7 Hungarian Origin Myths
Myths of the Hungarian Settlement of the Carpathian Basin
People like stories; they entertain, help to explain the world, and give them a sense of their place. Hungarians are no different. They tell a range of stories about how they came to where they are. Most people see them as myths but some see them as the literal truth. Time to add in a little objective evidence from history, anthropology, and the latest DNA research.
Mentions:
DNA of Hungarians and other steepe people: Razib Khan (2021). “Hungarians as the ghost of the Magyar confederacy” www.razibkhan.com/p/hungarian...
Composite image of Scythians - Netchev, Simeon. "Scythians." World History Encyclopedia. World History Encyclopedia, 24 Jun 2021. Web. 18 Apr 2024.
William Berthon (2019). “Bioarchaeological Analysis of the Mounted Archers from the Hungarian Conquest Period (10th Century)”. University of Szeged
"Early Hungarian History" by M. Laser History • Early Hungarian History
Places visited on my journey:
Hortobágyi Vadaspark, Hortobágy (multiple visits)
Pannonian Sea Museum, Miskolc (visited 2017)
Hungarian National Museum (A Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum), Budapest (visited 2016)
Kurultáj (Meeting of the Tribes), Bugac (attended 2016)
Archeopark, Polgár (visited 2015) - now closed permanently
National Heritage Park, Ópusztaszer (visited 2010)
Additional Exploration:
This video is fed by over a decade of reading and thinking. (Thanks also to my honismeret teacher, Gara.) Here are a small selection of further resources I have used that may be useful to those who want to explore further.
Attila and the Huns • Attila and the Huns (F...
Feszty Cyclorama - view • Magyarok bejövetele ~ ...
Gabor Szantai. Ethnic changes in Hungary due to the Ottoman wars www.hungarianottomanwars.com/...
Project Pannonia - a series of videos on the history of Pannonia ( • Project Pannonia )
Scythians - www.worldhistory.org/Scythians/
Stefan Milo (Stefan Milosavljevich) makes a range of videos on archaeology, anthropology and human evolution backed with academic sources which he shares. For example, “Life In Paleolithic Europe (35,000 Years Ago)” • Life In Paleolithic Eu... and “The Rise & Fall of Europe's First Longhouse Builders - European Prehistory” • The Rise & Fall of Eur...
Zoltán Maróti et al (2022). “The genetic origin of Huns, Avars, and conquering Hungarians”, Science Direct volume 32 issue 13 available at www.sciencedirect.com/science...
00:00 Introduction
00:19 The nature of Myths
01:10 30 000 years
04:15 Attila
06:42 Hunor and Magor
09:27 Pure Magyar race
12:57 Turul bird
14:22 By invitation
17:16 Feszty Cyclorama
There seem to be some incorrect information presented here. The legend of Hunor and Magor is not about the Hungarians entering the Carpathian Basin at all. Kézai very clearly spells out that they chase the doe which disppears in the Maeotian Swamp and the brothers decide to bring their people and settle there. The Maeotian Swamp is the area around the Sea of Azov, the North-Eastern corner of the Black Sea. Hunor and Magor take Alan princesses as wives, the Alans lived in the North-West Caucasus, so they would have been these mythical Hungarians' direct neighbors. The story then states that the population grew too large for the land, so the Huns left West while the Hungarians stayed behind. As a sidenote, Attila the Hun, the literal anti-Christ in medieval Christian Europe is a very poor choice for an ancestor for László IV in the 1200's if you think about it. Especially when there are literal canonized Catholic saints in László's own family he could cite (as many Árpáds have cited). As historian Sudár Balázs likes to say "that's kind of like a Syrian immigrant in Germany in 2024 saying it's all cool, my family is descended from Adolf Hitler." Regarding Emese's dream: Again the original text is quite clear: Emese was already pregnant with Álmos when the Turul appeared to her in a dream and "impregnated her with the divine essence". This was / is a little strange for Christian ears, hence the many different versions, but it fits well with totemistic Eurasian myths. Kende and Gyula - it increasingly looks like this is a 19th century misinterpretation of the original Abbasid texts that mention the Hungarians. The dual principality with the sacred leader and military leader is also an outright fabrication based on scant evidence. Re-evaluation of the original text by modern historians reveals that the original text is referring to a *separate* group of Hungarians who lived along the rivers Oka and Volga, west of the Volga Bulgarians in the 900's. The text also doesn't talk about two chieftains, it says that the Hungarians had a chieftain called Gyula, whose title was Kende. You are also seemingly presenting contradictory information. At "pure magyar race" from 09:30 you state that 30% of the conqueror elites showed Eastern Asian genes. So 3 out of 10 people and go on stressing how the conqueror population was already mixed. This is consistent with genetic analysis carried out in the past few years which lo and behold shows that people on the steppes mix a lot, and the Hungarians were a mixed population, not some pure race, because there is no such thing as a pure race. Then at 18:50 at the Feszty cyclorama you say that the Magyars "were not European". As a mixed population with less than 30% East Asian genes overall who lived in Europe for at least centuries by that point, pray tell what were they? The Feszty cyclorama is by no means "historically accurate", no one ever said so, but depicting the Magyars as a generally European-looking bunch is still far more accuarte than depicting them as East Asians. Obviously the best would be a bit of a mix, kind of like modern Volga Tatars, some of whom look very Asian, some look very European, and some look somewhere in-between. Coincidentally modern-day Volga Tatars and Bashkirs appear to be genetically the closest to conquest-era Hungarians. Bonus: the entire formatting of the video is a little weird to be honest. Some of the chosen topics approximate real, scientific-sounding arguments made by far right nationalists, while others are literally myths. Outside of some wildly ignorant nationalists, everyone knows that myths are just myths. They might contain kernels of the truth or partial truths, but are not literally true. Since the dawn of ethongraphy in the 1700's and 1800's myths are not understood to be literally true. So 'debunking' them as if they were serious, scientific claims is a little strange. It's kind of like "debunking Hansel and Gretel" because "people don't live in gingerbread houses". Well, yeah it's just a story.
Giving each myth three minutes means simplifying a lot! Although Kézai didn't bring the Magyars into the Carpathian Basin, I have met many Hungarians who believe that is what it said - having never read it but rather heard it by word of mouth. And although you and I may think it is obviously a myth, I have met people who use this as "proof" Magyars and Huns are closely related and "that" is how they found Hungary. What if not European? Iranian, Turkish, and Scythian. I have interacted (online and in person) with people using all of these (except Feszty being a historical representation) as "proof" of the Hungarians long occupation and right to the land. (Not all extreme right wingers either.) The Feszty cyclorama, if they know about it, it seen as a record of the conquest (historical accuracy never mentioned).
Curious, what are some Hungarian-Magyar attitudes towards us Mongols these days?
I cannot speak for all, but I'd say neutral to positive. There is a group that embrace all "tribes" as brothers as seen in at Kurultáj where people are encouraged to bring their own yurt! But in my experience, most Hungarians have a foggy idea about anything that occurred before 1990 :-)
I'd say neutral. Most people haven't met any Mongols and the only thing they know about them is that one time in the 1200's when they tried to genocide us.