Hungarian prehistory

Hungarian prehistory (Hungarian: magyar őstörténet) spans the period of history of the Hungarian
people, or Magyars, which started with the separation of the Hungarian language from other Finno-Ugric
or Ugric languages around 800 BC, and ended with the Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin
around 895 AD. Based on the earliest records of the Magyars in Byzantine, Western European, and
Hungarian chronicles, scholars considered them for centuries to have been the descendants of the ancient
Scythians and Huns. This historiographical tradition disappeared from mainstream history after the
realization of similarities between the Hungarian language and the Uralic languages in the late
18th century. Thereafter, linguistics became the principal source of the study of the Hungarians'
ethnogenesis. In addition, chronicles written between the 9th and 15th centuries, the results of
archaeological research and folklore analogies provide information on the Magyars' early history. After
the 2000s, archaeological research aimed at exploring the early history of the Hungarians resumed in the
Ural Mountains region. Today, these efforts are regularly supplemented with archaeogenetic studies. In
addition to linguistics, archaeology, and archaeogenetics, the re-evaluation of well-known written sources
has also begun. Together, these fields of study may provide new information regarding the origins of the
Hungarian people.

Study of pollen in fossils based on cognate words for certain trees – including larch and elm – in the
daughter languages suggests the speakers of the Proto-Uralic language lived in the wider region of the
Ural Mountains, which were inhabited by scattered groups of Neolithic hunter-gatherers in the
4th millennium BC. They spread over vast territories, which caused the development of a separate Proto-
Finno-Ugric language by the end of the millennium. Linguistic studies and archaeological research
evidence that those who spoke this language lived in pit-houses and used decorated clay vessels. The
expansion of marshlands after around 2600 BC caused new migrations. No scholarly consensus on the
Urheimat, or original homeland, of the Ugric peoples exists: they lived either in the region of the Tobol
River or along the Kama River and the upper courses of the Volga River around 2000 BC. They lived in
settled communities, cultivated millet, wheat, and other crops, and bred animals – especially horses,
cattle, and pigs. Loan words connected to animal husbandry from Proto-Iranian show that they had close
contacts with their neighbors. The southernmost Ugric groups adopted a nomadic way of life by around
1000 BC, because of the northward expansion of the steppes.

The development of the Hungarian language started around 800 BC with the withdrawal of the grasslands
and the parallel southward migration of the nomadic Ugric groups. The history of the ancient Magyars
during the next thousand years is uncertain; they lived in the steppes but the location of their Urheimat is
subject to scholarly debates. According to one theory, they initially lived east of the Urals and migrated
west to "Magna Hungaria" by 600 AD at the latest. Other scholars say Magna Hungaria was the Magyars'
original homeland, from where they moved either to the region of the Don River or towards the Kuban
River before the 830s AD. Hundreds of loan words adopted from Oghuric Turkic languages prove the
Magyars were closely connected to Turkic peoples. Byzantine and Muslim authors regarded them as a
Turkic people in the 9th and 10th centuries.
An alliance between the Magyars and the Bulgarians in the late 830s was the first historical event that
was recorded with certainty in connection with the Magyars. According to the Byzantine Emperor
Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, the Magyars lived in Levedia in the vicinity of the Khazar Khaganate
in the early 9th century and supported the Khazars in their wars "for three years". The Magyars were
organized into tribes, each headed by their own "voivodes", or military leaders. After a Pecheneg invasion
against Levedia, a group of Magyars crossed the Caucasus Mountains and settled in the lands south of the
mountains, but the majority of the people fled to the steppes north of the Black Sea. From their new
homeland, which was known as Etelköz, the Magyars controlled the lands between the Lower Danube
and the Don River in the 870s. The confederation of their seven tribes was led by two supreme chiefs, the
kende and the gyula. The Kabars – a group of rebellious subjects of the Khazar turks – joined the
Magyars in Etelköz. The Magyars regularly invaded the neighboring Slavic tribes, forcing them to pay a
tribute and seizing prisoners to be sold to the Byzantines. Taking advantage of the wars between Bulgaria,
East Francia, and Moravia, they invaded Central Europe at least four times between 861 and 894. A new
Pecheneg invasion compelled the Magyars to leave Etelköz, cross the Carpathian Mountains, and settle in
the Carpathian Basin around 895.

Ethnonyms
The Hungarians were mentioned under various ethnic names in Arabic, Byzantine, Slavic, and Western
European sources in the 9th and 10th centuries.[1][2] Arabic scholars referred to them as Magyars,
Bashkirs, or Turks; Byzantine authors mentioned them as Huns, Ungrs, Turks, or Savards; Slavic sources
used the ethnonyms Ugr or Peon, and Western European authors wrote of Hungrs, Pannons, Avars, Huns,
Turks, and Agaren.[2] According to the linguist Gyula Németh, the multiple ethnonyms – especially Ungr,
Savard, and Turk – reflect that the Magyars had been integrated in various empires of the Eurasian
steppes – the tribal confederations of the Onogurs and of the Sabirs, and the Göktürks – before gaining
their independence.[3] The designation Bashkirs likely comes from proximity to the Turkic-speaking
Bashkirs, a group which still today remains in the southern Urals.

Ibn Rusta was the first to record a variant of the Hungarians' self-designation; (al-Madjghariyya).[1]
According to a scholarly theory, the ethnonym "Magyar" is a composite word.[4] The first part of the
word (magy-) is said to have been connected to several recorded or hypothetical words, including the
Mansi's self-designation (māńśi) and a reconstructed Ugric word for man (*mańća).[5][6] The second part
(-er or -ar) may have developed from a reconstructed Finno-Ugrian word for man or boy (*irkä) or from
a Turkic word with a similar meaning (eri or iri).[2] Alan W. Ertl writes that the ethnonym was initially
the name of a smaller group, the Megyer tribe; it developed into an ethnonym because Megyer was the
most powerful tribe within the people.[7] Most scholars agree that the Hungarian exonym and its variants
were derived from the Onogurs' name.[1] This form started spreading in Europe with Slavic mediation.[8]

Formation of the Magyar people

Before the separation of the Hungarian language (before c. 800 BC)

Hungarian has traditionally been classified as an Ugric language
within the family of Uralic languages, but alternative views
exist.[9][10][11] For instance, linguist Tapani Salminen rejects the
existence of a Proto-Ugric language, saying Hungarian was a
member of an "areal genetic unit" that also included Permic
languages.[12] Paleolinguistic research suggests the speakers of the
Proto-Uralic language lived in a territory where four trees – larch,
silver fir, spruce, and elm – grew together.[13][14] The study of
Cave painting in the Ignateva Cave
pollen in fossils shows these trees could be found on both sides of in the Ural Mountains
the Ural Mountains along the rivers Ob, Pechora, and Kama in the
4th millennium BC.[15][16] The land between the Urals and the
Kama was sparsely inhabited during this period.[17] From around 3600 BC, the Neolithic material culture
of the wider region of the Urals spread over vast territories to the west and east.[18] Regional variants
emerged, showing the appearance of groups of people who had no close contact with each other.[18]

About 1000 basic words of the Hungarian language – including the names of the seasons and natural
phenomena, and the most frequently used verbs – had cognates in other Finno-Ugric languages,
suggesting the temporary existence of a Proto-Finno-Ugric language.[19] Between around 2600 and
2100 BC, climatic changes caused the spread of swamps on both sides of the Urals, forcing groups of
inhabitants to leave their homelands.[20] The Finno-Ugric linguistic unity disappeared and new languages
emerged around 2000 BC.[21][22] Whether the groups speaking the language from which Hungarian
emerged lived to the east or to the west of the Urals in this period is debated by historians.[19]

Further climate changes occurring between 1300 and 1000 BC caused the northward expansion of the
steppes by about 200–300 kilometres (120–190 mi), compelling the southernmost Ugric groups to adopt a
nomadic lifestyle.[19][23][24] Around 800 BC, the climate again changed with the beginning of a wetter
period, forcing the nomadic Ugric groups to start a southward migration, following the grasslands.[19][25]
Their movement separated them from the northern Ugric groups, which gave rise to the development of
the language from which modern Hungarian emerged.[26] According to historian László Kontler, the
concept of the "sky-high tree" and some other elements of Hungarian folklore seem to have been
inherited from the period of the Finno-Ugric unity.[27] The melodies of the most common Hungarian
funeral songs show similarities to tunes of Khanty epic songs.[28]

Original homeland (c. 800 BC – before 600 AD)

The stag and the eagle, which are popular motifs of 10th-century Magyar art, have close analogies in
Scythian art.[29] The Scythians, Sarmatians, and other Indo-Iranian speaking peoples dominated the
Eurasian steppes between around 800 BC and 350 AD.[30][31] During this period, all ethnic groups in the
steppes were nomads with almost identical material cultures, for which the certain identification of the
Magyars is impossible.[31] Consequently, the exact location of their original homeland is subject to
scholarly debates.[32] Róna-Tas says the development of Hungarian started in the region of the rivers
Kama and Volga, west of the Urals.[33] Archaeologist István Fodor writes that the original homeland lay
to the east of the Urals.[34] He says that some features of the tumuli erected at Chelyabinsk in the
4th century BC, including the northward orientation of the heads
of the deceased and the geometric motifs on the clay vessels put in
the graves, are similar to older burials that he attributes to Ugric
peoples.[35]

Migrations

Early westward migrations (before 600 AD – c. A map depicting the theories of the
Magyars' proposed Urheimats and
750 or 830 AD) their migrations
In the 1230s, Friar Julian went to search for the Magyars'
legendary homeland Magna Hungaria after reading about it and a
group of Magyars who had remained there in a Hungarian
chronicle.[36][37] He met a Hungarian-speaking group "beside the
great Etil river" (the Volga or the Kama) in the land of the Volga
Bulgars, in or in the wider region of present-day Bashkortostan in
Eastern Europe.[38][39] Whether Magna Hungaria was the original
homeland of the Magyars, or whether the Magyars' ancestors
settled in Magna Hungaria after their migration to Europe from
their Western Siberian original homeland is still subject to
A map depicting Péter Veres's
scholarly debates.[40][34][41] According to a third scholarly theory, theory of the Magyars' Urheimat and
Magna Hungaria was neither the Magyars' original homeland nor of their migrations, including their
their first homeland in Europe. Instead, the ancestors of the staying in the region of the Kuban
Eastern Magyars whom Friar Julian met had moved to Magna River
Hungaria from the south.[42]

According to a scholarly theory, the name of at least one Magyar tribe, Gyarmat, is connected to the name
of a Bashkir group, Yurmatï.[43] Specific burial rites – the use of death masks and the placing of parts of
horses into the graves – featuring a 9th- or 10th-century cemetery at the confluence of the Volga and
Kama near present-day Bolshie Tigany in Tatarstan are also evidenced among the Magyars who lived in
the Carpathian Basin in the 10th century.[44][45] Most specialists say that the cemetery at Bolshie Tigany
was used by Magyars who either remained in Magna Hungaria when other Magyar groups left the
territory, or who moved there from other regions which were inhabited by the Magyars during their
migrations.[44][45][46]

If the Magyars' original homeland was situated in Western Siberia, instead of being identical with Magna
Hungaria, their ancestors moved from Western Siberia to Eastern Europe.[32] This must have happened
between 500 BC and 700 AD, because there were several major movements of peoples across the steppes
during this period.[47] The "Prohorovo culture" spread towards modern-day Bashkortostan around
400 BC.[47] The westward migration of the Huns forced many groups of people of Western Siberia to
depart for Europe between about 350 and 400 AD.[47] The Avars' attack against the Sabirs in Siberia set in
motion a number of migrations in the 460s.[32] Between around 550 and 600, the migration of the Avars
towards Europe compelled many nomadic groups to move.[48]
The arrival of the Huns ended the dominance of Iranian peoples in the Eurasian steppes.[49] Thereafter the
Sabirs, Avars, Onoghurs, Khazars, and other Turkic peoples controlled the grasslands of Eastern Europe
for centuries.[50] Gardizi described the Magyars as "a branch of the Turks"; Leo the Wise and Constantine
Porphyrogenitus called them Turks.[51] About 450 Hungarian words were borrowed from Turkic
languages before around 900.[52] The oldest layer of Hungarian folk songs show similarities to Chuvash
songs.[28] These facts show the Magyars were closely connected to the Turks while they stayed in the
Pontic steppes.[53]

Gyula Németh, András Róna-Tas and other scholars write that for centuries, the Magyars lived around the
Kuban River, to the north of the Caucasus Mountains.[54][55] They say it was there that the Magyars
adopted the Turkic terminology of viticulture, including bor ("wine") and seprő ("dregs"), and the Turkic
names of cornel (som), grapes (szőlő) and some other fruits.[56][57] According to these scholars, the
Hungarian words of Alanic origin – including asszony ("lady", originally "noble or royal lady") – were
also borrowed in the same region.[58]

Levedia (c. 750 or 830 – c. 850)

The Khazar Khaganate was the dominant power in the
Levedia
steppes between the rivers Dnieper and Volga after
around 650.[59][60] Archaeological finds show that the
Levédia (Hungarian)
Khagans controlled a multi-ethnic empire.[61][62] The c. 750–c. 850
"Saltovo-Mayaki culture", which flourished in the
same region around 750 and 900, had at least seven
variants.[63] In the Hungarian chronicles, the legend of
the wondrous hind seems to have preserved the
memory of the Magyars' "close symbiosis,
intermarriages, and incipient fusion" with various Attributed arms from the Chronicon Pictum (c.
1370)
ethnic groups – Alans, Bulgars, and Onogurs – of this
large region.[61]

Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus wrote that the

Magyars "had of old their dwelling next to Chazaria, in
the place called Levedia,"[64] adding that "a river
Chidmas, also called Chingilous"[64] ran through this
territory.[65] The identification of the (one or two)
rivers is uncertain.[66][67] Porphyrogenitus associated
Levedia with the whole territory dominated by the The Khazar Khaganate and Magyars around
830
Magyars, but most modern historians agree that he
only described a smaller region situated on the Don Status Principality

River.[68] The period when the Magyars settled in Religion Hungarian paganism
Levedia is also uncertain; this happened either before Hungarian shamanism
Tengrism
750 (István Fodor) or around 830 (Gyula
Kristó).[69][70] Porphyrogenitus said that the Magyars Demonym(s) Hungarian
had been named "Sabartoi asphaloi",[64] or "steadfast Government Gyula-Kende sacred
Savarts", while staying in Levedia.[66][71] Róna-Tas diarchy
says the ethnonym is an invented term with no Tribal confederation
historical credibility.[71] Based on the same Grand Prince
denomination, Károly Czeglédy, Dezső Dümmerth, • c. 818–c. 850 Levedi
Victor Spinei, and other historians associated the Historical era Middle Ages
Magyars either with the late 6th-century Sabirs or with • Established c. 750
the Suvar tribe of the Volga Bulgars.[71][72][73] • Battle of Pliska 811
• Hungarian – c. 830
Porphyrogenitus wrote that the Magyars "lived Khazar War
together with the Chazars for three years, and fought in • Pechenegs c. 850
alliance with the Chazars in all their wars",[64] which attack
suggests that the Magyars were subjugated to the • Settled in c. 850
Etelköz
Khazar Khagan, according to a scholarly view.[74][75]
On the other hand, historian György Szabados says, Preceded by Succeeded by
the emperor's words prove the equal position of the
Old Great Etelköz
Magyars and the Khazars, instead of the Magyars' Bulgaria Pechenegs
subjugation to the Khagan. [76] Although the emperor Khazar Khazar
said that the Magyars' cohabitation with the Khazars Khaganate Khaganate
lasted only for three years, modern historians tend to
propose a longer period (20, 30, 100, 150, 200 or even 300 years).[74][77]

According to a memorial stone erected in or before 831, a Bulgarian military commander named Okorsis
drowned in the Dnieper during a military campaign.[78] Florin Curta says this inscription may be the
" 'first clue' to the upheaval on the steppes created by the migration of the Magyars into the lands between
the Dnieper and the Danube".[79] The earliest certainly identifiable events of the Magyars' history
occurred in the 830s.[80] The Bulgarians hired them to fight against their Byzantine prisoners, who
rebelled and tried to return to Macedonia in the late 830s, but the Byzantines routed them on the banks on
the Lower Danube.[81] According to the Annals of St. Bertin, Rus' envoys who visited Constantinople in
839 could only return to their homeland through the Carolingian Empire because "the route by which
they had reached Constantinople had taken them through primitive tribes that were very fierce and
savage";[82] Curta and Kristó identify those tribes with the Magyars.[83][84] Ibn Rusta wrote that the
Khazars "used to be protected from attack by the Magyars and other neighboring peoples" by a
ditch.[85][86] According to a scholarly theory, Ibn Rusta's report shows that the Khazar fort at Sarkel,
which was built in the 830s, was one of the forts protecting the Khazars against the Magyars.[87][86]

According to Porphyrogenitus, In Levedia, the Magyars "were

seven clans, but they had never had over them a prince either
native or foreign, but there were among them 'voivodes' ",[64] or
chiefs.[88][89] Although the exact meaning of the term the emperor
used (genea) cannot be exactly determined, scholars have
traditionally considered the Magyar "clans" or "tribes" as ethnic
and territorial units.[90] In the Hungarian chronicles, references to
"seven leading persons"[91] or "seven captains"[92] denote the
existence of seven Magyar tribes.[93]

Porphyrogenitus said the tribes did not "obey their own particular
The "seven captains" of the [voivodes], but [had] a joint agreement to fight together with all
Magyars depicted in the Illuminated earnestness and zeal ... wheresoever war breaks out",[94]
Chronicle suggesting the tribal chiefs were military rather than political
leaders.[95] According to Kristó, the emperor's report also shows
the tribal confederation was not a "solid political formation with strong cohesion" in the early 9th
century.[88] The Gesta Hungarorum referred to the seven Magyar chiefs as "Hetumoger",[91] or "Seven
Magyars".[93][96] Similar ethnonyms – including Toquz Oghuz ("Nine Oghuzes") and Onogur ("Ten
Ogurs") – suggest the Gesta preserved the name of the confederation of the Magyar tribes.[93][97]
According to Porphyrogenitus, Levedia was named after Levedi, one of the Magyar voivodes.[98][99]
During Levedi's life, the Kangars, a distinct group within the Pechenegs' tribal confederation whom the
Khazars had expelled from their homeland, invaded Levedia and forced the Magyars to cede the
territory.[100][101] A Magyar group fled across the Caucasus Mountains as far as Persia.[102] However, the
masses departed for the West and settled in a region called Etelköz.[73] Most historians agree the
Magyars' forced exodus from Levedia occurred around 850.[103]

[T]he Pechenegs who were previously called "Kangar" (for this "Kangar" was a name
signifiying nobility and valour among them), these, then, stirred up war against the [Khazars]
and, being defeated, were forced to quit their own land and to settle in that of the [Magyars].
And when battle was joined between the [Magyars] and the Pechenegs who were at that time
called "Kangar", the army of the [Magyars] was defeated and split into two parts. One part went
eastwards and settled in the region of Persia, and they to this day are called by the ancient
denomination of the [Magyars] "Sabartoi asphaloi"; but the other part, together with their
voivode and chief [Levedi], settled in the western regions, in places called [Etelköz] ... .

— Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio[104]

Etelköz (c. 850 – c. 895)

Constantine Porphyrogenitus identified Etelköz
Atelkouzou
(actually Ἀτελκούζου from Ἐτὲλ and Κουζοῦ) with the
lands where the rivers "Barouch", "Koubou", Etelköz (Hungarian)
"Troullos", "Broutos", and "Seretos"[105] run.[106] The c. 850–c. 895
identification of the last three rivers with the Dniester, Árpád dynasty
the Prut, and the Siret is without debate, but the
traditional identification of the Barouch with the
Dnieper and the Koubou with the Southern Bug is
disputed by Spinei.[106][107] Al-Jayyani wrote that the
Magyars' territory was located between two rivers Magyar banner of the Attributed arms from
named "tl" and "dwb" in the 870s.[108] According to Conquest Era the Chronicon Pictum
modern scholars, tl may refer to the Volga, the Don, or (c. 1370)
the Dnieper; dwb is identified as the
Danube. [58][108][109] According to the Gesta
Hungarorum, the Magyars lived in "Scythia" or
"Dentumoger";[110] the latter name, which refers to the
Don River, suggests the Magyars inhabited the eastern
regions of the Pontic steppes, according to Spinei.[111]
János Harmatta infers that Dentu (reconstructed as
Dentü, Hungarian pronunciation: [dɛnty]) was the Proto-
Hungarian name of the river.[112]

Territory inhabited by the Hungarians c. 814

 The Khazar Khagan Status Principality
sent his envoys to the
Religion Hungarian paganism
Magyars shortly after Hungarian shamanism
they fled from Tengrism
Levedia and settled Hungarian Christianity
in Etelköz, according Demonym(s) Hungarian
to Porphyrogenitus.
The Khagan invited Government Gyula-Kende sacred
diarchy (early)
Levedi to a meeting, Tribal confederation
Álmos depicted in the proposing to make Grand Prince
Illuminated Chronicle: he was Levedi the supreme
the first head of the federation
• c. 818–c. 850 Levedi
head of the • c. 850–c. 895 Álmos
of the Magyar tribes,
confederation of the
according to the Hungarian Historical era Middle Ages
chronicles Magyar tribes in
• Established c. 850
exchange for the
• Hungarian 839-970
acceptance of his invasions of
suzerainty.[113][114] Instead of accepting the offer, Europe
Levedi suggested the new rank should be offered to • Hungarian c. 895
another voivode, Álmos, or the latter's son, Árpád. [114] conquest
The Khagan accepted Levedi's proposal and upon his
Preceded by Succeeded by
demand the Magyar chiefs proclaimed Árpád their
Levédia Pechenegs
head.[114][115] According to Kristó and Spinei,
Old Great Principality of
Porphyrogenitus' report preserved the memory of the
Bulgaria Hungary
creation of a central office within the federation of the Khazar
Magyar tribes.[115][116] Róna-Tas says the story relates Khaganate
only a "change of dynasty"; the fall of Levedi's family
and the emergence of the Árpád dynasty.[117] In
contrast with Porphyrogenitus's story, the Gesta Hungarorum says it was not Árpád, but his father who
was elected the first supreme prince of the Magyars.[118]

According to Muslim scholars, the Magyars had two supreme leaders, the kende and the gyula, the latter
being their ruler in the 870s.[119] Their report implies the Khagan granted a Khazar title to the head of the
federation of the Magyar tribes; Ibn Fadlan recorded that the third Khazar dignitary was styled kündür in
the 920s.[120] The Muslim scholar's report also implies the Magyars adopted the Khazar system of "dual
kingship", whereby supreme power was divided between a sacred ruler (the kende) and a military leader
(the gyula).[115][121][122]

Between the country of the [Pechenegs] and the country of the Iskil, which belongs to the
[Volga Bulgars], lies the first of the Magyar frontiers. ... Their chief rides at the head of 20,000
horsemen. He is named kundah, but the one who actually rules them is called jilah. All the
Magyars implicitly obey this ruler in wars of offence and defence. ... Their territory is vast,
extending to the Black Sea, into which two rivers flow, one larger than the Oxus. Their
campsites are located between these two rivers.

— Ibn Rusta: On the Magyars[85]

Porphyrogenitus wrote that the Kabars – a group of Khazars who rebelled against the Khagan – joined the
Magyars in Etelköz at an unspecified time,[123][124] suggesting that the Magyars had got rid of the
Khagan's suzerainty.[125] The Kabars were organized into three tribes, but a single chieftain commanded
them.[126][125] Porphyrogenitus also wrote that the Kabars "were promoted to be first" tribe, because they
showed themselves "the strongest and most valorous"[127] of the tribes.[128] Accordingly, the Kabars
formed the Magyars' vanguard, because nomadic peoples always placed the associated tribes in the most
vulnerable position.[128][125]

Ibn Rusta wrote that the Magyars subjected the neighboring Slavic peoples, imposing "a heavy tribute on
them"[85] and treating them as prisoners.[129] The Magyars also "made piratical raids on the Slavs"[85]
and sold those captured during these raids to the Byzantines in Kerch on the Crimean peninsula.[73][129] A
band of Magyar warriors attacked the future Saint Cyril the Philosopher "howling like wolves and
wishing to kill him"[130] in the steppes near the Crimea, according to the saint's legend.[83] However,
Cyril convinced them to "release him and his entire retinue in peace".[130][83] The inhabitants of the
regions along the left bank of the Dniester – whom the Russian Primary Chronicle identified as Tivertsi –
fortified their settlements in the second half of the 9th century, which seems to be connected to the
Magyars' presence.[131]

A plundering raid in East Francia in 862 was the Magyars' first recorded military expedition in Central
Europe.[51][132] This raid may have been initiated by Rastislav of Moravia, who was at war with Louis
the German, according to Róna-Tas and Spinei.[133][134] The longer version of the Annals of Salzburg
said the Magyars returned to East Francia and ransacked the region of Vienna in 881.[51][133] The same
source separately mentioned the Cowari, or Kabars, plundering the region of Kulmberg or Kollmitz in the
same year, showing that the Kabars formed a distinct group.[135][136] In the early 880s, a "king" of the
Magyars had an amicable meeting with Methodius, Archbishop of Moravia, who was returning from
Constantinople to Moravia, according to Methodius' legend.[83][137][138][139][140]

When the King of Hungary came to the lands of the Danube, Methodius wished to see him.
And though some were assuming and saying: "He will not escape torment," Methodius went to
[the king]. And as befits a sovereign, [the king] received [Methodius] with honor, solemnity,
and joy. Having conversed with [Methodius] as befits such men to converse, [the king]
dismissed [Methodius] with an embrace and many gifts. Kissing him, [the king] said: "O
venerable Father, remember me always in your holy prayers."

— The Life of Methodius[141]

The Hungarian Conquest (c. 895 – 907)

The Magyars returned to Central Europe in July 892, when they invaded Moravia in alliance with Arnulf,
king of East Francia.[142][143][144] Two years later, they stormed into the March of Pannonia.[142][125]
According to the Annals of Fulda, they "killed men and old women outright, and carried out the young
women along with them like cattle to satisfy their lusts".[145][146] Although this source does not refer to
an alliance between the Magyars and Svatopluk I of Moravia, most historians agree the Moravian ruler
persuaded them to invade East Francia.[142][125][146] During their raids in the Carpathian Basin, the
Magyars had several opportunities to collect information on their future homeland.[125]
 The Samanid emir, Isma'il
ibn Ahmad, launched an
expedition against the
Oghuz Turks in 893,
forcing them to invade the
Pechenegs' lands between
the Volga and Ural
rivers.[136][147][148] After
being expelled from their The Hungarian conquest of the
homeland, the Pechenegs Carpathian Basin
departed for the west in
Álmos's son, Árpád, depicted in the search of new pastures.[148]
Illuminated Chronicle: he was the The Magyars had in the meantime invaded Bulgaria in alliance
first head of the federation of the with the Byzantine Emperor Leo the Wise.[149] Simeon I of
Magyar tribes, according to the Bulgaria sent envoys to the Pechenegs and persuaded them to
Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII storm into Etelköz.[150] The unexpected invasion destroyed the
Porphyrogenitus
unguarded dwelling places of the Magyars, forcing them to leave
the Pontic steppes and seek refuge over the Carpathian
Mountains. [151] The Magyars occupied their new homeland in several phases,[152] initially settling the
lands east of the Danube[153] and only invading the March of Pannonia after Arnulf of East Francia died
in 899.[154] They destroyed Moravia before 906 and consolidated their control of the Carpathian Basin
through their victory over a Bavarian army in the Battle of Brezalauspurc in 907.[155]

Sources

Archaeology
Since the 1830s, archaeology has played an important role in the
study of the Magyar prehistory.[156] Archaeologists have applied
two methods; the so-called "linear method" attempts to determine
the route of the migrating Magyars from their original homeland
to the Carpathian Basin, while the "retrospective method" tries to
discover the antecedents of 10th-century assemblages from the
Carpathian Basin in the Eurasian steppes.[157][158] However, only
twelve cemeteries in the steppes have yielded finds that show A fastener from the 9th century,
similarities to assemblages unearthed in the Carpathian Basin.[159] unearthed in Kirovohrad Oblast,
The dating of those cemeteries is also controversial.[159][160] Ukraine; the finding belongs to the
"Subotcy horizon", attributed to the
Both the scarcity of published archaeological material and the pre-conquest Hungarians
misdating of some sites may have contributed to the low number
of archaeological sites that can be attributed to the Hungarians in
the steppes, according to archaeologist László Kovács.[161] Kovács also says that the Hungarians'
migration from the steppes and their settlement in the Carpathian Basin may have caused the
development of a new material culture, rendering the identification of pre-conquest Hungarians
difficult.[161] Archaeological research has demonstrated that the material culture of the Avars and other
steppe peoples who settled in the Carpathian Basin before the Hungarians experienced a similarly
significant change after they left the steppes and settled in their new homeland.[162]

Buckles, belt mounts, and other objects of the so-called "Subotcy

horizon", which were unearthed at Caterinovca, Slobozia, and
other sites along the middle course of the Dniester show
similarities with archaeological finds from the 10th-century
Carpathian Basin.[163] These objects were carbon dated to the late
9th century.[163] The same archaeological sites also yielded vessels Migration of Hungarians
similar to the pottery of the neighboring Slavic territories.[163]

Linguistics
The study of the Hungarian language is one of the main sources of the research on the ethnogenesis of the
Hungarian people because a language shows the circumstances of its own development and its contacts
with other idioms.[164][165] According to a scholarly theory, the oldest layers of Hungarian vocabulary
show features of the territory in which the language emerged.[166] The study of loan words from other
languages is instrumental in determining direct contacts between the ancient speakers of the Hungarian
language and other peoples.[167][168] Loan words also reflect changes in the way of life of the
Magyars.[169]

Written sources
Written sources on the prehistoric Hungarians may begin with
Herodotus, who wrote of the Iyrcae, a people of equestrian hunters
who lived next to the Thyssagetae.[170][171][172] Based on the
location of the homeland of the Iyrcae and their ethnonym, Gyula
Moravcsik, János Harmatta, and other scholars identify them as
Hungarians; their view has not been universally
accepted. [170][171][173][174] The 6th-century Byzantine historian
John Malalas referred to a Hunnic tribal leader called Muageris,
who ruled around 527 AD.[175] Moravcsik, Dezső Pais, and other
historians connect Muageris's name to the Hungarians' endonym
(Magyar); they say Malalas's report proves the presence of
Magyar tribes in the region of the Sea of Azov in the early
6th century AD. This identification is accepted by most
scholars.[174][176][177][178]

The Continuation of the Chronicle by George the Monk, which The first page of the sole manuscript
was written in the middle of the 10th century, recorded the first preserving the text of the Gesta
historical event – an alliance between the Magyars and the Hungarorum, the earliest extant
Bulgarians in the late 830s – that can without doubt be connected Hungarian chronicle
to the Magyars.[81][179][180] The Byzantine Emperor Leo the
Wise's Tactics, a book written around 904, contained a detailed
description of their military strategies and way of life.[181] Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus's De
administrando imperio ("On Governing the Empire"), which was completed between 948 and 952,
preserves most information on the Magyars' early history.[182] Abu Abdallah al-Jayhani, the minister of
Nasr II, ruler of the Samanid Empire, collected the reports of merchants who had traveled in the western
regions of the Eurasian steppes in the 870s and 880s.[183][184][185] Although Al-Jayhani's work was lost,
later Muslim scholars Ibn Rusta, Gardizi, Abu Tahir Marwazi, and Al-Bakri used his book, preserving
important facts about the late 9th-century Magyars.[185][186] However, their works also contain
interpolations from later periods.[185] Among the sources written in Western Europe, the longer version of
the Annals of Salzburg, Regino of Prüm's Chronicon, the Annals of Fulda, and Liutprand of Cremona's
Antapodosis ("Retribution"), provide contemporaneous or near-contemporaneous information of the 9th-
century Magyars.[187] There are also references to the Magyars dwelling in the Pontic steppes in the
legends of Cyril, Methodius and other early Slavic saints.[188] According to historian András Róna-Tas,
information preserved in the Russian Primary Chronicle, which was completed in the 1110s, has to be
"treated with extreme caution".[189]

The first Hungarian chronicles were written in the late 11th or early 12th centuries but their texts were
preserved in manuscripts compiled in the 13th to 15th centuries.[190][191] Most extant chronicles show
that the earliest works contained no information on the history of the Hungarians before their conversion
to Christianity in the 11th century.[190] The only exception is the Gesta Hungarorum, which is the earliest
extant Hungarian chronicle, whose principal subject is the Magyars' pagan past.[192] However, the
reliability of this work, which was written by a former royal notary now known as Anonymus, is
suspect.[193] In his monograph of medieval Hungarian historians, Carlile Aylmer Macartney describes it
as "the most famous, the most obscure, the most exasperating and most misleading of all the early
Hungarian texts".[194]

Historiography

Medieval theories
According to the Annals of St. Bertin, the Magyars who invaded
East Francia in 862[51] were enemies "hitherto unknown"[195] to
the local population.[196] Likewise, Regino of Prüm wrote that the
Magyars had been "unheard of in the previous centuries because
they were not named".[197] in the sources.[196] Both remarks
evince that late 9th-century authors had no knowledge of the
Magyars' origins.[196][198] However, the Magyar raids reminded
the Western European and Byzantine scholars of earlier historians'
descriptions of the Scythians or Huns, which gave rise to their
identification with those peoples.[196][199] For instance, Leo the King Attila as the first Hungarian
Wise listed the Hungarians among the "Scythian nations".[200][201] king (Chronicon Pictum, 1358)
The similarity between the Latin ethnonyms Huni and Hungari
strengthened the identification of the two peoples, which became
commonplace in Western Europe in the 11th century.[201] The Chronicon Eberspergense was the first
source that clearly stated that the Huns and the Hungarians were the same people.[201]
The earliest Hungarian chronicles adopted the idea that the Huns and Hungarians were closely
related.[202] Anonymus did not mention the Huns, but he referred to Attila the Hun as a ruler "from whose
line Prince Álmos",[203] the supreme head of the Magyar tribes, descended.[204] However, Simon of Kéza
explicitly identified the Huns and the Hungarians in the 1280.[205][206] He started his chronicle with a
book of the history of the Huns, thus presenting the Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin as the
reoccupation of a land inherited from their ancestors.[192] Thereafter the identification of the two peoples
was the basic theory of the origins of the Hungarians for centuries.[199]

In the 401st year of Our Lord’s birth, in the 28th year since the arrival of the Hungarians in
Pannonia, according to the custom of the Romans, the Huns, namely the Hungarians exalted
Attila as king above themselves, the son of Bendegúz, who was before among the captains. And
he made his brother Buda a prince and a judge from the River Tisza to the River Don. Calling
himself the King of the Hungarians, the Fear of the World, the Scourge of God: Attila, King of
the Huns, Medes, Goths and Danes…

— Mark of Kalt: Chronicon Pictum[207]

Legend of the Wondrous Hind

Most historians agree that the legend of the wondrous hind
preserved the Hungarians' own myth of their origins.[208] The late
13th-century chronicler Simon of Kéza was the first to record
it.[208] The legend says two brothers, Hunor and Magor, were the
forefathers of the Huns and Hungarians.[208] They were the sons
of Ménrót and his wife, Eneth.[208] While chasing a hind, they
reached as far as the marches of the Sea of Azov, where they
abducted the wives of Belar's sons and two daughters of Dula, the
prince of the Alans.[208][58] According to historian Gyula Kristó,
Eneth's name derived from the Hungarian word for hind (ünő),
showing that the Magyars regarded this animal as their totemistic The "legend of the wondrous hind"
ancestor.[209] Kristó also says the four personal names mentioned depicted in the Illuminated Chronicle
in the legend personify four peoples: the Hungarians (Magor), the
Onogurs (Hunor), the Bulgars (Belar) and the Dula – kindred of
the Alans or Bulgars (Dulo).[210] The hunt for a beast, ending with the arrival in a new homeland, was a
popular legend among the peoples of the Eurasian steppes, including the Huns and the Mansi.[210] The
myth that a people were descended from two brothers was also widespread.[211] Consequently, it is
possible that Simon of Kéza did not record a genuine Hungarian legend, but borrowed it from foreign
sources.[212]

After the confusion of tongues the giant [Ménrót] entered the land of Havilah, which is now
called Persia, and there he begot two sons, Hunor and Mogor, by his wife Eneth. It was from
them that the Huns, or Hungarians, took their origins. ... [A]s Hunor and Mogor were Ménrót's
first born, they journeyed separately from their father in tents. Now it happened one day when
they had gone out hunting in the Meotis marshes that they encountered a hind in the wilderness.
As they went in pursuit of it, it fled before them. Then it disappeared from their sight altogether,
and they could not find it no matter how long they searched. But as they were wandering
through these marshes, they saw that the land was well suited for grazing cattle. They then
 returned to their father, and after obtaining his permission they took all their possessions and
went to live in the Meotis marshes. ... So they entered the Meotis marshes and remained there
for five years without leaving. Then in the sixth year they went out, and when by chance they
discovered that the wives and children of the sons of Belar were camped in tents in a lonely
place without their menfolk, they carried them off with all their belongings as fast as they could
into the Meotis marshes. Two daughters of Dula, prince of the Alans, happened to be among the
children who were seized. Hunor took one of them in marriage and Mogor the other, and to
these women all the Huns owe their origin.

— Simon of Kéza: Gesta Hunnorum et Hungarorum[213]

Modern scholarship
Scholarly attempts in the early 18th century to prove a relationship
between the Finns and the Huns led to the realization of the
similarities between the Finnish and Hungarian languages.[214]
János Sajnovics's Demonstratio, the first systematic comparative
study of Hungarian and the Saami languages, was published in
1770.[215][216] Three decades later, Sámuel Gyarmathi
demonstrated similarities between a larger group of languages that
are now known as Uralic languages.[216] However, the majority of
Hungarian scholars only gradually adopted Sajnovics's and
Gyarmathi's views.[217][218] In the 1830s, Pál Hunfalvy still wrote
that Hungarian had an intermediate position between the Finnish
and Turkic languages, but later accepted that Hungarian is closely
related to the Mansi and Khanty languages.[217] Hereafter
linguistics played a pre-eminent role in the research of the
Magyars' prehistory because it was always the dominant linguistic
theory that determined the interpretation of historical and
archaeological evidence.[218] Consequently, as historian Nóra The title page of János Sajnovics's
Berend writes, Hungarian prehistory is "a tenuous construct based Demonstratio, the first systematic
study of the comparison of the
on linguistics, folklore analogies, archaeology, and later written
Hungarian and Saami languages
evidence", because there are no certain records of the Magyars
before the 9th century and the identification of archaeological
cultures with peoples is highly debatable.[219] Historian László Kontler identifies "the history of
Hungarian origins" as "the history of a community whose genetic composition and cultural character has
been changing, but which has assuredly spoken Hungarian or its predecessor language".[9]

According to mainstream scholarly consensus, the Hungarians are not the autochthonous population of
the Carpathian Basin.[220] Their ancestors arrived there through a series of westward migrations across
the Eurasian steppes around 894, centuries after their departure from their original homeland located
somewhere in the East.[220] Many details of the Magyars' prehistory – the location of their original
homeland, the ancient Magyars' connections with the Turkic peoples and the Khazar Khaganate, their
lifestyle and political organization, and the background of their conquest of the Carpathian Basin – are
still subject to scholarly debates.[221] With regard to the connections between the Magyars and the Turkic
tribes, archaeologist Gyula László mooted an alternative theory in the 1960s.[222] According to his theory
of the "double conquest", a large group of people who spoke a Finno-Ugrian language arrived in the
Carpathian Basin in 670, and a Turkic-speaking people conquered the same territory in the late 9th
century.[222] László's theory has never been widely accepted.[223]

Way of life

Economy
Most Neolithic settlements were situated on the banks of rivers
and lakes in the proposed original homeland of the Uralic peoples,
but no houses have been excavated there.[224] The local
inhabitants primarily used tools made of stone – especially jasper
from the southern Urals – , bone and wood, but baked clay vessels
decorated with broken or wavy lines were also found.[225] Their
economy was based on fishing, hunting, and gathering.[226] The
basic Hungarian words connected to these activities – háló (net), íj
(bow), nyíl (arrow), ideg (bowstring), and mony (egg) – are Traditional Khanty fishing equipment
inherited from the Proto-Uralic period.[227][228] The Hungarian
words for house (ház), dwelling (lak), door (ajtó), and bed (ágy)
are of Proto-Finno-Ugric origin.[229] Houses built in the presumed Finno-Ugric homeland in the wider
region of the Urals in the 3rd millennium BC show regional differences; in the valley of the Sosva River,
square pit-houses were dug deep into the ground; along the Kama River, rectangular semi-pit houses were
built.[230] The local people were hunter-gatherers.[19] They used egg-shaped, baked clay vessels that were
decorated with rhombuses, triangles, and other geometrical forms.[231] They buried their dead in shallow
graves and showered the bodies with red ochre.[232] They also placed objects including tools, jewels
made of pierced boar tusks, and small pendants in the form of animal heads into the graves.[233] Copper
objects found in the graves, which were manufactured in the Caucasus Mountains, indicate that the
inhabitants of the lands on both sides of the Ural Mountains had trading contacts with faraway territories
around 2000 BC.[234] Words from the Proto-Ugric period – ló ("horse"), nyereg ("saddle"), fék ("bridle"),
and szekér ("wagon") – show that those who spoke this language rode horses.[235] Animal husbandry
spread on both sides of the Urals from around 1500 BC.[236] The bones of domestic animals – cattle,
goats, sheep, pigs, and horses – comprised 90% of all animal bones excavated in many settlements.[237]
Loan words from Proto-Iranian suggest the Ugric-speaking populations adopted animal husbandry from
neighboring peoples.[19][238] For instance, the Hungarian words for cow (tehén) and milk (tej) are of
Proto-Iranian origin.[19] Archaeological finds – including seeds of millet, wheat, and barley, and tools
including sickles, hoes, and spade handles – prove the local population also cultivated arable lands.[239]

The Magyars' ancestors gave up their settled way of life because of the northward expansion of the
steppes during the last centuries of the 2nd millennium BC.[19][24] Ethnographic studies of modern
nomadic populations suggest cyclic migrations – a year-by-year movement between their winter and
summer camps – featured in their way of life, but they also cultivated arable lands around their winter
camps.[240] Most historians agree the Magyars had a mixed nomadic or semi-nomadic economy,
characterized by both the raising of cattle and the cultivation of arable lands.[165] Turkic loanwords in the
Hungarian language show the Magyars adopted many practices of animal husbandry and agriculture from
Turkic peoples between the 5th and 9th centuries.[241] For instance, the Hungarian words for hen (tyúk),
 pig (disznó), castrated hog (ártány), bull (bika), ox (ökör), calf
(borjú), steer (tinó), female cow (ünő), goat (kecske), camel (teve),
ram (kos), buttermilk (író), shepherd's cloak (köpönyeg), badger
(borz), fruit (gyümölcs), apple (alma), pear (körte), grape (szőlő),
dogwood (som), sloe (kökény), wheat (búza), barley (árpa), pea
(borsó), hemp (kender), pepper (borz), nettle (csalán), garden
(kert), plough (eke), ax (balta), scutcher (tiló), oakum (csepű),
weed (gyom), refuse of grain (ocsú), fallow land (tarló), and sickle
10th-century artifacts from a grave
(sarló) are of Turkic origin.[241] Most loanwords were borrowed
of a wealthy woman, unearthed at from Bulgar or other Chuvash-type Turkic language, but the place
Szeged-Bojárhalom and the time of the borrowings are uncertain.[242] The Magyars'
connections with the people of the Saltovo-Mayaki culture may
have contributed to the development of their agriculture,
according to Spinei.[243]

According to Ibn Rusta, the late 9th-century Magyars "dwell in tents and move from place to place in
search of pasturage",[85] but during the winters they settled along the nearest river, where they lived by
fishing.[244][245] He also said their "land is well watered and harvests abundant",[85] showing they had
arable lands, although it is unclear whether those lands were cultivated by the Magyars themselves or by
their prisoners.[243] Taxes collected from the neighboring peoples, a slave trade, and plundering raids
made the Magyars a wealthy people.[246] Gardezi wrote that they were "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",[247] proving their growing wealth.[140] However, 9th-century Byzantine and Muslim coins have
rarely been found in the Pontic steppes.[248]

Archaeological finds from the Carpathian Basin provide evidence of the crafts practiced by the
Magyars.[249] 10th-century warriors' graves yielding sabres, arrow-heads, spear-heads, stirrups, and
snaffle bits made of iron show that blacksmiths had a pre-eminent role in the militarized Magyar
society.[250][249] Engraved or gilded sabres and sabretache plates – often decorated with precious stones –
and golden or silver pectoral disks evidence the high levels of skills of Magyar gold- and
silversmiths.[251][252] Cemeteries in the Carpathian Basin also yielded scraps of canvas made of flax or
hemp.[253] The positioning of metal buttons in the graves shows the Magyars wore clothes that either
opened down the front or were fastened at the neck.[254] Ear-rings were the only accessories worn above
the belt by Magyar warriors; jewelry on their upper bodies would have hindered them from firing
arrows.[255] In contrast, Magyar women wore head jewelry decorated with leaf-like pendants, ear-rings,
decorated pectoral disks, and rings with gemstones.[256]

A man seeking a bride was expected to pay a bride price to her father before the marriage took place,
according to Gardizi's description of the late 9th-century Magyars.[257] The Hungarian word for
bridegroom – vőlegény from vevő legény ("purchasing lad") – and the expression eladó lány (verbatim,
"bride for sale") confirm the reliability of the Muslim author's report.[258][259] A decree of Stephen I of
Hungary prohibiting the abduction of a girl without her parents' consent implies that pretended abduction
of the bride by her future husband was an integral part of ancient Magyar matrimonial
ceremonies.[258][259]

Military
The Magyars' military tactics were similar to those of the Huns, Avars,
Pechenegs, Mongols, and other nomadic peoples.[260][261] According to
Emperor Leo the Wise, the main components of Magyar warfare were
long-distance arrow-fire, surprise attack, and feigned retreat.[262][263]
However, the contemporaneous Regino of Prüm said the Magyars knew
"nothing about ... taking besieged cities".[264][244] Archaeological research
confirms Leo the Wise's report of the use of sabres, bows, and arrows.[265]
Fresco about a Hungarian
However, in contrast with the emperor's report, spears have rarely been
warrior (Italy)
found in Magyar warriors' tombs.[266] Their most important weapons were
bone-reinforced reflex bows,[267] with which they could shoot at a
specific target within 60–70 metres (200–230 ft).[268]

In battle [the Magyars] do not line up as do the [Byzantines] in three divisions, but in several
units of irregular size, linking the divisions close to one another although separated by short
distances, so that they give the impression of one battle line. Apart from their battle line, they
maintain an additional force that they send out to ambush careless adversaries of theirs or hold
in reserve to support a hard-pressed section. ... Frequently they tie the extra horses together to
the rear, that is, behind their battle line, as protection for it. They make the depth of the files,
that is, the rows, of their battle line irregular because they consider it more important that the
line should be thick than deep, and they make their front even and dense. They prefer battles
fought at long range, ambushes, encircling their adversaries, simulated withdrawals and
wheeling about, and scattered formations.

— Leo the Wise: Tactics[269]

Religion
Modern scholarly theories of the Magyars' pagan religious beliefs and practices are primarily based on
reports by biased medieval authors and prohibitions enacted during the reigns of Christian kings.[270]
Both Christian and Muslim sources say the Magyars worshipped forces of nature.[270] They gave offering
to trees, fountains, and stones, and made sacrifices at wells; these are evidenced by the prohibition of
such practices during the reign of Ladislaus I of Hungary in the late 11th century.[271] In accordance with
the custom of the peoples of the Eurasian steppes, the pagan Magyars swore oaths on dogs, which were
bisected to warn potential oathbrakers of their fate.[270] Simon of Kéza also wrote about the sacrifice of
horses.[272] According to the Gesta Hungarorum, the seven Magyar chiefs confirmed their treaty "in
pagan manner with their own blood spilled in a single vessel".[203][272]

Scholars studying the Magyars' religion also take into account ethnographic analogies, folklore, linguistic
evidence, and archaeological research.[273] Artifacts depicting a bird of prey or a tree of life imply both
symbols were important elements of the Magyar religion.[272] Trepanation – the real or symbolic
wounding of the cranium – was widely practiced by 10th-century Magyars.[274] Gyula László writes that
real trepanations – the opening of the skull with a chiesel and the closing of the wound with a sheet of
silver – were actually surgical operations similarly to those already practiced by Arab physicians, whereas
symbolic trepanations – the marking of the skull with an incised circle – were aimed at the disposal of a
protective talisman on the head.[275] According to Róna-Tas, a Hungarian word for cunning, (agyafúrt) –
verbatim "with a drilled brain" – may reflect these ancient practices.[276]
The Magyars buried their dead, laying the deceased on their backs with the arms resting along their
bodies or upon their pelvises.[277][278] A deceased warrior's tomb always contained material connected
with his horse.[279] These are most frequently its skin, skull, and the lower legs; these were put into its
master's grave, but occasionally only the harness was buried together with the warrior, or the horse's skin
was stuffed with hay.[278][280] The Magyars rolled the corpses in textiles or mats and placed silver plates
on the eyes and the mouth.[281]

Scholarly theories note the similarities between the táltos of Hungarian folklore and Siberian shamans,
but the existence of shamans among the ancient Magyars cannot be proven.[270][282] Many elements of
the Hungarian religious vocabulary, including boszorkány ("witch"), elbűvöl ("to charm"), and the ancient
Hungarian word for holy (igy or egy), are of Turkic origin.[283] Many of these loanwords were adopted
into their Christian vocabulary: búcsú (indulgence), bűn (sin), gyón (confess), isten (god), and ördög
(devil).[284][271] According to Gyula László, a Hungarian children's verse that refers to a fife, a drum, and
a reed violin preserves the memory of a pagan ritual for expelling harmful spirits by raising great
noise.[285] The refrain of another children's verse, which mentions three days of the week in reverse order,
may have preserved an ancient belief in the existence of an afterlife world where everything is upside-
down.[286]

Stork, oh stork, oh little stork,

What has made your leg bleed so?
A Turkish child made the cut,
A Magyar child will cure it
With fife and drum and a reed violin.

—A Hungarian children's song.[286]

See also
Hungary portal

Hungarian mythology
Hunor and Magor
List of Hungarian rulers
Magyar tribes
Old Hungarian alphabet
Origin of the Székelys
Principality of Hungary
Shamanistic remnants in Hungarian folklore
Turul

Notes
1. Spinei 2003, p. 13.
2. Kristó 1996, p. 57.
3. Kristó 1996, p. 59.
 4. Gulya 1997, p. 92.
5. Gulya 1997, pp. 89, 91.
6. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 303.
7. Ertl 2008, p. 358.
8. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 286.
9. Kontler 1999, p. 34.
10. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 173.
11. Molnár 2001, pp. 4–5.
12. Salminen, Tapani (2002). "Problems in the taxonomy of the Uralic languages in the light of
modern comparative studies" (http://www.helsinki.fi/~tasalmin/kuzn.html).
Лингвистический беспредел: сборник статей к 70-летию А. И. Кузнецовой.
Издательство Московского университета: 44–55. Retrieved 22 November 2014.
13. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 93–94.
14. Klima 2004, p. 20.
15. Fodor 1975, p. 51.
16. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 317.
17. Fodor 1975, p. 54.
18. Fodor 1975, p. 75.
19. Kontler 1999, p. 36.
20. Veres 2004, p. 34.
21. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 318.
22. Csorba 1997, p. 19.
23. Csorba 1997, pp. 23–24.
24. Veres 2004, p. 35.
25. Kristó 1996, p. 31.
26. Kontler 1999, pp. 36–37.
27. Kontler 1999, p. 37.
28. Csorba 1997, p. 32.
29. Fodor 1975, pp. 193–194.
30. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 195.
31. Fodor 1975, p. 180.
32. Kristó 1996, p. 32.
33. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 319.
34. Fodor 1975, p. 201.
35. Fodor 1975, pp. 180–181.
36. Macartney 1953, pp. 85–86.
37. Fodor 1975, p. 197.
38. Fodor 1975, p. 198, 201.
39. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 429.
40. Tóth 1998, p. 15.
41. Kristó 1996, p. 87.
42. Kristó 1996, p. 68.
43. Kristó 1996, pp. 67–68.
44. Fodor 1975, pp. 122–123.
45. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 121, 429.
46. Szeifert, Bea (27 June 2022). "Tracing genetic connections of ancient Hungarians to the
6th–14th century populations of the Volga-Ural region" (https://academic.oup.com/hmg/articl
e/31/19/3266/6582494?searchresult=1). Human Molecular Genetics. 31 (19): 3–9.
doi:10.1093/hmg/ddac106 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fhmg%2Fddac106). PMC 9523560 (ht
tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9523560). PMID 35531973 (https://pubmed.nc
bi.nlm.nih.gov/35531973).
47. Fodor 1975, p. 202.
48. Fodor 1975, p. 203.
49. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 209.
50. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 209–213, 230–231.
51. Engel 2001, p. 10.
52. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 105.
53. Engel 2001, pp. 9–10.
54. Kristó 1996, p. 35.
55. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 323.
56. Sinor, Denis (1958). "The outlines of Hungarian prehistory" (http://www.kroraina.com/hunga
r/ds_ohp.html). Cahiers d'histoire mondiale. 4 (3). International Commission for a History of
the Scientific and Cultural Development of Mankind: 513–540. Retrieved 27 November
2014.
57. Kristó 1996, pp. 49–50.
58. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 328.
59. Spinei 2003, p. 40.
60. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 230.
61. Kristó 1996, p. 125.
62. Spinei 2003, p. 41.
63. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 139–140.
64. Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio (ch. 38), p. 171.
65. Fodor 1975, p. 213.
66. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 418.
67. Kristó 1996, p. 108.
68. Kristó 1996, p. 110.
69. Kristó 1996, pp. 87, 132.
70. Fodor 1975, p. 210.
71. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 288.
72. Kristó 1996, pp. 139–140.
73. Spinei 2003, p. 43.
74. Kristó 1996, p. 131.
75. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 230, 417.
76. Szabados 2011, p. 96.
77. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 72.
78. Curta 2006, pp. 156–157.
79. Curta 2006, p. 157.
80. Kristó 1996, pp. 15–17.
81. Kristó 1996, p. 15.
82. The Annals of St-Bertin (year 839), p. 44.
83. Curta 2006, p. 123.
84. Kristó 1996, p. 86.
 85. Ibn Rusta on the Magyars, p. 122.
86. Brook 2006, p. 31.
87. Kristó 1996, p. 16.
88. Kristó 1996, p. 116.
89. Spinei 2003, pp. 30–31.
90. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 105.
91. Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (Prologue), p. 3.
92. The Hungarian Illuminated Chronicle (ch. 27), p. 98.
93. Kristó 1996, p. 117.
94. Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio (ch. 40), p. 179.
95. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, pp. 105–106.
96. Engel 2001, p. 19.
97. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 340.
98. Brook 2006, p. 142.
99. Kristó 1996, p. 107.
100. Kristó 1996, p. 145.
101. Spinei 2003, pp. 42–43.
102. Kristó 1996, pp. 144, 147.
103. Kristó 1996, p. 144.
104. Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio (ch. 38), pp. 171–173.
105. Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio (ch. 38), p. 175.
106. Spinei 2003, p. 44.
107. Kristó 1996, p. 156.
108. Kristó 1996, p. 157.
109. Fodor 1975, p. 248.
110. Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 1), p. 5.
111. Spinei 2003, pp. 52–53.
112. Erdélyi 1986, p. 19.
113. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 416.
114. Kristó 1996, p. 159.
115. Spinei 2003, p. 33.
116. Kristó 1996, pp. 164–165.
117. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 417.
118. Fodor 1975, p. 250.
119. Fodor 1975, p. 236.
120. Kristó 1996, p. 136.
121. Engel 2001, p. 18.
122. Cartledge 2011, p. 55.
123. Engel 2001, p. 22.
124. Kristó 1996, p. 148.
125. Spinei 2003, p. 51.
126. Kristó 1996, pp. 152–153.
127. Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio (ch. 39), p. 175.
128. Kristó 1996, p. 153.
129. Fodor 1975, p. 251.
130. The Life of Constantine (ch.8), p. 45.
131. Curta 2006, pp. 124, 185.
132. Molnár 2001, p. 11.
133. Spinei 2003, p. 50.
134. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 331.
135. Kristó 1996, p. 150.
136. Brook 2006, p. 143.
137. László 1996, p. 43.
138. Kristó 1996, pp. 175, 219.
139. Spinei 2003, p. 36.
140. Fodor 1975, p. 261.
141. The Life of Methodius (ch.16), p. 125.
142. Fodor 1975, p. 278.
143. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 92.
144. Kristó 1996, p. 175.
145. The Annals of Fulda (year 894), p. 129.
146. Kristó 1996, p. 178.
147. Fodor 1975, p. 280.
148. Spinei 2003, p. 53.
149. Cartledge 2011, pp. 5–6.
150. Cartledge 2011, p. 6.
151. Molnár 2001, p. 13.
152. Curta 2006, p. 188.
153. Engel 2001, pp. 12–13.
154. Cartledge 2011, p. 8.
155. Spinei 2003, pp. 69–70.
156. Langó 2005, p. 175.
157. Langó 2005, p. 296.
158. Türk 2012, pp. 2–3.
159. Langó 2005, p. 299.
160. Curta 2006, p. 124.
161. Kovács 2005, p. 354.
162. Kovács 2005, p. 353.
163. Türk 2012, p. 3.
164. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 32, 92.
165. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 63.
166. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 33–34, 93–94.
167. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 93–95.
168. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 64.
169. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 109–112.
170. Kristó 1996, p. 7.
171. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 45.
172. Harmatta 1997, pp. 120, 123.
173. Harmatta 1997, pp. 122–123.
174. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 61.
175. Kristó 1996, p. 8.
176. Kristó 1996, pp. 7–8.
177. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 297–298.
178. "Timeline : Hungary" (https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/97801917364
83.timeline.0001). Timeline: Hungary. 2012.
179. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 54.
180. Tóth 2005, p. 47.
181. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 53.
182. Tóth 1998, p. 10.
183. Kristó 1996, p. 103.
184. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 69.
185. Zimonyi 2005, p. 88.
186. Tóth 2005, p. 49.
187. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 57.
188. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 60–61.
189. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 62.
190. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 489.
191. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 58.
192. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 490.
193. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 59.
194. Macartney 1953, p. 59.
195. The Annals of St-Bertin (year 862), p. 102
196. Kristó 1996, p. 78.
197. The Chronicle of Regino of Prüm (year 889), p. 202.
198. Fodor 1975, pp. 36–37.
199. Fodor 1975, pp. 37–38.
200. The Taktika of Leo VI (18.41), p. 453.
201. Kristó 1996, p. 79.
202. Fodor 1975, p. 37.
203. Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 5), p. 17.
204. Kristó 1996, p. 81.
205. Engel 2001, p. 121.
206. Kontler 1999, pp. 100–101.
207. Mark of Kalt: Chronicon Pictum https://mek.oszk.hu/10600/10642/10642.htm
208. Kristó 1996, p. 119.
209. Kristó 1996, pp. 119–120.
210. Kristó 1996, p. 120.
211. Kristó 1996, pp. 120–121.
212. Macartney 1953, p. 100.
213. Simon of Kéza: The Deeds of the Hungarians (ch. 1.4–5), pp. 13–17.
214. Szíj 2005, p. 118.
215. Fodor 1975, p. 38.
216. Szíj 2005, p. 119.
217. Tóth 2005, p. 54.
218. Fodor 1975, p. 39.
219. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 62.
220. Szíj 2005, p. 150.
221. Tóth 2005, pp. 77–79.
222. Tóth 2005, p. 77.
223. Tóth 2005, p. 78.
224. Fodor 1975, p. 61.
225. Fodor 1975, pp. 62–65.
226. Fodor 1975, pp. 66–71.
227. Fodor 1975, pp. 66–69.
228. Kontler 1999, pp. 34–36.
229. Fodor 1975, p. 78.
230. Fodor 1975, pp. 76–77.
231. Fodor 1975, p. 80.
232. Fodor 1975, pp. 80–81.
233. Fodor 1975, p. 81.
234. Fodor 1975, p. 92.
235. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 99.
236. Fodor 1975, pp. 103–105, 121, 126.
237. Fodor 1975, p. 105.
238. Fodor 1975, p. 104.
239. Fodor 1975, pp. 106, 126.
240. Fodor 1975, p. 184.
241. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 110.
242. Kristó 1996, pp. 44, 46.
243. Spinei 2003, p. 22.
244. Spinei 2003, p. 19.
245. Fodor 1975, p. 249.
246. Fodor 1975, pp. 261–262.
247. László 1996, p. 195.
248. Kovács 2005, p. 355.
249. Spinei 2003, p. 24.
250. Fodor 1975, pp. 298–299.
251. Fodor 1975, pp. 299–308.
252. László 1996, pp. 110–111.
253. László 1996, p. 117.
254. László 1996, p. 118.
255. László 1996, p. 122.
256. László 1996, pp. 123–124.
257. László 1996, pp. 135–136.
258. László 1996, p. 135.
259. Csorba 1997, p. 46.
260. László 1996, p. 127.
261. Engel 2001, p. 15.
262. Engel 2001, p. 16.
263. Fodor 1975, p. 263.
264. The Chronicle of Regino of Prüm (year 889), p. 205.
265. László 1996, pp. 128–129.
266. László 1996, p. 129.
267. Fodor 1975, p. 299.
268. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 127.
269. The Taktika of Leo VI (18.53–56), p. 457.
270. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 133.
271. Engel 2001, p. 47.
272. Spinei 2003, p. 35.
273. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, pp. 132–133.
274. László 1996, p. 148.
275. László 1996, pp. 147–148.
276. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 366.
277. Spinei 2003, p. 37.
278. Róna-Tas 1999, p. 368.
279. Spinei 2003, pp. 37–39.
280. Spinei 2003, p. 39.
281. Berend, Urbańczyk & Wiszewski 2013, p. 134.
282. László 1996, pp. 140–141.
283. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 364, 366.
284. Róna-Tas 1999, pp. 366–367.
285. László 1996, pp. 133–134.
286. László 1996, p. 134.

Sources

Primary sources
Anonymus, Notary of King Béla: The Deeds of the Hungarians (Edited, Translated and
Annotated by Martyn Rady and László Veszprémy) (2010). In: Rady, Martyn; Veszprémy,
László; Bak, János M. (2010); Anonymus and Master Roger; CEU Press; ISBN 978-963-
9776-95-1.
Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio (Greek text edited by Gyula
Moravcsik, English translation by Romillyi J. H. Jenkins) (1967). Dumbarton Oaks Center for
Byzantine Studies. ISBN 0-88402-021-5.
"Ibn Rusta on the Magyars 903–913" (2012). In: Ibn Fadlān: Ibn Fadlān on the Land of
Darkness: Arab Travellers in the Far North (Translated with an Introduction by Paul Lunde
and Caroline Stone) (2012); Penguin Books; ISBN 978-0-140-45507-6.
Simon of Kéza: The Deeds of the Hungarians (Edited and translated by László Veszprémy
and Frank Schaer with a study by Jenő Szűcs) (1999). CEU Press. ISBN 963-9116-31-9.
The Annals of Fulda (Ninth-Century Histories, Volume II) (Translated and annotated by
Timothy Reuter) (1992). Manchester University Press. ISBN 0-7190-3458-2.
The Annals of St-Bertin (Ninth-Century Histories, Volume I) (Translated and annotated by
Janet L. Nelson) (1991). Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-0-7190-3426-8.
 "The Chronicle of Regino of Prüm" (2009). In: History and Politics in Late Carolingian and
Ottonian Europe: The Chronicle of Regino of Prüm and Adalbert of Magdeburg (Translated
and annotated by Simon MacLean); Manchester University Press; ISBN 978-0-7190-7135-
5.
The Hungarian Illuminated Chronicle: Chronica de Gestis Hungarorum (Edited by Dezső
Dercsényi) (1970). Corvina, Taplinger Publishing. ISBN 0-8008-4015-1.
The Taktika of Leo VI (Text, translation, and commentary by George T. Dennis) (2010).
Dumbarton Oaks. ISBN 978-0-88402-359-3.
"The Life of Constantine"; "The Life of Methodius" (1983). In: Kantor, Marvin (1983);
Medieval Slavic Lives of Saints and Princes; pp. 23–161. University of Michigan; ISBN 0-
930042-44-1.

Secondary sources
Erdélyi, István (1986). Moharos, Éva (ed.). A magyar honfoglalás és előzményei (in
Hungarian). Debrecen: Kossuth Könyvkiadó. ISBN 963-09-3019-6. ISSN 0324-7953 (https://
search.worldcat.org/issn/0324-7953).
Berend, Nora; Urbańczyk, Przemysław; Wiszewski, Przemysław (2013). Central Europe in
the High Middle Ages: Bohemia, Hungary and Poland, c. 900-c. 1300. Cambridge University
Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78156-5.
Brook, Kevin Alan (2006). The Jews of Khazaria. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-7425-
4982-1.
Cartledge, Bryan (2011). The Will to Survive: A History of Hungary. C. Hurst & Co.
ISBN 978-1-84904-112-6.
Csorba, Csaba (1997). Árpád népe [Árpád's People] (in Hungarian). Kulturtrade. ISBN 963-
9069-20-5.
Curta, Florin (2006). Southeastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 500–1250 (https://archive.or
g/details/southeasterneuro0000curt). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-89452-
4.
Engel, Pál (2001). The Realm of St Stephen: A History of Medieval Hungary, 895–1526. I.B.
Tauris Publishers. ISBN 1-86064-061-3.
Ertl, Alan W. (2008). Toward an Understanding of Europe: A Political Economic Précis of
Continental Integration. Universal-Publishers. ISBN 9781599429830.
Fodor, István (1975). In Search of a New Homeland: The Prehistory of the Hungarian
People and the Conquest. Corvina Kiadó. ISBN 963-13-1126-0.
Gulya, János (1997). "A magyarok önelnevezésének eredete [Origin of the self-designation
of the Hungarians]". In Kovács, László; Veszprémy, László (eds.). Honfoglalás és nyelvészet
[The Hungarian Conquest and Linguistics]. Balassi Kiadó. pp. 85–97. ISBN 963-506-108-0.
Harmatta, János (1997). "A magyarok nevei görög nyelvű forrásokban [The Hungarians'
ethnonyms in Greek sources]". In Kovács, László; Veszprémy, László (eds.). Honfoglalás és
nyelvészet [The Hungarian Conquest and Linguistics]. Balassi Kiadó. pp. 119–140.
ISBN 963-506-108-0.
Klima, László (2004). "The history of research on the ancestral Uralic homeland". In
Nanovfszky, György (ed.). The Finno-Ugric World. Teleki László Foundation. pp. 15–24.
ISBN 963-7081-01-1.
Kontler, László (1999). Millennium in Central Europe: A History of Hungary. Atlantisz
Publishing House. ISBN 963-9165-37-9.
Kovács, László (2005). "Remarks on the archaeological remains of the 9th–10th century
Hungarians". In Mende, Balázs Gusztáv (ed.). Research on the Prehistory of the
Hungarians: Review: Papers Presented at the Meetings of the Institute of Archaeology of
the HAS, 2003–2004. Archaeological Institute of the HAS. pp. 351–368. ISBN 963-7391-87-
8.
Kristó, Gyula (1996). Hungarian History in the Ninth Century. Szegedi Középkorász Muhely.
ISBN 963-482-113-8.
Langó, Péter (2005). "Archaeological research on the conquering Hungarians: a review". In
Mende, Balázs Gusztáv (ed.). Research on the Prehistory of the Hungarians: Review:
Papers Presented at the Meetings of the Institute of Archaeology of the HAS, 2003–2004.
Archaeological Institute of the HAS. pp. 175–340. ISBN 963-7391-87-8.
László, Gyula (1996). The Magyars: Their Life and Civilisation. Corvina. ISBN 963-13-4226-
3.
Macartney, C. A. (1953). The Medieval Hungarian Historians: A Critical & Analytical Guide (h
ttps://archive.org/details/medievalhungaria0000maca). Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 978-0-521-08051-4.
Molnár, Miklós (2001). A Concise History of Hungary (https://archive.org/details/concisehisto
ryof00moln). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-66736-4.
Róna-Tas, András (1999). Hungarians and Europe in the Early Middle Ages: An Introduction
to Early Hungarian History (Translated by Nicholas Bodoczky). CEU Press. ISBN 978-963-
9116-48-1.
Spinei, Victor (2003). The Great Migrations in the East and South East of Europe from the
Ninth to the Thirteenth Century (Translated by Dana Badulescu). Romanian Cultural
Institute. ISBN 973-85894-5-2.
Szabados, György (2011). Magyar államalapítások a IX-X. században [Foundations of the
Hungarian States in the 9th–10th Centuries] (in Hungarian). Szegedi Középkorász Műhely.
ISBN 978-963-08-2083-7.
Szíj, Enikő (2005). "The past and present of the research on the prehistory of the
Hungarians:Historiography". In Mende, Balázs Gusztáv (ed.). Research on the Prehistory of
the Hungarians: Review: Papers Presented at the Meetings of the Institute of Archaeology
of the HAS, 2003–2004. Archaeological Institute of the HAS. pp. 115–156. ISBN 963-7391-
87-8.
Tóth, Sándor László (1998). Levédiától a Kárpát-medencéig [From Levedia to the
Carpathian Basin] (in Hungarian). Szegedi Középkorász Műhely. ISBN 963-482-175-8.
Tóth, Sándor László (2005). "The past and present of the research on the prehistory of the
Hungarians:Historiography". In Mende, Balázs Gusztáv (ed.). Research on the Prehistory of
the Hungarians: Review: Papers Presented at the Meetings of the Institute of Archaeology
of the HAS, 2003–2004. Archaeological Institute of the HAS. pp. 45–86. ISBN 963-7391-87-
8.
Türk, Attila (Summer 2012). "The new archaeological research design for early Hungarian
history" (https://web.archive.org/web/20160304035019/http://www.hungarianarchaeology.hu/
wp-content/uploads/2012/08/eng_turk_12Ny_0827.pdf) (PDF). Hungarian Archaeology.
hungarianarchaeology.hu. Archived from the original (http://www.hungarianarchaeology.hu/w
p-content/uploads/2012/08/eng_turk_12Ny_0827.pdf) (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved
9 December 2014.
Veres, Péter (2004). "The Uralic and Hungarian ancestral homeland: the state of current
research". In Nanovfszky, György (ed.). The Finno-Ugric World. Teleki László Foundation.
pp. 31–36. ISBN 963-7081-01-1.
 Zimonyi, István (2005). "The state of the research on the prehistory of the Hungarians:
Historiography (Oriental sources, history of the Steppe)". In Mende, Balázs Gusztáv (ed.).
Research on the Prehistory of the Hungarians: Review: Papers Presented at the Meetings
of the Institute of Archaeology of the HAS, 2003–2004. Archaeological Institute of the HAS.
pp. 87–102. ISBN 963-7391-87-8.

Further reading
Bowlus, Charles R. (1994). Franks, Moravians and Magyars: The Struggle for the Middle
Danube, 788–907. University of Pennsylvania Press. ISBN 0-8122-3276-3.
Makkai, László (1994). "The Hungarians' prehistory, their conquest of Hungary and their
raids to the West to 955". In Sugar, Peter F.; Hanák, Péter; Frank, Tibor (eds.). A History of
Hungary (https://archive.org/details/historyofhungary00suga). Indiana University Press.
pp. 8–14 (https://archive.org/details/historyofhungary00suga/page/8). ISBN 0-253-35578-8.

External links
Hofer, Tamás (Fall 1996). "Ethnography and Hungarian Prehistory (Edited version of a
lecture held at the conference "Ethnography and Prehistory," organized by the Hungarian
Prehistoric Committee of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences on December 5, 1995)" (htt
p://www.c3.hu/scripta/books/96/03/02hofer.htm). Budapesti Könyvszemle – BUKSZ.
Retrieved 9 December 2014.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hungarian_prehistory&oldid=1243987672"