Hungarian prehistory

See Pannonian basin before Hungary for the prehistory of Hungary (as opposed to the prehistory of the Hungarian people).

File:Hungarian tresure Galgoci.jpg

The "Tree of Life" on an ancient Magyar sabertache (tarsoly) plate

"Hungarian prehistory" (Hungarian: magyar őstörténet) is a specific period in the history of the Hungarian people that typically refers to the time starting from when the Magyars were considered a people separate and identifiable from other Ugric speakers (1000-500 BC) up until their occupation and settlement of the Pannonian plain around 896 AD (Hungarian: Honfoglalás). The events that occurred between the Honfoglalás ("occupation of our country") and the coronation of St. Stephen (1000/1001 AD) are also included by some historians as part of Hungarian prehistory. The terms "ancient history", and "early history"are also used by different sources to describe this same period of Hungarian history.

The formation of the Magyars

Emergence from the Ugric speakers

The Hungarian language is an Ugric language and belongs to the group of Finno-Ugric languages, a grouping in the family of Uralic languages. The Finno-Ugric languages separated within the Uralic languages before 4000 BC and the community of the Finno-Permic and Ugric languages ended before 2000 BC. The formation of the Hungarian language (between 1000 BC and 500 BC) can be localised to the southern regions of the Ural Mountains.

Climate changes around 1300 BC resulted in the northward expansion of the steppes which compelled several groups within the proto-Ugric people to turn to the nomadic lifestyle. This change was strengthened by the several proto-Iranian groups living south of them who had been practising pastoral nomadism. Following a further climate change around 800 BC that caused the expansion of the taiga, the nomadic proto-Ugric groups had to move southward; thus they separated from the ancestors of the Khanty and Mansi peoples.

Ethnonym

The origin of the "Magyar" expression (the self-definition of the Hungarians) could prove the period when the separation of the proto-Hungarians and the groups speaking proto-Ob-Ugric languages took place, but there are several theories on its origins; the word is composed of two parts: magy and ar. Words similar to the magy element of the word are also used by the Khanty and Mansi peoples (referring to one of their groups (mos) or to themselves (mansi) respectively) which suggest that it is of Ugric origin and it possibly means "those who speak". The ar element of the world may be either of Ugric or Turkic origin and it probably means "man".

Nevertheless, the Magyars (Hungarians) in the Arabic sources are mentioned as magyar, baškir, turk, in the Greek as hun, ungr, turk, savard, in the Latin ung, hungr, pannon, avar, hun, turk, agaren, in the Slavic as ugr, peon.

The Hungarian Urheimat

The Hungarian Urheimat (Hungarian: magyar őshaza) is the theoretical original homeland of the Magyars. The term urheimat comes from linguistics and tends to be reserved for discussion about language origin. One view states that the Magyar Urheimat is the same as the Ugric language group's urheimat on the western side of the Urals. Another view claims that the urheimat is roughly the same area as Yugra to the east of the Urals, where the Khanty and Mansi live today. Another point of view is that the urheimat concept is outdated since the development of a people is continuous.

Yugra also tends to be identified as the Ob-Ugric language urheimat and not the earlier Ugric period. The western side of the Urals in the vicinity of the Kama river is considered to be the Ugric language urheimat. It is believed that the Magyars emerged from this western Ural Urheimat based upon early language influence from Permic peoples. One of the consensus views is that the Magyar urheimat is somewhere in the steppe zone south of the Ural mountains.

Another view, based upon the idea of early Ugrian and Turkic connections places the Magyars to the east of the Urals. The time when the proto-Magyars moved westwards from the regions east of the Ural Mountains and settled down in Bashkiria (around the region where the Kama River joins the Volga) is still under debate. Their movement may have been caused by the migrations of people in the 4th century AD, but it may have also connected to the appearance of a new archaeological culture (Kushnarenkovo culture) in the region in the 6th century AD.

Migrations

Migration of the Hungarians

Very specific areas are named and connected with the migration of the Magyars from an original homeland area to modern day Hungary. Each area is detailed below.

First records on the Magyars

See also: Sources for Hungarian prehistory

The Magyar tribes appeared in the written sources in the 830s and the sources suggest that they were living north of the Black Sea at that time. The following records are usually connected to the Magyars, although some of the authors do not accept the identification of the people mentioned in the sources with them.

• The Byzantine author who continued Georgius Monachus' work records that the Bulgarian Empire sought the alliance of a pagan people (called Ungri, Turc and Hun in the source) when the former inhabitants of Macedonia theme, whom the Bulgarians had carried off as captives over the Lower Danube, rebelled against the Bulgarians, but the rebels defeated the pagans and could return to the Byzantine Empire (around 837).
• The Annales Bertiniani mentiones at the year 839 that the Byzantine Emperor Teophilos sent the Rus delegates who had visited Constantinople to the Emperor Louis the Pious and asked the Emperor to assist them in returning to their country because the road they had used when visiting Constantinople became dangerous because of "barbarian and wild peoples".
• The Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus records in his work De Administrando Imperio ("On Administering the Empire") that the Khagan and the Bek of the Khazars asked the Emperor Teophilos to have the fortress of Sarkel built for them. The record is connected to the Magyars on the basis that the new fortress must have become necessary because of the appearance of a new enemy of the Khazars, and other people cannot be taken into account at that time.
• Ahmad ibn Rustah mentiones in the 10th century that "earlier, the Khazars entrenched themselves against the attacks of the Magyars and other peoples".

Magna Hungaria

Map illustrating the confluence of the Volga and the Kama (the territory whereabout Magna Hungaria lay).

Magna Hungaria (literally "Great Hungary") was an area settled by the Magyars. In 1235, Friar Julian located this land directly east of the capital of Volga Bulgaria. One theory states that the Magyars moved to this area from a northerly urheimat before migrating further to the southwest. "The Hungarian tribes joined with by the tribe Megyer – as readable by Istvan Fodor – presumably moved to the south, then west from the Bashkirian Magna Hungaria, crossing the Volga, and dwelled in the area of the river Don." In Bashkiria, in the territory of the Kama river, Hungarian gravesites confirm the Hungarians' ancestors' dwelling here. A significant burial place used between 850 and 920 AD is Bolshie Tigani with 150 graves in the Volga-Kama territory.

Linguistic researches and toponyms suggest that in the Volga-Kama region, the Magyars came into contact with the Volga Bulgarians, who were migrating northward following the 670s. The Magyars organised themselves into tribes probably in the region, because the name of one of their tribes (Gyarmat) reserved as a clan's name among the Bashkirs. The name of several Magyar tribes is of Oghur origin.

The proto-Magyars were separated into two groups between 750 and 830; and afterwards, the two groups existed separately: one of them stayed in Magna Hungaria until the 1240s, while the other group (the ancestors of the future Hungarians) moved southwards.

The Don-Kuban area

There is no name for this Caucasian area the early Magyars were to have lived in and the evidence for habitation appears tenuous, but most scholars seem to agree that the Magyars lived there prior to Levedia. It is generally referred to as the Don-Kuban area or the Caucasian homeland. Xenophon, Prokopios (490-562 AD), Agathias (536-582 AD), Protector Menandros (6th century), Joshua the Stylite (6th century), the Chronicle of Edessa, Joannes Ephesinus (6th century) and especially the Armenian authors Agathangelos, Phaustos Byzantios and Lazar of Farp, mention the Huns and Hungarians dwelling there. The Armenian ruler St. Gregory "the Illuminator" (Gregor Lusavoritch) mentions the Hungarians' ancestors there in his ecclesiastic works.

Kornél Bakay (1996) finds significance in the fact that "the old name Sabir of the Hungarians leads us into the Caucasus... the ancient Hungarians came into being from two ethnicities; the Hungarian speaking Sabir-Huns, and the Turkish speaking Onogur Turks" (it is now known that the language of the Huns was also Onogur Turkish). The group who broke away in the Caucasus are the Savard Hungarians, to whom the monk Julianus traveled, before nearing Magna Hungaria. (Their location here is Majar, where Samuel Turkoly attracted attention in 1825).

Levedia

Byzantine emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, writing in De administrando imperio, names a place where the early Magyars lived. He called it "Levedia" after Magyar voivode Lebedias. Constantine reports that this land has a river flowing through it called Chidmas or Chingilous, but scholars have been unsuccessful in identifying which river these names refer to. The most widely accepted theory identifies the Chidmas with the Kodyma River and the Chingilous with the Inhul River (tributaries of the Southern Bug River).

According to the Emperor's work, the Magyars struggled together with the Khazars, which is interpreted that the Magyar tribes were under Khazar suzerainty. The length of the period when the Magyar tribes belonged to the Khazar empire is under debate. If the early Hungarians were in Levedia – in the neighborhood of Bulgarians and Khazars – it is possible that they lived there only "three years" altogether, as Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus wrote. Some modern authors suggest a 300-year-long period. The Khazar suzerainty over the Magyars may have started around 840 when references to a people distinct from the Khazars disappeared from the written sources.

Around 850, the Pechenegs, who had suffered a defeat from the Khazars, invaded Levedia and defeated the Magyars who, lead by the "Voivode" Lebedias, were obliged to flee westwards. A group of the Magyars fled over the Caucasus Mountains and settled down there. The latter's descendants lived in the region until the 13th century.

Doubt has been cast upon the existence of Levedia. For example, András Róna-Tas doesn't believe Levedia was a real place, instead seeing the story as an Árpádian legitimizing explanation for a regime change.

"The appearance of a new dynasty always brought about a crisis of legitimacy. The new ruler ... needed to explain what happened to the previous clan... At that time, the legitimacy of power in the steppes meant being recognised by the Khazars. The part [in De administrando imperio], which relates Levedi facing up to his incompetence, and recommending Álmos or Arpád instead of himself, lacks even the smallest fragment of credibility."

— András Róna-Tas

Etelköz

The Seven Chieftains of the Conquest (Chronicon Pictum)

Following their defeat from the Pechenegs, the seven Magyar tribes (Hétmagyar) that moved westwards settled down on the territory that the Byzantine emperor calls Etelküzü (or Etel and Küzü). The territory was located around the Dnieper, Southern Bug, Dniester, Prut and Siret Rivers.

Shortly afterwards, as the Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus recorded, the Khagan of the Khazars sent envoys to the "Voivode" Lebedius and suggested him that he should be elevated to grand prince, but Lebedias rejected the Khagan's proposal and proposed another "voivode", Álmos or his son, Árpád instead of himself; the Khagan accepted his offer. Although, the Byzantine Emperor recorded that the heads of the seven Magyar tribes preferred Árpád, but modern authors usually follow the theory that his father, Álmos was proclaimed the first Grand Prince of the Magyars (megas Turkias arkhon in the De Administrando Imperio).

Ahmad ibn Rustah mentiones that the nominal leader of the tribal federation Hétmagyar was styled kende, but its military leader was the gyula.

The Magyars are a reace of Turks and their leader rides out with 20,000 horsemen and this king is called k.nd.h and this name denotes their king, for the name of the man who is actually king over them is ĝ.l.h and all the Magyars accept the orders of their ĝ.l.h in the matter of war and defence and the like.

— Ahmad ibn Rustah

His record suggests that the leadership of the Magyar tribal federation was divided between a spiritual ruler and an administrative and military leader – similar to the practise the Khazars had been following. In the Khagan empire, the holder of the third dignity (following its military leader) was styled kündür which suggests that the Khagan granted this title to the head of the Magyar tribal federation.

In 860-861, Magyar soldiers attacked Saint Cyril, who was travelling to the Khagan, around Chersonesos that had been captured by the Khazars, but Saint Cyril could calm them down. The Hétmagyar federation seceded from the Khazar empire around 862. The Annales Bertiniani recorded at the year 862, that the Magyars (Ungri) pillaged East Francia:

enemies, proviously unknown for the nations, called Ungri, devastate his /Louis the German's/ country.

— Annales Bertiniani

Muslim geographers recorded that the head of the Magyar tribal federation lead 20,000 soldiers when attacked the neighboring East Slavic tribes and they sold their captives to the Byzantine Empire. They also mentioned that

These Magyars are a handsome people and of good appearance and their clothes are of silk brocade and their weapons are of silver and are encrusted with pearls.

— Ahmad ibn Rusta

The Hétmagyar federation even was strengthened when the three tribes of the Kabars who, had rebelled against the Khazars, joined it before 881. The joining of the Kabars to the Magyars was recorded by Constantine Porphyrogenitus:

The so-called Kabaroi were of the race of the Chazars. Now, it fell out that a secession was made by them to their government, and when a civil war broke out their first government prevailed, and some of them were slain, but others escaped and came and settled with the Turks in the land of the Pechenegs, and they made friends with one another, and were called 'Kabaroi'.

— De Administrando Imperio

Thenceforward, the Kabars were regarded as military auxiliaries of the Magyars and they provided the advance and rear guards to their hosts. In 881, the Magyars and the Kabars invaded East Francia, and they fought two battles, the former (Ungari) at Wenia (probably Vienna) and the latter (Cowari) at Culmite (Kulmberg or Kollmitz in Austria). The Annales Fuldenses recorded at the year 892, that King Arnulf of East Francia invaded Great Moravia and the Magyars joined to his troops. Two years later, in 894, the Magyars invaded Pannonia allied themselves with King Svatopluk I of Great Moravia.

Hungarian tradition of the migrations

Dentumoger

The Gesta Hungarorum ("The Deeds of the Hungarians") names a place called Dentumoger where the ancient Magyars lived before migrating to the Carpathian Basin. The name is used synonymously with Scythia.

So the Hungarians...traced their origin to the Scythian people, whom in their own language they call Dentumoger. And that land became overcrowded with the multitude of people born there...

— Anonymous

According to the Gesta Hungarorum, the ancient Magyars migrated directly from Dentumoger to the Carpathian Basin following a path from the Middle Volga region to Susdal to Kiev.

Both the interpretation and the localisation of Dentumoger is uncertain. The first part of the expression (Dentu) may contain the Don River's Alanic name (Den) with the ancient Hungarian diminutive suffix (tü); and therefore it may refer to the Donets ("Small Don") River. The expression's second part (moger) contains an ancient form of the word "Magyar".

The Legend of the White Horse

The Chronicon Pictum reserved the most complete version of the legend according to which the heads of the Magyar tribes sent "a big horse with a saddle gilded with gold from Arabia and a gilded rein" to Svatopluk and they asked soil, grass and water in exchange. Svatopluk was delighted at the presents and told their envoys that they could take as much as they wanted. When Grand Prince Árpád was informed on Svatopluk's answer, he sent again envoys to him with the next message:

Árpád, together with his people, tells you that not to stay anymore on the land that has been bought, because your land has been bought for the horse, your grass for the rein and your water for the saddle. And you transferred your land, grass and water for a price simple, because of your penury and eagerness.

— Chronicon Pictum

The legend probably reserved the memory of an alliance made by King Svatopluk I of Great Moravia and the Magyars following pagan customs. The Gesta Hungarorum connects the events of the legend to Dux Salan, an alleged ruler between the Danube and the Tisza Rivers, in the southern part of the Carpathian Basin.

The "Conquest of our Country" (Honfoglalás)

The conquest

Prelude

The theories on the reasons of the invasion of the Magyars into the Carpathian Basin can be divided into three groups:

• Based on the later chroniclers' tradition and the Gesta Hungarorum, some scholars think that the invasion was an intended military operation with the clear purpose of occupying the territory and the Magyars had surveyed their future country during their former campaigns in the region.
• Interim theories suggest that the Magyars, threatened by the Petchenegs, had been planning to conquer the territory protected by the Carpathian Mountains, but their plans were disturbed by the Pechenegs' sudden attack against Etelköz.
• Based on the contemporary or nearly contemporary sources, the historians' third group pointed out that the Magyars' invasion was an involuntary military action that was enforced by the joint attack of the Pechenegs and the Bulgarians against them.

Movements on the Steppe

Muslim historians recorded that in 893, Isma'il ibn Ahmad, the Samanid amir of Transoxiana made a successful military campaign against the Karluks, a Turkic tribe who had to move northward and expelled the Oghuz Turks from their dwellings; thus, the latter were obliged to move westward and they attacked the Pechenegs. Therefore, the Samanid amir's action launched a series of movements of the peoples on the Eurasian Steppe and these movements put the Pechenegs under pressure.

As Constantine Porphyrogenitus mentions in his work:

Originally, the Pechenegs had their dwelling on the river Atil /the Volga/ and likewise on the river Geich /the river Ural/, having common frontiers with the Chazars and the so-called Uzes. But fifty years ago the so-called Uzes made common cause with the Chazars, and joined battle with the Pechenegs and prevailed over them and expelled them from their country, which the so-called Uzes have occupied till this day. The Pechenegs fled and wandered round, casting about for a place for their settlement.

— De Administrando Imperio

The Kabars and the Szeklers

The late-medieval historian Aventinus mentiones that King Arnulf promised to the Magyars, in 892, that they would keep all the territories they would occupy if they gave him military assistance against Great Moravia. Both the Gesta Hungarorum and the Gesta Hunnorum et Hungarorum refers to the tradition that the Szeklers, who had probably joined to the tribal federation in Etelköz, had already settled down in the Carpathian Basin when the Magyar tribes invaded the territory.

When they /the Szeklers/ got to know that the Hungarians were returning once more to Pannonia, they hurried to meet them in Ruthenia and together they conquered the region of Pannonia.

— Illuminated Chronicle

Based on the above-mentioned primary sources, some modern historians claim that some tribes of the Hétmagyar federation may have expanded their dwellings to parts of the Carphatian Basin east of the Garam River, since they had been intervening in the wars of the local powers occasionally from 861. Following the nomadic traditions, the Szeklers and the Kabars, who joined to the tribal federation Hétmagyar after its formation, had to go before the Magyar armies in wars; therefore, they must have been the first who invaded the territory and settled down there around 893 - provided that the theory is valid.

Alliance with the Byzantine Empire

Following 883, a war broke out between the Byzantine and the Bulgarian Empires; the tzar Simeon I of Bulgaria invaded the territories of Thracia and his troops destroyed the Byzantine armies. The Byzantine Emperor Leo VI the Wise sent envoys to the Magyars and his envoys signed an agreement with the heads of the Hétmagyar federation, Árpád and Kurszán against the Bulgarian Empire.

The Byzantine fleet delivered the Magyar troops over the Danube to the Bulgarian Empire, and the Magyars defeated the Bulgarians in three battles (at the Danube, Silistra and Preslav). The tzar Simeon had to flee to a fortress (Mundraga). Following their victories, the Magyars commenced to return to Etelköz.

According to the Rus' annals, the Magyars

defeated the Bulgars, Simeon hardly escaped in Silistria.

The Pechenegs' intervention

The tzar Simeon made an alliance with the Pechenegs who were seeking for new territories threatened by the Oghuz Turks. The tzar lead his armies against the Magyars and he defeated them at the a decisive battle. In the meantime, the Pechenegs invaded the dwellings of the Magyars in Etelköz and pillaged the territory that was nearly unprotected because the Magyar troops were far away, in Bulgaria.

Following their decisive defeat from the Bulgarians and the invasion of the Pechenegs, the Magyars were obliged to flee from their dwellings in Etelköz and they invaded the Carpathian Basin around 896. Constantine Porphyrogenitus summarizes these events (referring to the Magyars as "Turks") in his work as follows:

when the Turks had gone off on a military expedition, the Pechenegs with Simenon came against the Turks and completely destroyed their families and miserably expelled thence the Turks who were guarding their country. When the Turks came back and found their country thus desolate and utterly ruined, they settled in the land where they live today.

— De Administrando Imperio

The abbot Regino of Prüm also relates that the Magyars

were expelled from their own dwelling places by the neighboring peoples, called Pechenegs.

— Chronicon

The conquest of the Carpathian Basin

The invasion of the Magyars (Chronicon Pictum)

Following their catastrophic defeats from the Pechenegs and the Bulgarians, the Magyars were forced to migrate to new pastures; therefore, their all population moved to the territory of the Carpathian Basin over the mountains bordering on their dwellings.

At that time, the Magyars probably killed their spiritual leader, the Grand Prince Álmos following a similar Khazar tradition that prescribed the murder of the Khagans (as a human sacrifice) in case of disasters affecting the people. The fourteenth century chronicle compilation briefly says:

Álmos was killed (…) for he was not allowed to enter Pannonia.

— Chronicon Pictum

The chronology and the circumstances of the conquest of the Carpathian Basin are still debated by modern authors, because the primary sources contain several contradictory data. Even the exact date of the conquest cannot be determined based on the primary sources; modern authors tend to accept the theory that the Magyars invaded the Carpathian Basin around 896 (between 893 and 897), but some scholars still claim that their invasion must have occurred after 897.

The circumstances of the conquest that have been still debated by modern scholars include:

• the states existing in the Carpathian Basin at the end of the 9th century and their exact borders;
• the peoples living in the Carpathian Basin at the time of the invasion of the Magyars;
• the chronology of the conquest;
• the credibility of certain primary sources written centuries after the events.

The Carpathian Basin at the time of the Magyar invasion

At the time of the Magyar invasion, the Carpathian Basin was divided among several powers, because following the collapse of the Avar Empire around 800, the neighboring powers occupied only parts of its territory.

• The region of Transdanubia (Pannonia) and the western parts of Slavonia belonged to East Francia. The Slavic population of the province was governed by dukes appointed by the king of East Francia with a seat in Blatnograd (today Zalavár in Hungary).
• The territories north of the Danube belonged to Moravia, but the expansion of the Moravian territories on the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin is still under debate.
• Transylvania and some regions east of the Danube were occupied by the Bulgarians around 803.

Some modern authors emphasize that certain medieval sources written in the 9th-10th centuries suggest the existence of another Moravia ("Great Moravia") in the southern parts of the Carpathian Basin, but other scholars point out that archaeological evidences do not support the theory of “two Moravias”.

When the Magyars invaded the Carpathian Basin, its largest part was inhabited by Slavic peoples; not only several primary sources written in the 9th century, but also place names and the names of several rivers prove that the Magyars conquered a territory whose population mainly spoke Slavic languages.

Besides the Slaves, the Avars must have formed a significant part of the population of the Carpathian Basin at the end of the 9th century; contemporary sources and archaeological evidences suggest that some groups of the Avars survived the disintegration of their empire, but the majority of the Avars must have been assimilated to their Slavic neighborhoods by the time of the Magyar conquest, because there are only sporadic examples that the Magyars borrowed place names from a Turkic language. Sources written in the 9th century also suggest that some groups of the Onogurs, who had moved to the Carpathian Basin around 670, lived on the territory when the Magyars invaded it. Archaeological evidence suggest that the Bulgars occupied the valley of the river Maros at the time of the Magyars’ invasion.

The presence of some groups of Gepids was also documented by sources written in the 9th century and following the collapse of the Avars’ power, Germans immigrated to the parts occupied by East Francia.

The presence of the Romanians at the time of the invasion of the Magyars is still debated:

• Some scholars point out that place names in the Carpathian Basin suggest that the Romanians must not have arrived to the territory before the 12th century and no clear evidence based on contemporary documents have been provided to prove their presence north of the Danube until the same period. They emphasize that in contrast to the Carpathian Basin, on the territories south of the Danube, the presence of a population speaking a Romance language is well-documented by contemporary sources from the 10th century. They also point out that archeological findings do not contradict to their theory.
• On the other hands, based on archeological findings and on some written sources, other authors emphasize that the ancestors of the Romanians had been living north of the Danube by the time when the Carpathian Basin was invaded by the Magyars. They point out that the Hungarian chronicles (written in the 12th-15th centuries) clearly refer to the military actions of the Magyars against the Romanians, and foreign chronicles (written in the same period) contain similar references.

The invasion

The Hungarian tradition connects the events of the invasion (Honfoglalás) to Álmos’ son and successor, Grand Prince Árpád. The contemporary sources, however, emphasize the role Kurszán played during the invasion, which suggest that he was the military leader of the tribal federation of the Magyars.

The route the Magyars followed when invading the Carpathian Basin is under debate:

• based on the chronicles that probably reserved the Magyars’ tradition, some authors claim that the Magyars occupied Transylvania first;
• other scholars follow the account of the author of the Gesta Hungarorum (the oldest surviving Hungarian chronicle) of the events who described that the Magyars arrived through the north-eastern passes of the Carpathians and they occupied Transylvania only at a later stage.

The followers of the first theory emphasize that the Magyars must have been engaged with their internal affairs after the conquest of the eastern parts of the Carpathian Basin, because they did not intervene in the internal struggles of (the northern) Moravia. The fourteenth century chronicle compilation relates that the Magyars

had a rest in Transylvania, and let their beasts have a rest.

— Chronicon Pictum

Their opponents point out that following their defeat, the Magyars, already under the leadership of Árpád, proceeded northward, around Kiev and Galicia, and entered the Carpathian Basin through the Verecke Pass. They emphasize that the oldest and most numerous Magyar graves have been found in this area (around Zemplin and Szabolcs). They claim that the lack of Hungarian artefacts in the valley of the Maros river provides strong evidence that the Magyars did not pass through Transylvania. Other historians propose that had the Magyars first entered Transylvania, they would have remained there.

When in the 12th century, the Russian chronicler Nestor described the events of the invasion, he mentioned that:

Coming from the east, they /the Magyars/ marched in haste over the high mountains, which are called the mountains of the Magyars, and began to fight against the Volochi (Волохи) /the people of East Francia or Romanians/ and the Slavs who inhabited these countries. The Slavs had originally lived there, and the Volochi (Волохове) had subdued the country of the Slavs. Later, however, the Magyars drove out the Volochi (Волъхи), subdued the Slavs, and settled in their country. Since then, that region has been called Hungary.

— Primary Chronicle

Nevertheless, the Magyars invaded the Great Hungarian Plain and they could occupy the territories of the Carpathian Basin east of the Danube and the Garam Rivers probably without facing any severe resistance. In case a "Great Moravia" existed in the southern parts of the Carpathian Basin, the Magyars occupied its territories during their invasion and they may have also occupied the southern territories of Transylvania that had been occupied by the Bulgarians. The first legend of Saint Naum relates that the Magyars occupied the Moravian land

and devastated it. Those /of the Moravians/ not captured by the Magyars, ran to the Bulgars. And their depopulated land remained in the hand of the Magyars.

— First Legend of St. Naum

The first campaign against Italy

In 899, the Magyars invaded the northern regions of Italy. They pillaged the countryside around Treviso, Vicenza, Verona, Brescia, Bergamo and Milan and when they were informed that King Berengar I of Italy gathered an army against them, they pretended to be fleeing and they defeated the king's army at the Battle of Brenta (24 September 899).

Following their victory, they took Vercelli and Modena, then laid siege to Venice where they were defeated, and afterwards they left Italy. The Annales Fuldenses says that they

returned on the same route they had come devastating a great part of Pannonia.

— Annales Fuldenses

The second phase of the conquest

When the Emperor Arnulf I died (8 December 899), the Magyars sent envoys to his successor, King Louis the Child of East Francia. This mission intended, under the pretext of concluding a treaty, to reconnoitre the land to be occupied (i.e., Pannonia). The Hungarians started a war with the Moravians, occupying a part of their land between the Garam and Morava rivers; then they unexpectedly crossed the Danube, attacked the land of their allies and, meeting with hardly any resistance, seized Pannonia. A detailed account was left about this event by bishop Liutprand of Cremona who relates that one year after Arnulf's death and his son's coronation (in 900) the Magyars

gathering a very great army, demand for themselves the people of the Moravians that King Arnulf has subjugated through their valour; they occupy the frontiers of the Bavarians, too

The Hungarians stopped neither at the river Morava nor at the western border of Pannonia, but penetrated deeply into the territory of Bavaria, spreading devastation and destruction as far as the Enns River. Although Luitpold, Margrave of Bavaria defeated them at a battle near Linz, but his victory had no effect on the successes of the Magyars in the Carpathian Basin. Thus, in 900 the territory of the Carpathian Basin west of the Garam-Danube line was drawn under Magyar control, and that completed the conquest.

The Magyars endeavoured to expand their suzereinity also over the territories of Carantania in 901, but Margrave Ratold defeated them. In 902, they lead a campaign against the northern Moravia and defeated the Moravians whose country annihilated.

Consequences

The Honfoglalás may be qualify from several points of view.

• Concentrating only on its substance, independently of its consequences, the conquest was purely a change of the pastures of a nomadic people which had happened often before. Nevertheless, during the next centuries, it became obvious that the Magyars (Hungarians) managed to found a country, because they were forced to adopt the European traditions.
• The arrival of the Hungarians drove a non-Slavic wedge between the West Slavs and South Slavs; this was a factor contributing to the triumph of Latin over Slavic among the West Slavs.
• The arrival of the Pechenegs, split the Magyars from the Khazars with whom they had close ties. This had the effect of greatly weakening the Khazars as a Steppe power; eventually in 965 they were destroyed by Sviatoslav I of Kiev.

The Honfoglalás and the Hungarian chronicles

Gesta Hungarorum

The factual accuracy of the Gesta Hungarorum is disputed. Gesta Hungarorum's main subject of controversy concerns the mentioning of the existence of the local rulers and the ethnic character of the regions they controlled. The Gesta is valued by many Romanian, Hungarian, Serbian historians and denied by some others (Hungarian, Slovak).

Romanian academics value the Gesta Hungarorum as it is the earliest preserved Hungarian chronicle. The Gesta Hungarorum is also based on earlier Hungarian gestas, and therefore its factual accuracy is likely high. Furthermore, it is written over 130 years before the Chronicon Pictum, which is the earliest Hungarian work that contradicts the Gesta Hungarorum. On top of this, Annonymous uses many Greek sayings and was one of the few Hungarian authors who knew Greek, basing much of his work on previous Byzantine sources.

The anonymous author of the Gesta Hungarorum wrote his romantic work on the Honfoglalás in the late 12th century (i.e., 300 years after the events). He does not mention the name of the important historical personalities of the second half of the 9th century (e.g., Svatopluk, Braslav, Arnulf I, tzar Simeon) though it should be noted this happened quite frequently in Medieval chronicles, and romantic heroes created by him appear as characters in his work. Some disputed references in the book are:

• He says that the Magyars crossed the Carpathian Mountains and the first settlement they occupied in the Carpathian Basin was Munkács (today Mukachevo in Ukraine) that they named taking into account the fatiguing road on which they reached it, i.e., the Hungarian word munka (a loanword from a Slavic language) means "work".
• He names some opponents of the Magyars (Ménmarót, Salan, Gyalu, Galád and Zobor), but these personalities are not mentioned in contemporary sources and some of them are named after toponyms. Some are mentioned in other sources (like Glad/Galad's successor, Ahtum) who is mentioned in the Legenda Sancti Gerardi.
• The events of his own age are reflected in his work, e.g., he mentions Galád's "Cuman, Bulgarian and Vlach" troops, although the Cumans appeared in Europe in the 11th century. However, it is likely Annonymous simply confused Cumans with Pechenegs, who were inhabiting Transylvania during the Magyar conquest.

Gesta Hunnorum et Hungarorum

It was the chronicler Simon of Kéza (court priest of King Ladislas IV of Hungary) who attempted to elaborate in detail the relationship between the Huns and the Hungarians in his chronicle written around 1283. In his work, first among Hungarian historians, he records the legend of the origin of the Hungarians (the Myth of the Wondrous Hind), which suggest that the Huns (or the Hungarians) descended from two brothers. In his view, the Conquest becomes in fact a second conquest, and he emphasizes that this second conquest was executed by the same people; that is to say the two peoples are not simply related, but identical.

Alternative theories

Alternative theories on Hungarian prehistory break down into two different classes: those that are made through scientific methodology and those that are made from romantic fantasy.

Double conquest

Hungarian archaeologist Gyula László is renowned for his theory of a double conquest (Hungarian: kettős honfoglalás). This theory asserts that when the ancient Hungarians migrated to Hungary in 895, they found another group of Hungarians who had arrived earlier in 670. László identified this first group of Hungarian migrants with the late Avars or Onoghurs. His basic reasoning was that the archaeological record shows that the second wave of Hungarians were too small in number to have affected the ethnic composition of the contemporaneous population so they must have assimilated into Hungarians who were already there.

Gyula László found support for his double conquest theory in written sources as well, namely in the Russian Primary Chronicle which makes mention of "White Ugrians" and later "Black Ugrians" that passed Kiev.

Other

A popular activity amongst ethnic Hungarian communities in Hungary and around the world is to participate in the invention of theories regarding the history and origin of the Hungarian people.Such theories are generally based upon weak evidence and their development tends to lack a certain degree of scientific methodology. Despite major scholarly and scientific work done within the past 100 years that refute the majority of these alternative theories, they continue to garner enough attention that mainstream scholars must address the issue from time to time. These include the idea of Hungarian descent from Sumerians, Etruscans, Egyptians, Xiongnu, and Lemurians (c.f. hu:Arvisura).

Hungarian legends on their origins

The Legend of the Wondrous Hind

The Hunt of the Wondrous Hind (Chronicon Pictum)

The legend of the origins of the Magyars were recorded by Simon of Kéza in the Gesta Hunnorum et Hungarorum ("The Deeds of the Huns and Hungarians").

According to the legend, two brothers, Hunor and Magor were on a hunting trip when a white hind appeared before them; the hind were enticing them to the moorlands of the Mæotis (the Sea of Azov) where it disappeared, but the brothers settled down there. Six years after, the two brothers went for a new hunting and they met the wives of Bular's sons and two daughters of Prince Dula of the Alans; Hunor and Magor persuaded the girls and carried them off to be their brides. Thus, as the legend records, Hunor and one of Prince Dula's daughters became the ancestors of the Huns, while Magor and her sister became the ancestors of the Magyars.

The legend is usually interpreted as a remembrance of the Magyars' previous connections with the Onogurs (Hunor), the Bulgars (Bular) and the Alans.

Emese's dream

According to the legend, recorded in the Gesta Hungarorum and in the Chronicon Pictum ("Illustrated Chronicle"), the mother of Grand Prince Álmos (called Emese by the Gesta Hungarorum) saw a dream of a Turul bird "that flew over her and got her with child; she saw her womb as the source of many great kings, but they would multiply in foreign lands".

Modern scholars pointed out that the chronicles reserved the Árpáds's tradition of their totemistic descendence. The legend also suggests that Álmos must have been the spiritual leader (kende) of the Magyar tribal federation.

References

• Bakay Kornél (1997, 1998): Őstörténetünk régészeti forrásai. I. P. 302; II. P. 336. Miskolci Bölcsész Egyesület. Miskolc.
• Bakay Kornél (2000): Az Árpádok országa. Kőszeg. P. 512.
• Encyclopaedia Hungarica (1992, 1994, 1996) I-III. Főszerkesztő: Bagossy László. Hungarian Ethnic Lexicon Foundation. Calgary. P. 778, 786, 888.
• Kiszely István (1979): Rassengeschichte von Ungarn. In: Schwidetzky, Ilse ed.: Rassengeschichte der Menschheit. R. Oldenburg Verlag. München-Wien. Pp. 1-50.
• Kiszely István (1992): Honnan jöttünk? Elméletek a magyarság őshazájáról. Új Mandátum Könyvkiadó. Budapest. P. 460.
• Kiszely István (1996): A magyarság őstörténete. Mit adott a magyarság a világnak. Püski Kiadó, Budapest. I-II. P. 860.
• Kiszely István (2000, 2002, 2004): A magyarok eredete és ősi kultúrája. Püski Kiadó. Budapest. I-II. P. 1500.
• Kiszely István (2004): A magyar ember. Püski Kiadó. Budapest. I-II. P. 980.
• László Gyula (1999): Múltunkról utódainknak. I. A magyar föld és a magyar nép őstörténete. P. 573; II. Magyarok honfoglalása – Árpád népe Pp. 574-1036. Püski Kiadó. Budapest.
• Róna-Tas, András: Hungarians and Europe in the Early Middle Ages: An Introduction to Early Hungarian History; CEU Press; 1999; ISBN 963 91 1648 3
• Kristó, Gyula: Korai Magyar Történeti Lexikon (9-14. század) (Encyclopedia of the Early Hungarian History - 9-14th centuries); Akadémiai Kiadó, 1994, Budapest; ISBN 963 05 6722 9

See also

• Sources for Hungarian prehistory
• Kummagyaria

External links

• Hungarian Prehistory