Eu Sunt Mănescu Nicolae din București, România. Felicitări întregului colectiv redacțional, pentru documentare și prezentare. Mă bucur că a-ți găsit calea optimă. Mulțumesc.
😊Nea Paul Enache , daca te uiti atent pe harti ,o sa vezi ca in zona de formare a hunilor din acea perioada antica spre Era Noastră, coexistau multe triburi si clanuri asa zise Indo-europene, gen celti sciti ,geti ......adica Blonzi Albi Ochi albaștri......da da acolo în spatiul asiatic de la granițele Chinei care incepuse sa devina un imperiu ......care cu superioritate tehnica tehnologica si politica militare a reusit in cateva secole , la începutul erei noastre,sa provoace genocidurile si exterminarea triburilor si clanurilor indo-europene, Toharieni Yuezhi, Xiongnu, Wusun, Kusan.....cucerind teritoriile iar supravietuitorii au fost fortati sa emigreze ......asa a inceput migratia triburilor ,Atentie , Indo-europene......posibil sa se fi alaturat si ceva triburi mongoloide..... interesant,cum au aparut triburile turcesti, Oghuri, Oghuzi, într-o zona care in perioada antica ,a fost locuita numai de triburi indo-europene !?!? Ma refer la Asia Centrală......sa fie corcituri Ariano - Chineze, mixati apoi cu arabi si mongoli !?!?! Si sa nu uitam si influențele celor 10 triburi disparute ale lui Israel......plus amprentele religioase ale mozaismul budismul creștinismul si islamul.....
Nu au existat avari, era doar un nume imaginar inventat de unii istorici bizantini! Au fost sciţii numiţi "hunugori" de unii autori ca istoricul roman Iordanes, numiţi mai târziu şi "uarhuni". Istoricul bizantin Theophilact din Simocatta scria că avarii care au venit în Europa nu sunt la fel cu avarii care au trăit înainte în Asia, aceştia și-au luat numele doar pentru a intimida alte popoare, pentru că ei de fapt, sunt descendenții sciţilor oguri - unguri! Theophilact din Simocatta îi numește astfel pe aceşti „avari” (pseudoavaroi) ceea ce înseamnă "avarii falşi"! Deci, se pare că un istoric bizantin contemporan cu aceşti aşa zişi "avari", a scris de fapt adevărul despre originea poporului ungar. Dinastia Hephtaliaţilor (hunii albi) a ajuns la putere în Toharistan în anul 456, după care locuitorii Toharistanului au fost numiți Heftaliți. Fondatorul dinastiei, regele Khingila I (cca. 430-490), a unit triburile Uar și Jabjo care trăiau în zonă într-o alianță tribală strânsă, care de atunci sunt menționate în surse și ca "Uarhun" pe lângă numele de Heftalit. Numele apare și la istoricul bizantin şi retorul roman Priscos, care scrie despre căderea imperiului Hunilor europeni, al regelui Attila, în jurul anului 463, că Savirii - Sabirii au fost atacați de Uarhunii din Asia Centrală. Deci, şi acei "avari" erau de fapt hunii albi, de aceea îi numeau şi sciţi, pentru că hunii erau descendenţii sciţilor, exact ca magorii şi sabirii! Dar istoricii şi lingviştii maghiari au descifrat mai multe texte runice de pe unele artefacte din morminte, scrise cu alfabetul aşa numit "ungaro-secuiesc" din perioada aşa numită "avară" din secolele VI - VIII şi toate au fost în limba maghiară veche! De aceea a scris călugărul saxon benedictian Widukind von Corvey că avarii sunt numiți și unguri: „Avares, quos modo Ungarios vocamus...” - Avarii, pe care acum îi numim Ungari. „De Ungariis, qui et Avares dicuntur”. - Ungarii, pe care îi numim și avari. Institutul creat pentru cercetarea originii maghiarilor din Ungaria, a dovedit deja cu mii de date ştiinţifice continuitatea scitică-hunică-ungară şi în Bazinul Carpatic!
Acele cuvinte, dac-or fi, au fost explicitate în DEX-ul nostru, de către alogeni, ca: "provine din maghiarul (...) , avarul (...) , sau origine" hună". Da, alogenii fac astfel de manevre, de când au apărut, becisnici și neevoluați, pe aici, trăind din ce ciordeau din cuiburile noastre.
Bine dar secuii sunt ca noi,iar avarii erau mongoloizi.Oare nu e o contrazicere.Azi nici 1 la 100 din populatia Romaniei nu are trasaturi mongoloide,pina si n Turcia sun cel mult 5 la suta.Unde a disparut acea populatie din Altai.MONGOLIA,SIBERIA,TURCMENISTAN SI ZONELE LACURILOR BAICAL,ARAL,BALHAS SI IISIC CULI DIN KARGAZSTAN.
Dar migrația popoarelor este lăsată mărturie de unele expresii lingvistice . Cum ar fi salutul de "bună dimineața" românesc tradus în ... vietnameză actuală ca un fel de "o nuouă ziiuă" , (transcriere aproximativă la o ascultare foarte atentă). Care ar exprima cu exactitate referința la orele dimineții.
In the time of the Huns and Avars, there were no Vlachs anywhere, neither in the archival data nor even archeologically! The first authentic mention of the Vlachs can be made in 976 and only in the Balkans, and they start to be mentioned north of the Danube only from the 12th century, because many of them probably fled from the Byzantine and Bulgarian wars. Anyway, the eastern authors actually called the Avars as Var-Chuni, and it turned out that they were the White Huns, who were also called Hephthalites under the Parthians. That is why, for example, the Hungarian chronicles do not write anything about the Avars, because they were considered Huns, just like according to the Germanic and Frankish authors. According to the Byzantine writer Menandros: "...after the defeat of the Romans, the general of the Avars sent a message to Tiberius. The sent messenger said: How dare you, suffering from the disease of lack of fighting hands, start a war against the Avars, that is, the Scythians? Or have you no documents and records, the reading of which may acquaint you with the fact that the Scythian tribes are invincible?” In essence, the Greek Theophilaktos Simokattes says the same: "The tribe of the Avars, as they say, is the most skillful (toughest) among the Scythian peoples." Paulus Diaconus wrote in 596: "Hun, quoquae qui et Avares dicuntur" - the Huns, also called Avars. Why could the Saxon Benedictine monk and chronicler Widukind von Corvey write these if they were not true: "Avares autem, ut quidam putant, reliquiae erant Hunorum." - The Avars, as some think, were the remnants of the Huns. "Avares, quos modo Ungarios vocamus..." - the Avars, who we now call Ungarians. "De Ungariis, qui et Avares dicuntur." - Regarding Ungarians, whom we also call Avars. A source entitled "Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum" from 871 called the Avars Huns, who were Christians and lived in Pannonia and became tax-paying vassals of the East Frankish Empire. The Frankish chronicle calls the Hungarian town still called Sárvár "Sarvar" in 791 and 805! This is a pure Hungarian word, because Sárvár consists of two words, Sár + vár, both ancient Hungarian words! And this happened 100 years before Árpád's Hungarians entered or, according to others, returned to the Carpathian Basin. This data also clearly proves the Avar-Hungarian continuity, since many other contemporary authors also considered the Huns, Avars, and Hungarians to be Scythians who spoke the same language. It is not surprising, then, that in recent decades Hungarian archaeologists and linguists have found Avar-era runas that could only be deciphered in Hungarian! You Romanians have made a very big mistake because you believe in the many lies that have been taught to you since your childhood and the serious signs of this are already visible in Romanian society! The clear truth is that not only are there no ancient data on Romanians, but there are no typical medieval Romanian cemeteries and graves anywhere in Transylvania and in what is now Romania. Therefore, the genetics of today’s very mixed Romanians cannot be traced back to some ancient people, but rather it seems that 19th-century Romania evolved from a fused population from all over Europe and even Asia.
@@Arpoxais1Ateas2Și tu induci o mare minciună, încercând să sugerezi că ungurii, care vorbesc o limbă fino- ugrică, au fost aici înaintea vlahilor, care vorbeau o limbă având la bază latina populară.
Foarte interesanta legătură lingvistică dintre avari și secui . Este o dovada că maghiarii veniți de la sud de Caucaz in sec 7 i-au găsit aici . Si secuii sânt buni meșteri in lemn . Frumoasele porți secuiești sânt din nou apreciate .
Avar,inseamnă om care strange averi,indiferent pe ce cale. Eu cred că sunt furate sau insusite in mod abuziv. De ce cred asta ? Pentru că fiecare omulet,se naște gol-golut,fără macar o hainută pe el .....
Nu au existat avari, e doar un nume imaginar inventat de unii istorici! Au fost sciţii numiţi "hunugori" de unii autori ca istoricul roman Iordanes, numiţi mai târziu şi "uarhuni". Dinastia Hephtaliaţilor (hunii albi) a ajuns la putere în Toharistan în anul 456, după care locuitorii Toharistanului au fost numiți Heftaliți. Fondatorul dinastiei, regele Khingila I (cca. 430-490), a unit triburile Uar și Jabjo care trăiau în zonă într-o alianță tribală strânsă, care de atunci sunt menționate în surse și ca "Uarhun" pe lângă numele de Heftalit. Numele apare și la istoricul bizantin şi retorul roman Priscos, care scrie despre căderea imperiului Hunilor europeni, al regelui Attila, în jurul anului 463, că Savirii - Sabirii au fost atacați de Uarhunii din Asia Centrală. Deci, avarii erau de fapt hunii albi, de aceea îi numeau şi sciţi, pentru că hunii erau descenrenţii sciţilor, exact ca magorii şi sabirii! Dar istoricii şi lingviştii maghiari au descifrat mai multe texte runice de pe unele artefacte din morminte, scrise cu alfabetul aşa numit "ungaro-secuiesc" din perioada aşa numită "avară" din secolele VI - VIII şi toate au fost în limba maghiară veche! De aceea a scris călugărul benedictian Widukind von Corvey că avarii sunt numiți și unguri: „Avares, quos modo Ungarios vocamus...” - Avarii, pe care acum îi numim ungari. „De Ungariis, qui et Avares dicuntur”. - În ceea ce privește ungurii, pe care îi numim și avari.
Nu daco Romana ci Geto Tracica numele apare prin secolul 5-6 in toate hartile antice sunt cu numele Getia sau Tracia ma refer la teritoriul Romanesc din acea perioada care cuprindea ucraina de astazi polonia lituania biolorusia din acea vreme cehoslovacia austria germania ungaria ( Panonia) fosta yugoslavie , bulgaria turcia nordul Greciei ave aproape toata Europa era stapanita de Geto Traci
exact sergiule e adevarat ca tracii erau ruminii pe la marea neagra cu getii scitii apar pe hartii chiar daca nu imi place ca vlahii iliro tracii lau pus in imn pa trajan apar ca tracii da e diferenta intre eii getii erau iranicii de stepa sarmatii vechii cu ,,masagetii si tracii ilirii erau cu grecii
@@venomvenom9926 Se stie ca stramosi grecilor au fost triburile Ahee , Doriene , Ioniene care au venit din nord , adica din Tracia .Este posibil ca Ahei care au pus bazele civilizatiei miceniene sa fi provenit din zona de la nordul Dunari de la poalele muntilor Carpati deci razboiul Sparta si Troia a fost un razboi fraticid ca dovada ca in acea perioada vorbeau aceiasi limba insasi capitala greciei actuale Atena( Zeita intelepciuni si a razboiului) este un nume pur Trac aromani de asemenea sun Geto Traci si se gasesc in numar foarte mare in grecia mai ales in nord (salonic ect ect) Toti Zeii olimpici sunt de origine Geto Traca Achile tracul Alexandru fiul regelui Philip tracul...
@@sergiuromeo bai boss getodahae erau scitii sarmatii parthienii frigienii iranicii de stepa burebista a vrut sa uneasca triburile de grecii si aruminii tracii in dacia dobrogea in special ,,da nu au vrut si burebista ia trecut pprin sabie si in al 2 lea rand getodacii sau batut cu lisimah macedonu trac ai uitat partea asta macedonii si grecii fiind cu imperiul roman macedonica vlaha legiunea a 5 vlahu greek macedon bicilis care la tradat pe decebal erau ariminii tai
@@sergiuromeo punel pe decebal pe banii in imn pina atunci nu ti mai crea tu o istorie falsa cu picioare de lut ca dacia nui tara lui trajan pedofilu de la roma a fost regat, getodac de 1500 de anii dupa anu zero marea neagra nu se numea pontus euxinus, ci marea getica,
In the time of the Huns and Avars, there were no Vlachs anywhere, neither in the archival data nor even archeologically! Anyway, the eastern authors actually called the Avars Var-Chuni and it turned out that they were the White Huns, who were also called Hephthalites under the Parthians. That is why, for example, the Hungarian chronicles do not write anything about the Avars, because they were considered Huns, just like according to the Germanic and Frankish authors. According to the Byzantine writer Menandros: "...after the defeat of the Romans, the general of the Avars sent a message to Tiberius. The sent messenger said: How dare you, suffering from the disease of lack of fighting hands, start a war against the Avars, that is, the Scythians? Or have you no documents and records, the reading of which may acquaint you with the fact that the Scythian tribes are invincible?” In essence, the Greek Theophilaktos Simokattes says the same: "The tribe of the Avars, as they say, is the most skillful (toughest) among the Scythian peoples." Paulus Diaconus wrote in 596: "Hun, quoquae qui et Avares dicuntur" - the Huns, also called Avars. Why could the Saxon Benedictine monk and chronicler Widukind von Corvey write these if they were not true: "Avares autem, ut quidam putant, reliquiae erant Hunorum." - The Avars, as some think, were the remnants of the Huns. "Avares, quos modo Ungarios vocamus..." - the Avars, who we now call Ungarians. "De Ungariis, qui et Avares dicuntur." - Regarding Ungarians, whom we also call Avars. A source entitled "Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum" from 871 called the Avars Huns, who were Christians and lived in Pannonia and became tax-paying vassals of the East Frankish Empire. The Frankish chronicle calls the Hungarian town still called Sárvár "Sarvar" in 791 and 805! This is a pure Hungarian word, because Sárvár consists of two words, Sár + vár, both ancient Hungarian words! And this happened 100 years before Árpád's Hungarians entered or, according to others, returned to the Carpathian Basin. This data also clearly proves the Avar-Hungarian continuity, since many other contemporary authors also considered the Huns, Avars, and Hungarians to be Scythians who spoke the same language. It is not surprising, then, that in recent decades Hungarian archaeologists and linguists have found Avar-era runas that could only be deciphered in Hungarian. Another renowned historian and archaeologist László Gyula, who discovered many Hungarian cemeteries in Transylvania, dating from the 9th and 10th centuries, came to the following conclusion: "There is no doubt that those who dismounted in the 890s, the Magorians of Árpád found a predominantly Ungarian population in the Carpathian Basin." Gyula László was clearly talking about the Scythian Urgoi - Ungorians who lived here even before the Huns and white Huns who were called Avars!
@@almeu433 In order to understand the real situation, because it is clear that you have been living a lie since childhood, you need to know that while the Romanians have no data that they have been here before the 13th century, the Hungarians have there are countless facts that their ancestors have lived here in the Carpathian Basin for thousands of years! Quotes from the website of the Hungarian Research Institute:"The presence of the ancestors of today's Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin has been continuous for thousands of years" "A new database of 16,000 mitogenomes of 172 ancient and living populations has been created and investigated their connection system based on artificial intelligence method. The new algorithm recognizes all haplogroup correlations, regardless of the time of the process behind the correlation. A new methodological article (1) has been published in the journal Molecular Genetics and Genomics by the researchers of the Archaeogenetic Research Center of the Hungarian Research Institute, the Department of Genetics of the University of Szeged, the Institute of Technical Physics and Materials Science." "The Carpathian Basin is an unbreakable unit / Applying the method to the investigation of the former and present-day populations of the Carpathian Basin, the authors found that the vast majority of the present-day population is from a Copper Age (4500 BC-2800 BC) - Bronze Age (2800 BC-700 BC) can be traced back to a basic population, while immigration from the eastern steppe region seems to have had a smaller genetic impact on the population in the tenth-eleventh centuries." Anonymus wrot in the "Gesta Hunagorum" (The Deeds of the Hungarians): „Gens itaque Hungarorum fortissima at bellorum laboribus potentissima, ut superius diximus, de gente Scythica,… " - Therefore, the nation of the Hungarians is the strongest, they ar the strongest in the work of war, as I said above, they come from the nation of the Scythians. Marcus Antonius Coccius Sabellicus wrote in the the 15th century: „Nemini dubium sit Unnos, sive Ungaros Schytas esse" - No one doubts that the Hungarians are Scythians. Archbishop Antun Vrančić wrote the following in the the 16th century: "...the Hungarians living in Transylvania are often called Dacians, while those from the kingdom are called Pannons, but they still have the same language." In the official yearbook of St. Bertin's monastery known as the Annales Bertiniani, Archbishop Hinkmar of Reims wrote in 862: “Dani magnam regni eius partem cede et igni vastantes praedantur. Sed et hostes antea illis populis inexperti, qui Ungri vocantur, regnum eiusdem populantur.” The translation of this is: "The Danes surrendered the greater part of this kingdom and destroyed it with fire. But the enemy was previously inexperienced with these peoples, who are called Hungarians, and who peopled their kingdom." I think that when Archbishop Hinkmar wrote Danes, he was actually talking about the Dacians, whose kingdom was populated by Hungarians! A lot of data has already been discovered from foreign archives where there are countless references to these Scythian peoples, such as the Agathyrs, Dacians, Iazyges, Carps, Bastarnacs, Costobocs, Ourgois - Urogians - Ungars, the Magors, the Hunugors, which proves that these were tribes or peoples belonging to the same Scythian culture. Michelangelo Naddeo, Italian researcher, believes that the first civilization in Europe had already appeared in the Neolithic and it belonged to the ancient people living in the Carpathian Basin, the Hungarians! Michelangelo Naddeo says in hes book: "Decebalus was a Hungarian!" There are Hungarian researchers who say that the first half of Decebalus' name written in Latin is still present in Hungarian in the names of several medieval settlements such as Décse, Marosdécse, but it once meant glorious, which is very fitting for the name of a king. But if we even analyze the second half of his name, we find out that Bál was the name of a god among the ancient Hungarians, just like the god of storms and war among the Sumerians and Assyrians. But this name became a dignified name in ancient times, which can be found for example in the name of Hannibal, but it also appears in the name of Bél - Béla among the medieval Hungarians, and according to this Decebalus meant a glorious dignity in the ancient Scythian-Dacian language. I will also give you some linguistic - toponymic examples, for example that only in agglutinative languages the word for fortress was written and is still written affixed to the root. Clear examples in Hungarians are Kaposvár, Kolozsvár, Székesfehérvár, Nándorfehérvár, Gyulafehérvár, Segesvár etc. In all of these you can see the affix vár after the name, which could also be vára and what it means fortress, except as in the Dacian fortresses the affix dava - deva. And then it can't be a coincidence that the old Hungarians built and named Déva - Deva Castle in the Middle Ages! Some Dacian fortresses with significance only in the Hungarian language: Napoca - Napokavár - Sun Castle, Sarmisegethuza - Sármiszegetháza - Upper mountain White House, Piroboridáva - Pirosborvára - Red Wine Castle, Utidáva - Utivára - Road Castle, Sucidava - Szűcsivára - Furrier Castle, Tamasidava - Temesivár -The buried Castle, expl. Temesvár - Timisoara. Or Zargidava - Zergevára - Chamois Castle, Ziridava - Zeredavár - Wednesday Castle, expl. Csíkszereda - Nyárádszereda... Zirida or Szereda also means Wednesday in today's Hungarian language, but the Wednesday fair once existed in the Middle Ages and hence the names of the towns where the Wednesday fairs took place, which the Hungarians used a lot as place names, such as Marosvásárhely - Târgu Mureș or Kézdivásárhely - Târgu Secuiesc! This name also proves that the Scythian - Dacians spoke an agglutinating language, which was is related to the ancient Ugorian - Hungarian language! Anyway, this debate about who was here first was also started by the Romanians, moreover, the teachers of the Romanian school in Transylvania were frustrated by the rich history and cultural superiority of the Hungarians, and at the end of the 18th century they figured out that they were actually ancient Latins, and then it is likely that they are descended from the Romans here! But they did all this because they were bothered by the Hungarian "superiority", that the Hungarians derived themselves from the Scythians and the Huns, and that the Valchs were only considered late immigrants! However, in the 19th century, it got so bad that the Romanian priests and teachers of the Transylvanian Romanian School realized that it was not enough that they only came from the Romans, but also from the Dacians, since the Dacians were an ancient Transylvanian people, and so they invented the Daco-Roman theory, which is valid to this day, only with different variations! But contrary to all these lies, the reality that you are not told is that according to all the data we have, linguists specializing in toponyms agree that there are no settlement names or geographical names of Wallachian - Romanian origin before the 13th century in the Kingdom of Hungary, which included the entire Carpathian Basin! The conclusion of established historians and linguists is that a larger population that settled somewhere for at least a century had to leave traces of the names of settlements, rivers - streams - mountains and valleys somewhere! Very few peoples have given names of localities and geographical names as logical, with meaning, as the Szeklers and Hungarians did. The Regestrum Varadense of the Hungarian Kingdom (the Oradean register) contains about 711 names of localities and about 2500 names of people, registered between the years 1205 and 1238. No name or name of origin in this register has Romanian localities! How to explain the fact that the Romanians, who are supposed to have Dacian and Roman ancestors, did not build any city in Transylvania, but neither in Banat or Crişana? What's more, the Romanian word oraş - city comes from the ancient Hungarian word varas - város, which has been used by Hungarians for over 1000 years! Likewise, in the history of Transylvania, from all the medieval archives at the end of the 13th century, we find only 3 names of localities out of 511 that had Romanian origins! Is it still not quite clear to you that Romanians began to settle in Transylvania only in the 13th century? What is the reason why no river or stream in Transylvania - Banat - Crișana - Maramureș has names with Romanian origins? History should be respected as it was. The Kingdom of Hungary, in Latin Regnum Hungariae, was established in the year 1000 and existed until 1541, which included all the territories of the Carpathian Basin, such as Banat - Crișana - Maramureș - Transylvania, if we only talk about the territories which belong to Romania today! And after the Ottoman invasion, the royal court and part of the Hungarian nobility moved to the Eastern part of the kingdom with the sultan's consent and established the Principality of Transylvania, which also included parts of Körösvidék - Crișana and Máramaros - Maramureș! This principality was multi-ethnic, but was always organized and ruled by the Hungarian nobility, with predominantly Hungarian and Saxon towns and villages. So, it was and is considered part of the history of the Hungarians and the Hungarian Kingdom for over 1000 years! These territories were also later considered part of the Hungarian Kingdom during the time of the Habsburgs, because most of them were also crowned as kings of Hungary with the Holy Crown of Hungary, with all the territories belonging to the old kingdom!
@@Arpoxais1Ateas2 Less than 5% of modern Hungarians have the same DNA like the original invaders!At the battle agains Germans( Lechfeld??) MOST IF THE MAGYARS DIED ! HUNGARY WAS A VATICAN PUPOET STATE. After Istvan died the next kings were from the West...Karol Robert of Anjou..Szigmond of Luxemburg.." Janos Huniady"( Iancu de Hunedoara) was Romanian..etc PS: Sandor Petoffy( Alexandar Petrovic) had a Serbian father and a Slovak mother...Kossuth was Czech..etc
@@almeu433 No, the Dacians were also just a militarily strong elite layer like the Agathyrs, Thyrsians, Sygunnas, Carps, Jazigs, Roxolans, Costoboks, Urogians, Magors, Sakas, Sabirs and so on, but the people of the Hungarians were made up of all these Scythian tribes, probably because their language and culture were similar!
Eu Sunt Mănescu Nicolae din București, România.
Felicitări întregului colectiv redacțional, pentru documentare și prezentare.
Mă bucur că a-ți găsit calea optimă.
Mulțumesc.
Frumos documentar.
Excelent documentat..si far pic de politica..doar istorie...respectul meu.!!
Sunt super faine aceste imagini .
Un material interesant.
Multumesc.
Emilia..
Da, au pozat niste avari autentico-traco- ilirico-caucazo-daghichestan
Da, istoria este foarte
frumoasă și este foarte
interesantă. Mie una îmi
place foarte mult istora!
adica tracii iau tradat pe getii si masagetii pe decebal si burebista concluzia o tragi tu
Istoria e foarte interesanta,daca e fara politica si e simpla naratiune.Cand totu e politica,nu e prea bine
Multumesc...
In satul meu natal era un loc unde se numea ,cimitirul avarilor.
Avarii foarte interesan
12:11 E foarte interesant că fata din dreapta de tot arată ca o sud-coreeancă.
Avarii erau popor turcic, dar nu asiatici, ci cu figuri de caucazieni, ei exista si azi in Caucazul rusesc.
Avarii nu au stapanit toata Transilvania ci doar vestul Transilvaniei si vaile Muresului si Tarnavelor!
Ești un bou avarii erau din Dacia pina in Franța bouke
😊Nea Paul Enache , daca te uiti atent pe harti ,o sa vezi ca in zona de formare a hunilor din acea perioada antica spre Era Noastră, coexistau multe triburi si clanuri asa zise Indo-europene, gen celti sciti ,geti ......adica Blonzi Albi Ochi albaștri......da da acolo în spatiul asiatic de la granițele Chinei care incepuse sa devina un imperiu ......care cu superioritate tehnica tehnologica si politica militare a reusit in cateva secole , la începutul erei noastre,sa provoace genocidurile si exterminarea triburilor si clanurilor indo-europene, Toharieni Yuezhi, Xiongnu, Wusun, Kusan.....cucerind teritoriile iar supravietuitorii au fost fortati sa emigreze ......asa a inceput migratia triburilor ,Atentie , Indo-europene......posibil sa se fi alaturat si ceva triburi mongoloide..... interesant,cum au aparut triburile turcesti, Oghuri, Oghuzi, într-o zona care in perioada antica ,a fost locuita numai de triburi indo-europene !?!? Ma refer la Asia Centrală......sa fie corcituri Ariano - Chineze, mixati apoi cu arabi si mongoli !?!?! Si sa nu uitam si influențele celor 10 triburi disparute ale lui Israel......plus amprentele religioase ale mozaismul budismul creștinismul si islamul.....
Asa este, popoarele turcice din est nu erau asiatice mongoloide, ci indo europene, si aratau fix ca europenii de azi.
Greseala pe harta, Kherson
unde sunt cuvintele de origine" avare" din lb valahã,dacã erati în arcul carpatic?
Da,, placinta ,, de exemplu .
Nu au existat avari, era doar un nume imaginar inventat de unii istorici bizantini! Au fost sciţii numiţi "hunugori" de unii autori ca istoricul roman Iordanes, numiţi mai târziu şi "uarhuni". Istoricul bizantin Theophilact din Simocatta scria că avarii care au venit în Europa nu sunt la fel cu avarii care au trăit înainte în Asia, aceştia și-au luat numele doar pentru a intimida alte popoare, pentru că ei de fapt, sunt descendenții sciţilor oguri - unguri! Theophilact din Simocatta îi numește astfel pe aceşti „avari” (pseudoavaroi) ceea ce înseamnă "avarii falşi"! Deci, se pare că un istoric bizantin contemporan cu aceşti aşa zişi "avari", a scris de fapt adevărul despre originea poporului ungar.
Dinastia Hephtaliaţilor (hunii albi) a ajuns la putere în Toharistan în anul 456, după care locuitorii Toharistanului au fost numiți Heftaliți. Fondatorul dinastiei, regele Khingila I (cca. 430-490), a unit triburile Uar și Jabjo care trăiau în zonă într-o alianță tribală strânsă, care de atunci sunt menționate în surse și ca "Uarhun" pe lângă numele de Heftalit. Numele apare și la istoricul bizantin şi retorul roman Priscos, care scrie despre căderea imperiului Hunilor europeni, al regelui Attila, în jurul anului 463, că Savirii - Sabirii au fost atacați de Uarhunii din Asia Centrală. Deci, şi acei "avari" erau de fapt hunii albi, de aceea îi numeau şi sciţi, pentru că hunii erau descendenţii sciţilor, exact ca magorii şi sabirii! Dar istoricii şi lingviştii maghiari au descifrat mai multe texte runice de pe unele artefacte din morminte, scrise cu alfabetul aşa numit "ungaro-secuiesc" din perioada aşa numită "avară" din secolele VI - VIII şi toate au fost în limba maghiară veche!
De aceea a scris călugărul saxon benedictian Widukind von Corvey că avarii sunt numiți și unguri: „Avares, quos modo Ungarios vocamus...” - Avarii, pe care acum îi numim Ungari.
„De Ungariis, qui et Avares dicuntur”. - Ungarii, pe care îi numim și avari.
Institutul creat pentru cercetarea originii maghiarilor din Ungaria, a dovedit deja cu mii de date ştiinţifice continuitatea scitică-hunică-ungară şi în Bazinul Carpatic!
Spațiul era vizitat cu viza ......de tranzit😫
Acele cuvinte, dac-or fi, au fost explicitate în DEX-ul nostru, de către alogeni, ca: "provine din maghiarul (...) , avarul (...) , sau origine" hună".
Da, alogenii fac astfel de manevre, de când au apărut, becisnici și neevoluați, pe aici, trăind din ce ciordeau din cuiburile noastre.
@@MegaSzekelyNu este de acolo, prietene.
"Plăcintă" este "placenta" în limba latină.
Și în germană "platschinken"!
Sânt frumosi oamenii din Daghestan .Bărbații avari au bărbi roșcate .
Parul pe cap negru și alb pe piept
Bine dar secuii sunt ca noi,iar avarii erau mongoloizi.Oare nu e o contrazicere.Azi nici 1 la 100 din populatia Romaniei nu are trasaturi mongoloide,pina si n Turcia sun cel mult 5 la suta.Unde a disparut acea populatie din Altai.MONGOLIA,SIBERIA,TURCMENISTAN SI ZONELE LACURILOR BAICAL,ARAL,BALHAS SI IISIC CULI DIN KARGAZSTAN.
@@Springflowers233 de unde stii te ai culcat cu vre unu
@@venomvenom9926 Nu, se plimbau goi pe cal, precum Pootin
Dar migrația popoarelor este lăsată mărturie de unele expresii lingvistice .
Cum ar fi salutul de "bună dimineața" românesc tradus în ... vietnameză actuală ca un fel de "o nuouă ziiuă" , (transcriere aproximativă la o ascultare foarte atentă).
Care ar exprima cu exactitate referința la orele dimineții.
Au exploatat valahii timp de 220 de ani.
Si dupaia romani s-au rovoltand creand 30 de state mici.
In the time of the Huns and Avars, there were no Vlachs anywhere, neither in the archival data nor even archeologically! The first authentic mention of the Vlachs can be made in 976 and only in the Balkans, and they start to be mentioned north of the Danube only from the 12th century, because many of them probably fled from the Byzantine and Bulgarian wars.
Anyway, the eastern authors actually called the Avars as Var-Chuni, and it turned out that they were the White Huns, who were also called Hephthalites under the Parthians. That is why, for example, the Hungarian chronicles do not write anything about the Avars, because they were considered Huns, just like according to the Germanic and Frankish authors.
According to the Byzantine writer Menandros: "...after the defeat of the Romans, the general of the Avars sent a message to Tiberius. The sent messenger said: How dare you, suffering from the disease of lack of fighting hands, start a war against the Avars, that is, the Scythians? Or have you no documents and records, the reading of which may acquaint you with the fact that the Scythian tribes are invincible?”
In essence, the Greek Theophilaktos Simokattes says the same: "The tribe of the Avars, as they say, is the most skillful (toughest) among the Scythian peoples."
Paulus Diaconus wrote in 596: "Hun, quoquae qui et Avares dicuntur" - the Huns, also called Avars.
Why could the Saxon Benedictine monk and chronicler Widukind von Corvey write these if they were not true:
"Avares autem, ut quidam putant, reliquiae erant Hunorum." - The Avars, as some think, were the remnants of the Huns. "Avares, quos modo Ungarios vocamus..." - the Avars, who we now call Ungarians.
"De Ungariis, qui et Avares dicuntur." - Regarding Ungarians, whom we also call Avars.
A source entitled "Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum" from 871 called the Avars Huns, who were Christians and lived in Pannonia and became tax-paying vassals of the East Frankish Empire.
The Frankish chronicle calls the Hungarian town still called Sárvár "Sarvar" in 791 and 805! This is a pure Hungarian word, because Sárvár consists of two words, Sár + vár, both ancient Hungarian words! And this happened 100 years before Árpád's Hungarians entered or, according to others, returned to the Carpathian Basin. This data also clearly proves the Avar-Hungarian continuity, since many other contemporary authors also considered the Huns, Avars, and Hungarians to be Scythians who spoke the same language.
It is not surprising, then, that in recent decades Hungarian archaeologists and linguists have found Avar-era runas that could only be deciphered in Hungarian!
You Romanians have made a very big mistake because you believe in the many lies that have been taught to you since your childhood and the serious signs of this are already visible in Romanian society! The clear truth is that not only are there no ancient data on Romanians, but there are no typical medieval Romanian cemeteries and graves anywhere in Transylvania and in what is now Romania. Therefore, the genetics of today’s very mixed Romanians cannot be traced back to some ancient people, but rather it seems that 19th-century Romania evolved from a fused population from all over Europe and even Asia.
@@Arpoxais1Ateas2 indeed the vlach ilirians albanese come in Bucharest Cumania in 1200 with cattle sheperd slavizatic
@@Arpoxais1Ateas2Și tu induci o mare minciună, încercând să sugerezi că ungurii, care vorbesc o limbă fino- ugrică, au fost aici înaintea vlahilor, care vorbeau o limbă având la bază latina populară.
Foarte interesanta legătură lingvistică dintre avari și secui . Este o dovada că maghiarii veniți de la sud de Caucaz in sec 7 i-au găsit aici . Si secuii sânt buni meșteri in lemn . Frumoasele porți secuiești sânt din nou apreciate .
Secuii se consideră maghiari !
Secuii sunt buni meșteri în lemn datorită faptului că majoritatea lor sunt români/daci/geți deznaționalizati.
@@dinur.2584 Maramureșenii sunt meșteri în lemn ! Brâncuși a fost meșter în lemn ! Secuii nu mai sunt nimic ...
@@petrurares8300 poate da sau ba,mereu e 50 la 50
Ce legătură lingvistică ?! Secuii nu au o limbă proprie !
Felicitări felicitări felicitări felicitări felicitări felicitări pentru că meritați felicitări felicitări felicitări
Avar,inseamnă om care strange averi,indiferent pe ce cale. Eu cred că sunt furate sau insusite in mod abuziv. De ce cred asta ? Pentru că fiecare omulet,se naște gol-golut,fără macar o hainută pe el .....
🤣🤣🤣
Este numele Avram un nume avar ?
Nu au existat avari, e doar un nume imaginar inventat de unii istorici! Au fost sciţii numiţi "hunugori" de unii autori ca istoricul roman Iordanes, numiţi mai târziu şi "uarhuni".
Dinastia Hephtaliaţilor (hunii albi) a ajuns la putere în Toharistan în anul 456, după care locuitorii Toharistanului au fost numiți Heftaliți. Fondatorul dinastiei, regele Khingila I (cca. 430-490), a unit triburile Uar și Jabjo care trăiau în zonă într-o alianță tribală strânsă, care de atunci sunt menționate în surse și ca "Uarhun" pe lângă numele de Heftalit. Numele apare și la istoricul bizantin şi retorul roman Priscos, care scrie despre căderea imperiului Hunilor europeni, al regelui Attila, în jurul anului 463, că Savirii - Sabirii au fost atacați de Uarhunii din Asia Centrală. Deci, avarii erau de fapt hunii albi, de aceea îi numeau şi sciţi, pentru că hunii erau descenrenţii sciţilor, exact ca magorii şi sabirii! Dar istoricii şi lingviştii maghiari au descifrat mai multe texte runice de pe unele artefacte din morminte, scrise cu alfabetul aşa numit "ungaro-secuiesc" din perioada aşa numită "avară" din secolele VI - VIII şi toate au fost în limba maghiară veche!
De aceea a scris călugărul benedictian Widukind von Corvey că avarii sunt numiți și unguri: „Avares, quos modo Ungarios vocamus...” - Avarii, pe care acum îi numim ungari. „De Ungariis, qui et Avares dicuntur”. - În ceea ce privește ungurii, pe care îi numim și avari.
Evreiesc
@@01Autentic Abrahaam...ai dreptate ...corect !
@@BlakeWater71 prima data avra, apoi avraam
Nu daco Romana ci Geto Tracica numele apare prin secolul 5-6 in toate hartile antice sunt cu numele Getia sau Tracia ma refer la teritoriul Romanesc din acea perioada care cuprindea ucraina de astazi polonia lituania biolorusia din acea vreme cehoslovacia austria germania ungaria ( Panonia) fosta yugoslavie , bulgaria turcia nordul Greciei ave aproape toata Europa era stapanita de Geto Traci
exact sergiule e adevarat ca tracii erau ruminii pe la marea neagra cu getii scitii apar pe hartii chiar daca nu imi place ca vlahii iliro tracii lau pus in imn pa trajan apar ca tracii da e diferenta intre eii getii erau iranicii de stepa sarmatii vechii cu ,,masagetii si tracii ilirii erau cu grecii
@@venomvenom9926 Se stie ca stramosi grecilor au fost triburile Ahee , Doriene , Ioniene care au venit din nord , adica din Tracia .Este posibil ca Ahei care au pus bazele civilizatiei miceniene sa fi provenit din zona de la nordul Dunari de la poalele muntilor Carpati deci razboiul Sparta si Troia a fost un razboi fraticid ca dovada ca in acea perioada vorbeau aceiasi limba insasi capitala greciei actuale Atena( Zeita intelepciuni si a razboiului) este un nume pur Trac aromani de asemenea sun Geto Traci si se gasesc in numar foarte mare in grecia mai ales in nord (salonic ect ect) Toti Zeii olimpici sunt de origine Geto Traca Achile tracul Alexandru fiul regelui Philip tracul...
@@sergiuromeo bai boss getodahae erau scitii sarmatii parthienii frigienii iranicii de stepa burebista a vrut sa uneasca triburile de grecii si aruminii tracii in dacia dobrogea in special ,,da nu au vrut si burebista ia trecut pprin sabie si in al 2 lea rand getodacii sau batut cu lisimah macedonu trac ai uitat partea asta macedonii si grecii fiind cu imperiul roman macedonica vlaha legiunea a 5 vlahu greek macedon bicilis care la tradat pe decebal erau ariminii tai
@@sergiuromeo punel pe decebal pe banii in imn pina atunci nu ti mai crea tu o istorie falsa cu picioare de lut ca dacia nui tara lui trajan pedofilu de la roma a fost regat, getodac de 1500 de anii dupa anu zero marea neagra nu se numea pontus euxinus, ci marea getica,
@@Springflowers233 mafiotii lui trajan
Aiureli.... Cele mai vechi popoare din Europa sunt dacă -geții și ilirii adică romanii și albanezii.
In the time of the Huns and Avars, there were no Vlachs anywhere, neither in the archival data nor even archeologically! Anyway, the eastern authors actually called the Avars Var-Chuni and it turned out that they were the White Huns, who were also called Hephthalites under the Parthians. That is why, for example, the Hungarian chronicles do not write anything about the Avars, because they were considered Huns, just like according to the Germanic and Frankish authors.
According to the Byzantine writer Menandros: "...after the defeat of the Romans, the general of the Avars sent a message to Tiberius. The sent messenger said: How dare you, suffering from the disease of lack of fighting hands, start a war against the Avars, that is, the Scythians? Or have you no documents and records, the reading of which may acquaint you with the fact that the Scythian tribes are invincible?”
In essence, the Greek Theophilaktos Simokattes says the same: "The tribe of the Avars, as they say, is the most skillful (toughest) among the Scythian peoples."
Paulus Diaconus wrote in 596: "Hun, quoquae qui et Avares dicuntur" - the Huns, also called Avars.
Why could the Saxon Benedictine monk and chronicler Widukind von Corvey write these if they were not true:
"Avares autem, ut quidam putant, reliquiae erant Hunorum." - The Avars, as some think, were the remnants of the Huns. "Avares, quos modo Ungarios vocamus..." - the Avars, who we now call Ungarians.
"De Ungariis, qui et Avares dicuntur." - Regarding Ungarians, whom we also call Avars.
A source entitled "Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum" from 871 called the Avars Huns, who were Christians and lived in Pannonia and became tax-paying vassals of the East Frankish Empire.
The Frankish chronicle calls the Hungarian town still called Sárvár "Sarvar" in 791 and 805! This is a pure Hungarian word, because Sárvár consists of two words, Sár + vár, both ancient Hungarian words! And this happened 100 years before Árpád's Hungarians entered or, according to others, returned to the Carpathian Basin. This data also clearly proves the Avar-Hungarian continuity, since many other contemporary authors also considered the Huns, Avars, and Hungarians to be Scythians who spoke the same language.
It is not surprising, then, that in recent decades Hungarian archaeologists and linguists have found Avar-era runas that could only be deciphered in Hungarian.
Another renowned historian and archaeologist László Gyula, who discovered many Hungarian cemeteries in Transylvania, dating from the 9th and 10th centuries, came to the following conclusion: "There is no doubt that those who dismounted in the 890s, the Magorians of Árpád found a predominantly Ungarian population in the Carpathian Basin." Gyula László was clearly talking about the Scythian Urgoi - Ungorians who lived here even before the Huns and white Huns who were called Avars!
Fake. The proto Romanias were in Transilvania before the savages from the East
@@almeu433 In order to understand the real situation, because it is clear that you have been living a lie since childhood, you need to know that while the Romanians have no data that they have been here before the 13th century, the Hungarians have there are countless facts that their ancestors have lived here in the Carpathian Basin for thousands of years! Quotes from the website of the Hungarian Research Institute:"The presence of the ancestors of today's Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin has been continuous for thousands of years"
"A new database of 16,000 mitogenomes of 172 ancient and living populations has been created and investigated their connection system based on artificial intelligence
method. The new algorithm recognizes all haplogroup correlations, regardless of the time of the process behind the correlation. A new methodological article (1) has been published in the journal Molecular Genetics and Genomics by the researchers of the Archaeogenetic Research Center of the Hungarian Research Institute, the Department of Genetics of the University of Szeged, the Institute of Technical Physics and Materials Science." "The Carpathian Basin is an unbreakable unit / Applying the method to the investigation of the former and present-day populations of the Carpathian Basin, the authors found that the vast majority of the present-day population is from a Copper Age (4500 BC-2800 BC) - Bronze Age (2800 BC-700 BC) can be traced back to a basic population, while immigration from the eastern steppe region seems to have had a smaller genetic impact on the population in the tenth-eleventh centuries."
Anonymus wrot in the "Gesta Hunagorum" (The Deeds of the Hungarians): „Gens itaque Hungarorum fortissima at bellorum laboribus potentissima, ut superius diximus, de gente Scythica,… " - Therefore, the nation of the Hungarians is the strongest, they ar the strongest in the work of war, as I said above, they come from the nation of the Scythians.
Marcus Antonius Coccius Sabellicus wrote in the the 15th century: „Nemini dubium sit Unnos, sive Ungaros Schytas esse" - No one doubts that the Hungarians are Scythians.
Archbishop Antun Vrančić wrote the following in the the 16th century: "...the Hungarians living in Transylvania are often called Dacians, while those from the kingdom are called Pannons, but they still have the same language."
In the official yearbook of St. Bertin's monastery known as the Annales Bertiniani, Archbishop Hinkmar of Reims wrote in 862: “Dani magnam regni eius partem cede et igni vastantes praedantur. Sed et hostes antea illis populis inexperti, qui Ungri vocantur, regnum eiusdem populantur.” The translation of this is: "The Danes surrendered the greater part of this kingdom and destroyed it with fire. But the enemy was previously inexperienced with these peoples, who are called Hungarians, and who peopled their kingdom." I think that when Archbishop Hinkmar wrote Danes, he was actually talking about the Dacians, whose kingdom was populated by Hungarians!
A lot of data has already been discovered from foreign archives where there are countless references to these Scythian peoples, such as the Agathyrs, Dacians, Iazyges, Carps, Bastarnacs, Costobocs, Ourgois - Urogians - Ungars, the Magors, the Hunugors, which proves that these were tribes or peoples belonging to the same Scythian culture. Michelangelo Naddeo, Italian researcher, believes that the first civilization in Europe had already appeared in the Neolithic and it belonged to the ancient people living in the Carpathian Basin, the Hungarians! Michelangelo Naddeo says in hes book: "Decebalus was a Hungarian!" There are Hungarian researchers who say that the first half of Decebalus' name written in Latin is still present in Hungarian in the names of several medieval settlements such as Décse, Marosdécse, but it once meant glorious, which is very fitting for the name of a king. But if we even analyze the second half of his name, we find out that Bál was the name of a god among the ancient Hungarians, just like the god of storms and war among the Sumerians and Assyrians. But this name became a dignified name in ancient times, which can be found for example in the name of Hannibal, but it also appears in the name of Bél - Béla among the medieval Hungarians, and according to this Decebalus meant a glorious dignity in the ancient Scythian-Dacian language.
I will also give you some linguistic - toponymic examples, for example that only in agglutinative languages the word for fortress was written and is still written affixed to the root. Clear examples in Hungarians are Kaposvár, Kolozsvár, Székesfehérvár, Nándorfehérvár, Gyulafehérvár, Segesvár etc. In all of these you can see the affix vár after the name, which could also be vára and what it means fortress, except as in the Dacian fortresses the affix dava - deva. And then it can't be a coincidence that the old Hungarians built and named Déva - Deva Castle in the Middle Ages!
Some Dacian fortresses with significance only in the Hungarian language:
Napoca - Napokavár - Sun Castle, Sarmisegethuza - Sármiszegetháza - Upper mountain White House, Piroboridáva - Pirosborvára - Red Wine Castle, Utidáva - Utivára - Road Castle, Sucidava - Szűcsivára - Furrier Castle, Tamasidava - Temesivár -The buried Castle, expl. Temesvár - Timisoara. Or Zargidava - Zergevára - Chamois Castle, Ziridava - Zeredavár - Wednesday Castle, expl. Csíkszereda - Nyárádszereda... Zirida or Szereda also means Wednesday in today's Hungarian language, but the Wednesday fair once existed in the Middle Ages and hence the names of the towns where the Wednesday fairs took place, which the Hungarians used a lot as place names, such as Marosvásárhely - Târgu Mureș or Kézdivásárhely - Târgu Secuiesc! This name also proves that the Scythian - Dacians spoke an agglutinating language, which was is related to the ancient Ugorian - Hungarian language!
Anyway, this debate about who was here first was also started by the Romanians, moreover, the teachers of the Romanian school in Transylvania were frustrated by the rich history and cultural superiority of the Hungarians, and at the end of the 18th century they figured out that they were actually ancient Latins, and then it is likely that they are descended from the Romans here! But they did all this because they were bothered by the Hungarian "superiority", that the Hungarians derived themselves from the Scythians and the Huns, and that the Valchs were only considered late immigrants! However, in the 19th century, it got so bad that the Romanian priests and teachers of the Transylvanian Romanian School realized that it was not enough that they only came from the Romans, but also from the Dacians, since the Dacians were an ancient Transylvanian people, and so they invented the Daco-Roman theory, which is valid to this day, only with different variations!
But contrary to all these lies, the reality that you are not told is that according to all the data we have, linguists specializing in toponyms agree that there are no settlement names or geographical names of Wallachian - Romanian origin before the 13th century in the Kingdom of Hungary, which included the entire Carpathian Basin! The conclusion of established historians and linguists is that a larger population that settled somewhere for at least a century had to leave traces of the names of settlements, rivers - streams - mountains and valleys somewhere! Very few peoples have given names of localities and geographical names as logical, with meaning, as the Szeklers and Hungarians did. The Regestrum Varadense of the Hungarian Kingdom (the Oradean register) contains about 711 names of localities and about 2500 names of people, registered between the years 1205 and 1238. No name or name of origin in this register has Romanian localities! How to explain the fact that the Romanians, who are supposed to have Dacian and Roman ancestors, did not build any city in Transylvania, but neither in Banat or Crişana? What's more, the Romanian word oraş - city comes from the ancient Hungarian word varas - város, which has been used by Hungarians for over 1000 years! Likewise, in the history of Transylvania, from all the medieval archives at the end of the 13th century, we find only 3 names of localities out of 511 that had Romanian origins! Is it still not quite clear to you that Romanians began to settle in Transylvania only in the 13th century? What is the reason why no river or stream in Transylvania - Banat - Crișana - Maramureș has names with Romanian origins? History should be respected as it was. The Kingdom of Hungary, in Latin Regnum Hungariae, was established in the year 1000 and existed until 1541, which included all the territories of the Carpathian Basin, such as Banat - Crișana - Maramureș - Transylvania, if we only talk about the territories which belong to Romania today! And after the Ottoman invasion, the royal court and part of the Hungarian nobility moved to the Eastern part of the kingdom with the sultan's consent and established the Principality of Transylvania, which also included parts of Körösvidék - Crișana and Máramaros - Maramureș! This principality was multi-ethnic, but was always organized and ruled by the Hungarian nobility, with predominantly Hungarian and Saxon towns and villages. So, it was and is considered part of the history of the Hungarians and the Hungarian Kingdom for over 1000 years! These territories were also later considered part of the Hungarian Kingdom during the time of the Habsburgs, because most of them were also crowned as kings of Hungary with the Holy Crown of Hungary, with all the territories belonging to the old kingdom!
@@Arpoxais1Ateas2 Dacians were Hungarians?🫢🤔🤫🤥
@@Arpoxais1Ateas2 Less than 5% of modern Hungarians have the same DNA like the original invaders!At the battle agains Germans( Lechfeld??) MOST IF THE MAGYARS DIED ! HUNGARY WAS A VATICAN PUPOET STATE. After Istvan died the next kings were from the West...Karol Robert of Anjou..Szigmond of Luxemburg.." Janos Huniady"( Iancu de Hunedoara) was Romanian..etc
PS: Sandor Petoffy( Alexandar Petrovic) had a Serbian father and a Slovak mother...Kossuth was Czech..etc
@@almeu433 No, the Dacians were also just a militarily strong elite layer like the Agathyrs, Thyrsians, Sygunnas, Carps, Jazigs, Roxolans, Costoboks, Urogians, Magors, Sakas, Sabirs and so on, but the people of the Hungarians were made up of all these Scythian tribes, probably because their language and culture were similar!