We Hungarians are Caucasian. Huns / Attila are Mongoloid and so were the original Turks

[Beyond]

I made this thread for the sole purpose to understand the history of Hungarians, Turks, Huns, Scythians.

It is backed up by our Hungarian and Russian anthropologists and genetics studies as well which clearly shows Huns and Turks were originally Mongoloid and Turanid ( Mongoloid-Caucasoid ).
We Hungarians are pure Caucasian and we have high R1a like the Scythian and with other central Asian Iranian nomad cultures. Original Central Asian were Indo-European speakers were pure Caucasian Aryans who were later conquered by the Mongoloids and forced to intermarry, and as a result Central Asia existed only two types.

1st ) The Huns and Turks invaders were composed of 2 types of races.

1st type is the Mongoloid type which make up large minority . ( the original invaders from eastern/Southern Siberia )

2nd type is the Turanid type, a Caucasian with significant Mongoloid. ( a result of Mongoloid conquering and mixing with the andronovo type people )

Anthropology of Huns[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns

" Hungarian archaeologist István Bóna argues that most of Europeans Huns were of Caucasoid and that less than 20-25% were of Mongoloid stock.^[47] Turanid was most common among the Hun, According to the Hungarian anhtropologist Pál Lipták (1955) the Turanid type is a Caucasoid type with significant Mongoloid admixture, arising from the mixture of the Andronovo type of Europoid features and the Oriental (Mongoloid).^[48] Eickstedt's concept on this race as a variety of the Turanid type, transitional between the Europeoid and Mongoloid.[49] "

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Facial reconstruction of Asian Huns by Russian anthropologist ( the Xiongnu, Chinese Huns )



Facial reconstruction of European Huns by Hungarian anthropologist ( the Huns, European Huns )

2nd ) Difference between Turkic and Turkish are all different races

-The original description of Turks was like this

A close companion of Muhammad recorded what he said about Turks. Described them as small eyes, red faces, flat noses
"The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Turks; people with small eyes, red faces, and flat noses. " other description includes " A tribe with puny eyes and thin beard "




Facial reconstruction of the first turks, the Gokturks were the first people to call themselves Turks.


According to Russian anthropologist they were a predominately Mongoloid type

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[PlPs]

Ok, you Hungarians are all Caucasoid and Huns were Mongoloid Turks.

Are you happy now?

Seriously, why would anyone wants to start a thread like this? Why do you want to "prove" that you're white on internet? Also, there are dozens of sites about white "supremacy", go and "prove" your whiteness on those sites.

[Beyond]

Please stop posting comments about us being descendants of Huns. I have nothing against my Turkish brother, I still believe in the Turanian brotherhood but please stop claiming us something we are not.



Modern Turkish people are not descendants of original Turks but are Caucasian with substantial Mongoloid admixture, an small degree of South Asian admixture

Turkish people having substantial Mongoloid admixture is proof that original Turks were at least mixed.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic...Turkish_people


" The contribution of the Central Asian genetics to the modern Turkish people has been debated and become the subject of several studies. As a result, several studies have concluded that the indigenous peoples of Anatolia are the primary source of the present-day Turkish population,^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]} in addition to contributions from neighboring peoples,^[2] from the Caucasus, Balkans, and the Near East,^[8] with a small contribution from Central Asia and East Asia.^{[2] "}






Arabs described the Original Turks ( including Huns ) were described as being flat nose, small eyes, red faces, thin beard people

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

also the Turks were described as having small feet, how can any Caucasian people have small feet? we have have big feet.

[Beyond]

Ok, you Hungarians are all Caucasoid and Huns were Mongoloid Turks.

Are you happy now?

Seriously, why would anyone wants to start a thread like this? Why do you want to "prove" that you're white on internet? Also, there are dozens of sites about white "supremacy", go and "prove" your whiteness on those sites.

Maybe you should ask the Turkish people to stop claiming we are Huns than were will be less confusions, is absurd to claim we descent from both of them when they are physically described like the polar opposite of eachother. There is too many comments on this forum about how Hungarian have Mongol blood when in reality all we have is 1-3% which is insignificant. Our language is Uralic because of the non-Aryan ( Mongoloid/Caucasoid ) invaders coming from the east and replaced our original Indo-European language. And we simply unsurped the name Hun but in reality we have nothing to do with them.



The ancestors of Hungarians are central Asian Iranic people like Scythian, this is why we have high R1a and high frequencies of blue eyes, blonde hair. The Turks who have these traits were because they absorbed and mixed with the conquered original scythians.


Facial reconstruction of Scythians look typically Hungarian. They were described as being tall, handsome, long nose, pale skinned, large eyes, long beards, blue eyes, blonde hair





Huns and Turks were described as short, small eyes, tanned skinned, flat noses, big head people with red faces.

( you can find those Huns traits everywhere in modern Mongolians, Siberian Turks, and northern central Asian Turks. )

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[PlPs]

Ok, we got it. You are handsome white, Caucasoid and Turks and Mongols are ugly Mongoloids.

[Beyond]

Ok, we got it. You are handsome white, Caucasoid and Turks and Mongols are ugly Mongoloids.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This is what my people look like. Blonde hair, brown hair with blue-greenish eyes




Mongolian and Turks with these traits are due to have Scythian ( Hungarian ) ancestry, they were never original Turk trait. Even the ancient Kyrgyz and Kipchak had it only because of intermixing

[Tureuki]

Dude what are you talking about ? Its mostly Hungarians themselves claiming to be Huns, are you debating with yourself ? I also gave my answer about r1a, Hungarian r1a which is estimated to be majority of Hungarian gene pool can't be the original haplogroup of Hungarian people, because there is no way original nomadic haplogroup can stay dominant, you mostly got it from your neighbours, you were probably not different from other Uralic speakers in the beginning, when you transformed into a steppe nomadic federation, you most likely absorbed some other elements from Turkics and probably some Iranian remnants but thats it.

1) Presence of small amount of n haplogroup is enough to prove very orginal Magyars were this.

2) There is pretty much no way a less martial, largely hunter gatherer, fisher folk can assimilate a martial steppe folk and transform their language to their own, there is nothing that backs up this.


http://www.magyarorigins.com/hungariandna.html

This article fails in the logic of small invaders being not able to transform the language of locals.

[Beyond]

Dude what are you talking about ? Its mostly Hungarians themselves claiming to be Huns, are you debating with yourself ?

I also gave my answer about r1a, Hungarian r1a which is estimated to be majority of Hungarian gene pool can't be the original haplogroup of Hungarian people, because there is no way original nomadic haplogroup can stay dominant, you mostly got it from your neighbours, you were probably not different from other Uralic speakers in the beginning, when you transformed into a steppe nomadic federation, you most likely absorbed some other elements from Turkics and probably some Iranian remnants but thats it.

1) Presence of small amount of n haplogroup is enough to prove very orginal Magyars were this.
2) There is pretty much no way a less martial, largely hunter gatherer, fisher folk can assimilate a martial steppe folk and transform their language to their own, there is nothing that backs up this.

Those were loony Hungarian nationalists from 80's and 90's, and there still many of them but many Hungarians had also rejected this claim. Just read the Hungarian forums. Hungarian anthropologist even blatantly said that we are not the physical descendants of Huns. So what is the point of claiming something we are not Those Hungarian who claim we are related with Asiatic are simply too ignorant. New evidence suggest we are not even Uralic people but Indo-European Aryans with related with the spread of Indo-European languages in Europe and India

Hungarian R1a is derived from 2 source, one is from Central Asian Iranic and the other were from the slav migrants who I do admit migrated in millions to Hungary. Either way R1a was originally central Asia, so Russian and slavs with R1a are from central Asians.


Magyars make up a only very small percentage of Hungarian DNA.

The ancient Magyars were Turanid with small number of Mongoloids.

[Tureuki]

We don't claim anything, we don't even know what are you furious about, I already said Hungarians were not Huns at the other thread before you even came.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

The Magyars weren't Turanid, the Magyars were Finno-Ugric.

Turanid is the correct term for the admixture, and pre-dates the Huns by a very long time. The Iranian Nomads that dominated the Mongolian Steppes and prowled the Western borders of China before the Altai moved in had a myriad of Turanid admixtures.

The Huns are not Hungarian, there is probably no relation between any people, except maybe the Altai Republic, and the Huns on the planet. There's been a lot of water under the bridge, so modern concepts of race and ethnicity need to be thrown out in a world that had a concept of ethnicity based on whether or not you were a Roman citizen.

[Beyond]

We don't claim anything, we don't even know what are you furious about, I already said Hungarians were not Huns at the other thread before you even came.

I'm not talking about you, I'm talking about the Turkish and Romanian members who previously posted on this forum ( they are no small number )

So I had to made this thread to be clear.

The Magyars weren't Turanid, the Magyars were Finno-Ugric.

Turanid is the correct term for the admixture, and pre-dates the Huns by a very long time. The Iranian Nomads that dominated the Mongolian Steppes and prowled the Western borders of China before the Altai moved in had a myriad of Turanid admixtures.

The Huns are not Hungarian, there is probably no relation between any people, except maybe the Altai Republic, and the Huns on the planet. There's been a lot of water under the bridge, so modern concepts of race and ethnicity need to be thrown out in a world that had a concept of ethnicity based on whether or not you were a Roman citizen.

Finno-Uralic are Uralic people. They too are mixture of Mongoloid/Caucasoid but in different degrees. According to our anthropologist, Turanid was quite common in the Magyars as well.


Yes. Hungarians are not related with Uralic or Turkic, we are basically European + Aryans of central Asia




Please look at this video to gain better understanding.

Please look at my friends youtube video.




Hungary today should be called " lands of Scythians "




Turanid was basically a originaly Scythian europoid group altered by significant Mongoloid admixture from the invaders. They intermarried, so in a way I guess you can say most of the Huns are partly related with Hungarians but the core of the facts is tha Hungarians today are pure Caucasian as were original scythians where as original Huns were Mongoloids, and even the Caucasoid huns were heavily mixed with Mongoloid.

[Tureuki]

Well looks like you just like the idea of having Scythian ancestors, I'm not gonna further discuss.

[Maximinus Thrax]

Moved from TW Attila Historical Discussion to Vestigia Vetustatis where it probably fits better, since the OP is really keen on discussing the ancestry of the Hungarian people.

[Ciciro]

Hungry is about as much Scythian as it is Hunnic. Heck, Romania probably probably has more people of Scythian descent.

[Tureuki]

Bull ing .

Scythians were same as other nomads, just because there are some gold artifacts found in graves doesn't automatically puts them under the same category as settled civilizations, Scythians were tent dwellers, and looters, simple as that.

The map you see in wikipedia is NOT a single Scythian state smartass, its countless different little independent tribes.

"Midget race" is carved the largest land empire at once, not their "intelligent" and "handsome" counterparts.

Your ancestors are NOT Scythians, get it into your head, you think Slavic and other native admixture in your blood is some kind of "Scythian" blood which is hell wrong, you just want to glorify your past thats it.

At first I thought this was a serious attempt of historical debate, turned out it was just a white supremacist

[Beyond]

Hungry is about as much Scythian as it is Hunnic. Heck, Romania probably probably has more people of Scythian descent.

Hungarian have high frequencies of R1a1 like Scythians. This proves we are paternally connected they also had high frequencies of mtDNA U which shows we are both connected maternally

Mind you, I'm not a nationalist. I don't agree Hungarian are the only people who can claim descendant of Scythian, I believe many modern Iranic tribes in western central Asia and also in the Xinjiang China East Turkistan are related with the original scythians. But Hungarians are no doubt the closest

Check out this link----------> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qf6hB392SA

Bull ing .

Scythians were same as other nomads, just because there are some gold artifacts found in graves doesn't automatically puts them under the same category as settled civilizations, Scythians were tent dwellers, and looters, simple as that.

The map you see in wikipedia is NOT a single Scythian state smartass, its countless different little independent tribes.

"Midget race" is carved the largest land empire at once, not their "intelligent" and "handsome" counterparts.

Your ancestors are NOT Scythians, get it into your head, you think Slavic and other native admixture in your blood is some kind of "Scythian" blood which is hell wrong, you just want to glorify your past thats it.

At first I thought this was a serious attempt of historical debate, turned out it was just a white supremacist

#
Apparently you know very little of the achivements of Scythian so I suggest you read Wikipedia.




The Scythians migrated from central Asia and had advance the culture of East Europe all the way to India/Pakistan which were historically under Scythian rule and many of the nobles were of Scythian descent in India.

[Darth Red]

This thread is on thin ice. Now that it's here in the VV, I would like to point out the debate forum rules that we expect to be followed. Also any hint of hate speech, this thread will be closed and warnings handed out.

[Ciciro]

Looks like Hungry is pretty Slavic to me.

[Stavroforos]

Not that I want to give legitimacy to your posts by simply pointing out one error in them, but considering the Goths were enemies of the Huns and hated by the Germanic tribes, using Jordanes as a source on how good looking the Huns were is not the best approach.

[Sir Adrian]

Oh boy, here we go again.


Hungarians are caucasian for the same reason Bulgars and Serbia have southern European complexions instead of looking like Russians, why Turks look very European compared to Madjars and Volga Bulgars and why most englishmen are not blond and blue eyed despite the region being conqured by scandinavians three times in 500 years.
When a nomadic people usually conquer a region they manage to impose thier culture but eventually get absorbed by the native population due to their low numbers. The same thing happened with the magyars who never numbered more than 1000 families (meaning 50.000-100.000 people) in total after they left Khazaria. In fact the Hungarian academy conducted two studies on the topic. One in the 1980s, when at then request of the communist party, they sent a scientific expedition in Central Asia to find the birthplace of the hungarian language. They discovered a people called the Madjars who spoke a very similar language. They were turkic.
The second one occurred in the 1990s when the same Hungarian Academy conducted a fairly extensive genetic survey of Hungary's population. They found that most of the Hungarians living east of the Danube were genetically indistinguishable from Romanians (in North-East & East Hungary) and Serbs (South-East and south), while those living west were basically all Slovaks and Czechs with a significant Germanic influence.


The Scythian story was invented in 1987 by that raving lunatic Ilyes Elmer. The Scythians were Iranians mixed with balts and proto-slavs. They spoke a Indo-European language belonging to the Satem branch, they had no connection with the magyars or modern day hungarian language.
The Hun story is the result of standard medieval thinking. If you keep hearing tales about fearsome horse people highly skilled with the bow who called themselves
Huns and you meat a group of fearsome horse people highly skilled with the bow logic dictates that you label them Huns. The Byzantines called all nomads they ecountered Scythians because they fought like Scythians. That includes the Mongoloid Avars, the turkic Pechenegs and the turks themselves.