Ida, Origin of the Hungarian Nation, magyarmegmaradasert.hu/in-english/our-history/1570).

Deliberate falsifications of peoples' origins, race, ethnicity or culture are political instruments used to unjustly popularize, or obscure or discredit a segment of humanity. One example is the now bankrupt Finno-Urgrian theory fabricated by historians indentured to the Habsburgs' Viennese Court to discredit the Hungarians' birth right to the Carpathian Basin, and maintained by the equally indentured historians of foreign dictators who have been usurping power in Hungarian ever since(15). Although this theory still lingers in popular literature published for the masses, it elicits, at best, a smile from most serious scholars, even in the West. In response to this awakening, some indentured historians have distanced themselves from this defunct theory, and started fabricating a new one, hoping to achieve the same results. This new supposition still tries to take the Magyars out of their native Hungarian homeland - and thereby confiscate their birth right to the Carpathian Basin - but it now sends them east to central Asia instead of the Baltic. Unfortunately, a large chunk of the uninformed public, both in Hungary and abroad, have been deceived by this new ruse. Today it should be clear that though there are close genetic and cultural ties between the various autochthon peoples of Central Eurasia, their overwhelming majority still live today where they have been living for thousands of years(16). And that includes the Hungarians (See footnote #7).

Another form of jumping to conclusions is assumption in the absence of adequate knowledge. A native of the Amazon, for example, who finds himself in Portugal will wrongly conclude that the people there are Brazilians. So, whereas an assumption of relationship is probably safe, assuming direction of propagation based solely on relationship is just as flawed as assuming a cause-effect direction based on co-existence alone. Likewise a resident of Main, USA, will automatically conclude that the French owner (from France) of a local restaurant in Maine is a Quebecer simply because all his French-speaking contacts were Quebecers. Assumptions are not necessarily faulty - but should be confirmed. For instance, the ancient Greeks were on the right track when they called the inhabitants of Central Eurasia Scythians based on their knowledge of their distant northern and eastern neighbors, whose appearance, language, customs and values they associated with those of their close Scythian neighbors and magi teachers (Mede, Chaldean) whom they knew very well(17).

Finally, false beliefs are sometimes born out of propositions of absolute truths based on relative facts. Elephants are giants to mice; mice are giants to flees; and flees are giants to bacteria. People invariably compare and contrast the customs and lifestyles of others to their own, and draw absolute conclusions, even though comparison and contrast are by definition measures of relative similarity and difference. Hence lawmen who patrol open ranges are called rangers by people who live in houses and travel only seasonally to distant farms to pick produce. They themselves are called migrants by those who work in their own locale. Likewise, the latter are called commuters by those who work at home. And those who work at home but go to stores to buy their groceries are called free by those who are incarcerated. Conversely, those who live in cities or are tied to any fixed place are considered by rangers - who consider themselves free - as much prisoners as those incarcerated. All of these definitions suggest delusion if proposed as absolute reality. It is, therefore, best to always specify that such definitions are relative. E.g. a farmer's lifestyle could be considered independent compared with a city dweller's, but not with a ranger's.

_________________

(15) The architects of the Communist regime forced on Hungary by of the backers of the foreign dictator Rosenfeld (Rákosi) and his successors - who changed their colors to blend into the political fog of the 1990s and beyond - continue the disinformation campaign started by their ancestors, the Rothchilds who controlled the Viennese Court earlier.

(16) This does not apply to the Middle East, where the bulk of the Caucasian population has been gradually replaced by Semites during the last 40 centuries.

(17) "Plato often remembered that he and Pythagoras learned the best and most noble teachings from the Magi" (Clement of Alexandria). "The magi educated Aristotle, and taught him that '...the stars are on fire; that a lunar eclipse is the Earth's shadow; that the soul survives death; that the rain is caused by changes in the atmosphere...' and much more (Diogenes Laertius) (Fehérlófő tankör (study group), The Scythian, p. 145, magyarmegmaradasert.hu/files/k_aktatar/TheScythian.pdf)

13...
#16 11...leszerelt 2014-03-25 05:51
...11

Now that a few definitions have been addressed, I would like to comment on the content of this article. I would like to start by reiterating that I hold its author's intentions in the highest regard. Not many people have the moral courage to speak up and do what is right, risk publication bans, ridicule and attacks of their work by proponents of mainline propaganda and its deceived victims. I wish Timur Mussin the strength to continue his research. I offer my views in a spirit of helpfulness, information he is, of course, free to consider or reject.

First a few words about historical research. The study of a person usually includes such areas as his ancestry, his time, based on some arbitrary calendar, his lifespan, people he came in contact with, his assumed beliefs and aspirations, his struggles, victories and defeats, and his legacy. It does not address his ancestors origin, history, location, lifestyle or culture beyond that presumed necessary to establish a background. Neither does it extend to events he was not associated with, people and their activities elsewhere, historical eras before or after his time, or the age he lived in.

The study of an event includes a description of the activity, its protagonists and antagonists, if any, and their presumed goals, as well as that of observers and coincidental individuals caught in the event. It also includes a time period based on an arbitrary calendar, and an absolute or relative location and its recent history. It does not address the history of participants, of casual bystanders, or of any human activity beyond that presumed necessary to establish a background. Nor does it address people not associated with the event or people and their activities elsewhere or in different times.

The study of a location includes absolute or relative geographic coordinates and geography, the timeline the study covers, observed natural and man-made changes, the location's population, if any, and its activity, and the location's inferred or presumed antecedent state. It does not address other locations, events or ages, or human activity believed to have had no effect on it.

The study of an era usually includes peoples, their cultures, civilizations and activities in an absolutely or relatively defined location during a defined period based on an arbitrary calendar or relative time-marker. It does not address peoples or their activities, events, locations, or time periods the student does not believe are relevant to the era he is studying.

Finally, the study of an age includes a broad overview of geological, climatological and biological states and changes of an absolutely or relatively defined location, backdated from the present. It also includes humans, where present, their inferred state of development, lifestyle and activities. It does not address taxonomy beyond the presumed needs of the study, nor does it concern itself with states and changes elsewhere or in a different age the student believes have have no effect on the object of his concentration.

It should be clear from the above that all of theses studies suffer form tunnel vision and that those parts of the student's mental image that lie outside his concentration are the products of speculation - insofar as his research project is concerned. Consequently, they could lead to delusions if allowed to generate conclusions beyond the object of the study. Beliefs regarding a people's culture, for example, will be as false in the absence of knowledge of its value system as cause-effect inferences will be false without understanding the culture of the people responsible for the event.

The danger of tunnel vision is not missing relevant information, but rather the risk of jumping to conclusion. A scholar becomes so focused on the object of his research, he does not see beyond the world of his object. A student of medieval European history, for example, will not see Asian rulers who waged wars in the East or events that took place anywhere thousands of years earlier. When his work is nearly complete, he sometimes tries to fit his object into his overall view of humanity and global human activity. For example, if he researched a historical figure, he might color the portrait of his subject according to his knowledge of that individual's race, ethnicity, culture, era or location. Needless to say, his characterization will be unreliable if his knowledge of that race, ethnicity, culture, era or location is scanty, faulty or nonexistent.

Similar traps are laid in the path of the student of historical events. For example, to infer the origin of a people from a snapshot of their direction of movement, no matter how accurate, is a logical leap reason simply does not support. It supports only the inference of that people's position immediately preceding the moment the observation was made, its position at that moment, its projected position a moment after, and its direction of travel by plotting the two position on a map if the movement is spacial, or on a timeline if temporal (as in the development of a people).

This sort of jumping to conclusions can be best explained by an example. A child sees a family he has never seen before pull up in a moving van next door. He jumps to the conclusion they are strangers to his neighborhood moving in from another part of town or another city. What he does not know, is that the family simply moved back into its own house from a military base it lived on for a number of years.

Similarly, an archeologist 10,000 years from now might find the remains of a 20th century grindstone-maker's shop. The excavation does not yield any clues other than a few finished and semi-finished grindstones with a hole in the center, and a few sandstones nearby. If he concludes that at some point in the past the shop was used to produce circular stones with holes in their centers, then his reasoning is sound. However, if he speculates that the shop was used to make fishing net weights, then he is jumping to conclusion because the find does not yield evidence of that fact. And if he jumps to the conclusion that the 20th century man of that area was making and using stone tools or that he lived in a Stone Age, then his reasoning is flawed. In the first case grindstones, regardless on their number, do dot constitute the set we call tools. In the second, even if it were established that different kinds of tools were being made of stone at some point in the past, that evidence is insufficient to declare that era Stone Age. Survivalists routinely make stone tools; and modern kitchen cutting boards and countless other modern tools are made of stone, including today's grindstones.

These examples shows just how easy it is to fall into delusion when only a short segment of a timeline or insufficient samples are visible to the observer. Add to that historical falsifications for political advantage that muddy the waters of what information is available, and the worldview in the mind of the researcher is all too often more a product of fantasy than that of reality. Many, otherwise noted researchers fall into this trap. They study a few centuries and note the activities of a sampling of individuals during that period, and then base theories covering thousands of years or more, or even the origins and stages of development of nations and peoples on that blink of an eye in the history of humanity.

12...
#15 10...leszerelt 2014-03-20 20:22
...10

EUROPEAN COUNTRIES: It is difficult to speak of "European Countries", distinct entities in political geography individuals or groups of people claim as their own, during the periods associated with Huns, Sarmatians, Scythians, Pechenegs and Kipchaks. Eastern Europe - the landmass between the Urals and the Carpathians - was a vast, sparsely settled territory inhabited by Huns and also by the Norse in the north after the 8th century. Politically, this landmass was controlled by a loose confederacy of regional Hun (Kun) chieftains until Atilla unified them in the 5th century into the Hun Empire - more precisely, the Hun Monarchy. Following Atilla's death, its southern half reverted to a Hun confederacy centered in Kiev while the Norse (Rus) took control of the headwaters of the Volga which became the Grand Duchy of Moscow in the 13th century. There is no evidence to suggest "countries" existed in Eastern Europe during the referenced periods.

Geographically, Central Europe is generally considered to stretch from the east foot of the Carpathians to the first risings of the Alps and also includes the entire watershed of the Vistula. This fertile land has been continuously inhabited since at least the Neolithic by a Caucasian (Europid) people, today's Croats, Hungarians, Poles and Ukranians(7). It had been controlled by a close confederacy of Hun chieftains since recorded history before the Roman conquests. The Romans tried to conquer it for half a century at the turn of the 1st millennuim, and succeeded in controlling its south-western regions until Atilla evicted them in the 5th century. He took over the leadership of this confederacy when the Huns elected him their king, and made the Carpathian Basin his administrative center and his headquarters today's Hungary at the crossroads of the continent. Except for the Mediterranean, the Carpathian Basin was the most populated region of Europe - prorated to area - until the High Middle Ages. During the Avar period (6th to the 9th century) its political reach extended west into Bavaria and possibly beyond. By the 8th century, this region had been implicitly referred to as the Kingdom of Hungary "The life story of Hungary’s Berta" (Charlemagne's mother, died 783)(8). In the Vistula, the Poles struggled against aggressors from both sides, the Rus from the east and Germanic peoples from the west, while the Croats defended Central Europe in the south from alien invasions from the Balkans. There were no "countries" in Central Europe before an alien hegemony, founded on the fraudulent "Donation of Constantine", the "Holy Roman Empire"(9), brought in the concept of "land ownership"(10) in the Late Middle Ages.

Western Europe - excluding the British Isles - was a completely different world. Here, countries did exist but only centuries later. Following the collapse of the (Western) Roman Empire, Western Europe became, and for centuries remained, an uncivilized, lawless land sparsely inhabited by pockets of people who lived in forest clearings, tree-houses and caves. There were no buildings here nor people to fill them. The total population of Europe in 650 AD, excluding the Mediterranean and Hungary, was less than that of today's Switzerland or Tajikistan, for example(11). Here, everyone who could pay a handful of mercenaries' wages overran a parcel of land and began to claim it as his own personal property, while the victimized inhabitants ran for their lives and hid wherever they could.

'The Kingdom of France was unified under Louis XI (1461 1483). Bismarck (1815-1896) unified the German states. Italy was unified by Garibaldi (1807-1882). Ernst Sackur, a Jesuit priest, writes about the situation in Europe in the tenth century in his book "Die Cluniacenser Halle" in 1894. He states that the aristocrats robbed and killed each other and among them, the princes were the worst robbers. If a wandering knight gathered a few rocks on top of a mountain, it was declared to be a castle. Europe was prey to wild animals but people were in greater danger from robbers. Everyone was a fugitive and a nomad with no permanent residence. They did not build walls, but lived in caves and lean-to shelters. In the Chronicles of Charlemagne we see that "their buildings were built of mud and wood."[34 Ann. Lauriss A. 789: "ex ligno et terra".] The French bishops ordered the monks to build stone walls around their monasteries as a defense against the Norman invaders. The monks asked how they could do that because they had no knowledge of masonry and nobody to teach them. "What they built in the daytime fell down at night." [35 Rudnay, Egyed, A Nyugati Kulturáról, Ősi Gyökér, 1990, Sept/Oct. p.135, from the writings of Sackur and Krieg von Hochfelden.] Widukind, the chronicler of Henry the Fowler, (926-936) called the towers built for defense against the Magyars "cities" because they were built of stone, yet they could accommodate only nine soldiers. Widukind noted that, besides these "cities", there were no other stone walls in the German states.[36 Rudnay, Egyed: Op. Cit. - Pertz Georgicus Henricus: Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores, Hannover, 1826, Chapter 35. "Villa aut nulla extra urbes fuere moenia."] In Belgium, all the old houses were made of wood, in spite of the fact that this territory had very few trees but was rich in stone as a resource. The stone castles of Holland were built after the fourteenth century. Cellini, the famous Italian gold and silversmith, who spent two years in the service of King François I of France (1515-1547), complained that, whenever he traveled in France, he was accommodated in a tent because there were no buildings.' (Botos László, The homeland reclaimed, www.magtudin.org/Homeland%201.htm)

Therefore, the notion that "Huns, Sarmatians, Scythians, Pechenegs and Kipchaks fell upon the European countries like an avalanche" is difficult to support because no such countries existed. Eastern Europe was a sparsely settled open territory without any political borders. Central Europe consisted of the shared homeland of the Magyar-Hun nations centered in the Carpathian Basin who, like their brethren throughout Central Eurasia, had no concept of land ownership. They, like the majority of the Kos people's (KOSOK) descendents, still held the cosmic worldview according to which they were constituent elements of the Universe, rather than "proprietors" of any of its parts.

And Western Europe was still in its "Dark Ages" - by its own definition - a lose network of usurped pockets of land controlled by members of a handful of wealthy families who fought each other and regularly robbed the inhabitants of their produce, grain and other staples, and livestock. These unrelated looters even raided farms, ranches and villages as far east as Hungary. Instigated by the Church of Rome, they joined forces only when Árpád put an end to their looting of the Carpathian Basin's agricultural wealth and human and natural resources(12). The Hungarians, of course, welcomed(13) the return of their kindred from the east to help them put an end to the constant raids from the west and reestablish order in the Carpathian Basin. So the referenced peoples would not have "fallen on" their own kind "like an avalanche" but rather joined them to eliminate the uncultured western threat.

Western Europe finally emerged from its marginal existence thanks to the knowledge, skills, technology and civilization it received from its eastern neighbors, the Huns - as claimed, quite correctly, by the author - even art from the Huns of Tuscany(14).
_______________

(7) We, European aborigines - Semino, et alia, also confirm (magyarmegmaradasert.hu/in-english/our-history/1655). Contrary to popularized conjectures, evidence points to the Carpathian Basin as the Magyars' homeland since time immemorial: they did not "come from" anywhere. If this is true, then they were constituents of the Gravettian culture - possibly the Aurignacian as well.

(8) "The life story of Hungary’s Berta (Charlemagne's mother, died 783) was found by accident in 1270 by the then very famous minstrel of Belgian origin, Adenes li rois, or Little Adam, the King of Minstrels," Susan Tomory, Hungarian Kingdom in Europe Before the 8th Century? (www.magtudin.org/Hungarian%20Kingdom.htm)

(9) Fehérlófő tankör (study group), The Scythian, p. 299-300 (magyarmegmaradasert.hu/files/k_aktatar/TheScythian.pdf p. 299-300)

(10) The concept of land ownership was unknown to humanity before the 2nd millennium BC. It is still alien to many autochthonous peoples throughout the world (e.g. Natives of the Americas). This idea was introduced to humanity by the Hebrew, Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) who held a primitive, strictly materialistic worldview. He set out to erase the cosmic worldview from human consciousness - the awareness of the characteristics of the soul and the spirit, and the foundations of advanced societies and their value systems - and declared himself proprietor of the world. His idea has since contaminated Europe and a large chunk of the world, along with much of the Hebrews' materialistic ideology.

(11) J. C. Russell, Population in Europe, in Carlo M. Cipolla, ed., The Fontana Economic History of Europe, Vol. I: The Middle Ages, (Glasgow: Collins/Fontana, 1972), 25-71.

(12) Árpád's forces of 40,000 routed the attacking combined Bavarian forces of 100,000 attacking on both sides of the Danube in 907 at the Battle of Pozsony (today, Bratislava).

(13) "There is reason to believe that they welcomed the arrival of the Hungarians and joined them. According to the chronicles, the conquering Hungarians found in many places a humble, autochthonous people, who had lived there since time immemorial. They had given names to rivers and mountains, which were accepted by the conquerors and, as geographic names usually do, survived easily the last millennium. These names are all in good Hungarian. The natives and the newcomers probably spoke related languages" (Bobula Ida, Origin of the Hungarian Nation, magyarmegmaradasert.hu/in-english/our-history/1566).

(14) Tóth Alfréd, Etruscans, Huns and Hungarians, magyarmegmaradasert.hu/in-english/our-language/1628
#14 9...leszerelt 2014-03-17 20:34
...9

NOMAD, NOMADIC: This word is problematic in this article because its meaning in western cultures cannot be associated with the referenced peoples or their lifestyle. It defines people (persons), peoples and lifestyles alien to the autochthons of Central Eurasia - save some Arctic and subarctic Samoyedic tribes. Dictionaries of the English language define "nomad" as individuals or groups who have no fixed residences and wander from place to place in search of food, water and grazing land, and their life-style. Etymologically this word means wandering in search of pasture, derived from the Greek word nomas, from nemein, "to pasture". In the English speaking world, the word "nomad" carries the negative connotation of primitiveness or social irresponsibility, or both.

There is no equivalent word in Hungarian for this concept as there were no nomads among the Magyars (Huns, Kuns, Scythians, Sarmatians, etc.) or any of their relatives in the sense defined in western cultures. Those Magyars whose occupation was animal husbandry based on breeding and herding livestock on open ranges had a fixed homeland and a prescribed territory within their homeland. Their lifestyle was similar to that of today's cattlemen in the Americas (vaquero (buckaroo), gaucho, cowboy). The names of these people were specific to the kind of livestock they raised or herded, e.g., gulyás cattleman, cowboy, lovász, csikós "horse-handler", wrangler, "colt- foal-handler, or the general term, csordás herdsman. Although they did not live in fixed buildings while on the range, they were neither wandering nor searching for food. They had specific destinations, known routes to their destinations, supplies for the duration of the herding season, and schedules to meet.

Those who wander from place to place without a fixed home are variously called vándorló rover or kóborló vagabond in Hungarian, or csavargó vagrant, drifter if they have no lawful or visible means of support. These people were not and are not involved in any kind of animal husbandry: they are simply searching for subsistence, often by engaging in criminal activity. The name for these people's lifestyle is cigány Gypsy, in reference to roaming clans who migrated from India during the Middle Ages and began squatting and living off charity or the proceeds of marginal occupations or criminal activity throughout Europe. While justified in a historical sense, this adjective is today inaccurate - and unjust - because a significant number of Gypsies have since successfully integrated into their host societies and have assumed their social responsibilities.

If such wanderers lived off herding livestock - typically sheep and goats - the literal "nomads ", then they are specifically identified by their point of foreign origin, ethnicity or race, e.g., the oláh Wlach, who migrated to Hungary - and elsewhere - along with the Slavs (see, SLAV) and Gypsies in the Late Middle Ages. Hungarians use the Latin derivative word nomád to express this foreign concept. Others associate the word "nomad" with the Hebrews and their lifestyle(6). I have no knowledge of equivalent words in other languages or their literal or implicit meanings - unfortunately. Perhaps someone can fill that void.

In popular usage, the word "nomad" in western cultures refers to:

1: Primitive hunter-gatherer clans who inhabit wilderness regions and follow and live off wild herds, and their lifestyle.

2: Primitive individuals or groups without ties to settled communities or to any homeland and living off pastoralism who wander aimlessly without knowledge of territorial boundaries, and their lifestyle.

Beyond its literal meaning, the word "nomad" may also refer to:

3: Typically financially independent individuals, groups or clubs whose members temporarily or permanently leave their settled communities and travel from place to place, often in "Recreation Vehicles", sometimes in caravans, and their lifestyle.

4: Vagabonds, vagrants or other shifting and shifty population elements without ties to settled communities or homelands who drift aimlessly with the tides of opportunity from place to place, often living off charity or the proceeds of criminal activity, and their lifestyle.

The word "nomad, nomadic" is also used in western cultures to refer to larger segments of humanity - tribes, nations, peoples, ethnic groups and races, often as a subtle pejorative to propagate strategic disinformation for political advantage. Considering themselves sophisticated but ignorant of the world beyond their own, westerners could not envision societies other than primitive - let alone more advanced - that could exist in other lands. In the early days of the development of their languages, their contact with such "outsiders" took three forms, two direct, one indirect. They traveled to lands they may have heard about but did not know to gather information, conduct trade, establish diplomatic relations, spread ideology, or to conquer. They noted their observations and reported them upon their return. Their reports usually included the physical appearance, social structure and organization, character, value systems, beliefs and lifestyle of those they came in contact with. Those parts of their reports that could obstruct the West's political aspirations were locked away or destroyed. Those that served its interests became widely publicized. Hence, if the report contained such details as farmers' and their families' large-scale seasonal relocation between their winter homes in their villages and their summer dwellings in the fields they cultivated - activities typical of crop growing in the plains of Ukraine, Hungary and other regions well-suited for seasonal soil cultivation - the purpose, expediency and logic of those activities were edited out of the report before it was released for public consumption, leaving only the notion of a "people aimlessly wandering in the plains searching for food" in the mind of the deceived westerner.

Reports of the highly structured and organized activities of herdsmen and herd-owners of Central Eurasia underwent the same editing process. The herd-owners' carefully planned roundup and herding of livestock to and from grasslands, water sources and markets - activities typical of animal husbandry in much of Central and Western Asia and other regions where the soil is unsuited for cultivation or the growing season is too short - as part of their nation's complex economy was reduced to roaming the Steppes subsisting on marginal pastoralism. In both cases, the social structure and organization, character, value systems and beliefs of the people observed were hidden if positive, and only their movements in large numbers from place to place were popularized as "evidence of their nomad and, therefore, primitive" stage of development. Consequently, the misinformed westerner associated such people with primitive hunter-gatherer clans who inhabit wilderness regions and follow and live off wild herds, or with marginal tribes living off pastoralism without ties to any homeland.

Alternatively, people from such "unknown" lands visited their western neighbors for much the same reasons. If they came in numbers, they often brought their families and supply trains for the long journey to their destinations and back, which included their mobile accommodations similar to the Wagon Trains of the North American pioneer centuries later. Having no knowledge of these visitors' origin, homeland, social structure, character, value systems and beliefs, or lifestyle, the locals associated them with the illegals of their own world who were constantly on the move, socially irresponsible individuals or bandits who led a lifestyle typical of opportunistic parasites.

The third form of contact was indirect. People confined to urban or coastal village life observed or received reports of movements of people over land on horseback or in caravans traveling between two points, both beyond the known world of the urbanites or villagers. Unbeknownst to them, these movements were routine activities associated with domestic and international - occasionally intercontinental - trade and commerce, military and commercial transportation of goods and supplies, scientific expeditions, or simply the regular maintenance of diplomatic or cultural ties between tribes, nations and peoples. Since these urbanites' and villagers' total knowledge of these "strangers" was limited to "people on the move", they concluded that these travelers must be either searching for a place to settle down, or were still too primitive to contemplate "civilized" settled life.

It is clear that the author refers to "herdsman" and "herd-owners" of complex societies of Central Eurasia engaged in animal husbandry, which necessarily included the herding of livestock to designated grasslands, water sources, ports, road and railway terminals and markets within their homeland, and their activities and lifestyle. The word "nomad" in western cultures, however, does not define these Central Eurasians or their lifestyle: it does not convey the author's intended concept. English-speaking societies did not include elements similar to those of Central Eurasia during the development of their language. Consequently, there is no equivalent word for the author's intended concept in English, just as there is no equivalent word for "nomad" in Hungarian. The only such societies the English came in contact with were the Scots, the Irish and other Celtic peoples. However, those peoples spoke their own Gaelic language, not English.

Since the word "nomad" carries strong negative connotations and politically motivated disinformation, it is best to avoid its use when addressing western cultures to preclude the "primitive" or "socially irresponsible" stigma it conveys in those cultures. Those who apply the word "nomad" - or any derivative of its Greek root - to the Central Eurasian autochthons or their lifestyle are, deliberately or inadvertently, defaming those peoples and their way of life. (This article suggests its author is doing so inadvertently.) "Animal husbandry" seems to be the most accurate term to define the activities and lifestyle of those autochthons of Central Eurasia who live on lands unsuited for soil cultivation or where the growing season is too short. Other suggestions to label this concept are solicited.
_______________

(6) Baráth Tibor, Küzdelem a nomád életformájú szemitákkal (Struggle with the Nomadic Lifestyle Semites, magyarvagyok.com/.../...). The Habiru (Hebrews) are "people who travel in dead silence, who destroy everything, whose menfolk go where they will - they establish their tents and their camps - they spend their time in the countryside without observing the decrees of my king" (2150 BC cuneiform notation from Ur, Mesopotamia, Fehérlófő Study Group, The Scythian, magyarmegmaradasert.hu/in-english/our-beliefs/1666). The Hebrews "led a marginal and sometimes lawless existence on the fringes of settled society... a loosely defined, inferior social class composed of shifting and shifty population elements without secure ties to settled communities who are referred to 'as outlaws, mercenaries, and slaves' in ancient texts", (Carol Redmount, Bitter Lives: Israel in and out of Egypt, The Oxford History of the Biblical World).

10...
#13 Maybe you will be interested.Timur M. 2014-03-15 17:24
A small excerpt from my book is not yet finished… In this article will discuss the the great figures of the steppe, including representatives of the Magyar people.

Dasht-i-Kipchak – a huge in size area is also known as Kipchak or Polovtsian steppe from ancient centuries been home for members of the nomadic people. Territory, covering the Central Asia, Siberia, Caucasus and Eastern Europe gave birth to the great history of the steppe, which created and disappearing states and nations, were born heroes, stories and legends. Legends of Steppe Glory.
Peoples inhabiting Great steppe initially combines not only Turkic language, but also the belief in Heavenly God Tengri and common traditions, in particular Cumans or how they will be called on by the Kipchaks had their different from other neighboring nations system and life style. Kipchaks were excellent horsemen and cattlemen. Their whole life has been associated with the breeding of cattle, camels, sheeps and horses. Horses were to Kipchaks strategic resource and a major source of livelihood, they gave food (meat, milk, kumys), were so necessary part in the steppe for transportation and military doctrine. That horse - the ultimate resource defined their nomadic way of life caused by the constant search of fertile pastures, which were vital to the aforementioned animals, and therefore nomadic peoples.
Found comments about the backwardness of the nomadic economy long ago debunked in our time, and due to those achievements that gave nomadic civilization. In particular, it is necessary to emphasize that the nomadic world was such not fully known to everybody as nomads build cities and engage in agriculture. Also stands out faith nomads - Tengriizm first monotheistic religion on the basis of which appeared remarkable modern religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam and etc.). In European sources Tengriizm often associated with Arianism.
Habitat area has always had an important role to humans, causing his behavior and traditions. Example can serve as food, clothing, housing construction methods. In particular, residents of the far north are often built houses of stone due to the fact that its production multimeter under a layer of snow and folk was almost impossible. In turn, the residents of the desert areas that do not have sufficient access to wood, could not build a full wooden houses.
Kipchaks main habitat settlement were steppe with a sharp and harsh climate were constant battle with the environment for survival. In particular clothing of Kipchaks is predominantly leather and fur in particular, which allowed to cope with strong winds and rainfall. In Kipchak`s food predominant fatty meats necessary to maintain heat and energy in the body .
Terrific yurt is the optimum housing for nomads leading permanent nomadic lifestyle. Physical impossibility to build a house on each new nomadic, caused this yurt dwelling nomads composite that combines the full warmth of the house and mobility collapsible tent.
Regarding military arts, until the emergence of widespread use of gunpowder and guns and artillery, Kipchaks` warriors were not equal. From the very childhood wound kipchaks fully mastered the art of riding. Romans faced with the troops of the Huns, compared them with the centaurs - mythical creatures , hybrid of human and horse.
Given the importance of hunting for nomads, possession of onions is the necessary minimum without which a resident of the steppe were not likely to be fully or even survive.
All of the above served as the fact that each Kipchak to adulthood was a warrior by default. This also explains the success of nomads on the battlefields, which lasted for centuries.
As mentioned in the beginning, Kipchak steppe awarded heroes, history and legends.

The above people remained not only in the history books, but in most living peoples inhabiting Central Eurasia and many surrounding regions. They did not remain in the names of modern states, but left his legacy in millions of like-minded people...

Hozzászólni csak a bejelentkezett felhasználók tudnak

Latest comments

Recommended websites

New Articles