Utolsó kommentek:

Albu 2019.05.09. 09:17:42

@Rasz: Csak a román használja, meg az önfeladó tükörfordítók.

Bejegyzés: Nagy románok sorozat: Vitéz Mihály (II. rész)

esszithais 2019.04.28. 03:12:36

@xmas: Talalkoztam egy Czine Mihaly nevu egyetemi tanarral, Szabolcs-Szatmar-Bereg kornyekerol. Az en szuleim onnan szarmaznak. Azota is azt gondolom, vagy tevesen avagy valamily megjegyzesebol, hogy talan a tirpak nevu nepcsoporttol szarmazik. Ezeket vagy egy Kallay grof vagy mas modon behoztak a megyebe (Ung volt a megye harmdik resze akkoriban) mert torokok vesztesege utan el volt neptelenedve a videk. Ha tirpak akkor be lett telepitve, nehany evszazaddal elott.Biztos meg lehet talalni a nevet: Kanadaban is jart eloadason, bar az reg volt.

Bejegyzés: Eleink neveirül A családnevek kialakulásának rövid története I. rész általános ill. nyelvészeti megközelítés

esszithais 2019.04.28. 02:54:17

@béci79: A jaszok miben tartjak "jasz" tartozasi tudatokat? En joreszt lakhelyeikrol, es azok jasz neverol tudtam, meg iskolatrsol akinek a vezetek/csaladi neve Jasz volt. Talan nepi motivumokban, stb.

Bejegyzés: Sztyeppei népek sorozat: a jászok

Rakovszky · http://rakovszky.blog.hu 2019.03.31. 12:53:47

Sárközy maga is vallja a magyar származását, mint a múlt hétvégén hallhattuk is!
Sárközy nagybátyja Gedeon 1948-ban vette feleségül unokanővéremet Rakovszky Juditot! az esküvő a Mátyás templomban volt‼

Bejegyzés: Nicolas Sarkozy magyarságáról, történeti hűséggel 1. rész: De genere

Nimeni Altul 2019.03.09. 23:43:14

@Justice for Hungary:

Hello.

-First of all, don't confuse ethnicity with language. Many people wrongfuly do so. For example: romanians speak a latin language, but we are not latins like italians or spanish who are meditarenean, we are balkanic like the bulgarians or the greeks. The celts were a grouping of tribes originating from the alps, and they eventualy spread out throughout europe and they culturaly dominated the western europe and they had people speaking celtish even in the iberian peninsula. However, most scholars agree that all these people who spoke celtish, weren't all of the same ethnicity or the same roots if you will, as with the original alpine celtish people. Scottish and Irish people speak english, but they are not anglo-saxon. The Kazakhs speak russian, but they are not russian not even slavic/european. Mexican speak spanish, but they are not spanish.
-So when you say that people in transylvania spoke hungarian, to me that doesn't necesarily mean those people were magyars.
How do you justify that they spoke magyar in the region? Because you say toponymes in the region originate from magyar. I think you mainly refer to the romanian "ardeal" which comes from "erdely", because i don't know any other toponyme in romanian that comes from magyar. Please enlighten me if you can.
But let's assume what you say is true, that wouldn't mean you are the ancestral rightful owners of the region, it would mean at least that the magyars were the ruling elite at that time. For example, the french conquered the english in the 11th century, and they brought with them french words into the english vocabulary, into administration, and even toponymes. That doesn't mean the english are french and that doesn't mean England belongs to France.
-And the last thing i want to say about toponymes, do you speak romanian? do you know what are the romanian toponymes and if they descend from hungarian? I speak romanian, and while yes, a couple of county names from transylvania do sound funny, or they do sound like they might have hungarian origin, the majority of the names are romanian, especialy villages which are overwhelmingly romanian.
And by the way, there are romanian toponymes in ukraine, bulgaria, serbia, greece and yes, even Hungary (Mestecănești). Not to mention, many of the toponymes that were in transylvania during your rule applied only to the magyar elite, and they were simply translated into hungarian, even the word erdely is a conveniant toponyme chosen because the region was know in latin as "terra ultra silvum", or in german as "überwald".

The numbers you bring up are really in the detriment of your arguments. I don't know how many magyars settled down in central europe, but I hope you realize 30k-50000 is a really small number, the size of a very large army. If your numbers are correct, to me this goes to show that the magyars were just a ruling warrior elite. Yes, the magyars of transylvania kept their language, however the vast majority of magyars from romania are bilingual, even in the most ethno-nationalistic enclave. And it seems that even in the past some of you certainly knew how to speak it. Miklos Barabas studied in bucharest and he often painted romanians. Even your great Matyas Corvin was part romanian, he was cousin to Stephen the Great and Vlad the Impaler. BOTH hungarian and romanian have words borrowed from one another, a couple hundreds or so, which goes to show the languages mutualy influenced eachother.

How can you say the magyars died in transylvania during the wars with the ottomans and the mongols? :)) If that were to be true, then you can no longer have any claim on the land since you were long time gone. But that isn't true, first because "nations" don't go to war, armies go to war, so only people fighting the wars die, which represent a very small number of the population they die for. Plus, ottomans, like nearly all conquerers, they didn't genocide people, they subjugated people, otherwise the balkans would have been turkish.

We do have a lot in common with bulgarians, but we are not the same people and neither do we come from bulgary. This theory of yours goes against the albanian theory that your peers put forward. I think you say this because the 2nd bulgarian empire was known as the vlaho-bulgarian empire. But you are aware that it extended in what is now modern day bulgaria, romania, and even beyond?

you say "romanians created this theory". I have to be honest, i will never understand how you all knowing-all kind of people can be so certain in your beliefs. You are more dogmatic than religious people. How can you be sure YOU are not the one who's been wrong and indoctrinated? How can you say "this is fact", bring me some evidence, or at least make some logical arguments which are not based on fallacies.

With best regards, i await for your reply.

Bejegyzés: A románok eredete V.

Justice for Hungary 2019.02.27. 09:12:42

@Nimeni Altul:
Hello.
I found this article yesterday and saw your comments. My English is not perfect, but I try to reply to your comments, I hope you will understand it.
I only want to reflect on your thoughts about the presence of romanians in Transylvania, because I really don't care about Wallachia or Moldavia. Romanians only created this theory to prove their right to rule Transylvania, which is an ancient hungarian territory. But if your theory is right, the majority of Transylvania was Romanian when the Hungarian tribes conquered it in the 9th and 10th century. In that case, what is the explanation that hungarian language was so widespread in Transylvania, the name of the cities, towns, villages, rivers, mountains etc are originated from hungarian language and people in Transylvania have been speaking the hungarian language since 1100 years? It is a fact that hungarian tribes only included 100, 000 - 150,000 people and not all of them was hungarian speaker. And not all of them settled down in Transylvania, maybe 30, 000 - 50, 000 hungarian went there. If there were thousands and thousands of romanian speaking people (as you claim), how it was possible that hungarian language remained so widespread? For example, take a look at Bulgaria, where the originally turkish bulgarians changed their language to slavic, because the majority of Bulgaria was slavic. But hungarians didn't change their language to romanian, so I think there were NO romanians in Transylvania. They came centuries after the hungarians conquered Transylvania from Bulgaria and became the majority of Transylvania, because mongols and ottomans killed most of the hungarian people during the wars.

Bejegyzés: A románok eredete V.

Hidnor 2019.02.10. 10:16:25

Aki külföldi eredetű vagy idegen hangzású névvel rendelkezik tudnám ajánlani a néveredet kutatás szolgáltatást.
www.multkutatas.hu/neveredet-kutatas/

Bejegyzés: Eleink neveirül A családnevek kialakulásának rövid története I. rész általános ill. nyelvészeti megközelítés

Attila Halasi 2018.12.05. 07:09:55

Halasi név eredete. 1857. Ig tudtam követni Abonyban. Tovább visszamenőleg nem. Hol lehet megnézni .

Bejegyzés: Eleink neveirül A családnevek kialakulásának rövid története I. rész általános ill. nyelvészeti megközelítés

poirot a gyilkos 2018.11.13. 17:41:31

"Crassus 55-ben érkezett Szíriába, mint a provincia konzulja" Ilyen római politikai elöljárói tisztég nem létezett a köztársaság korában. Aki a konzuli megbízatást viselte semmilyen más politikai feladattal nem foglalkozhatott. Aki a két konzul közül,hat hónapig a diktátor volt el sem hagyhatta Róma város területét. Crassus a keleti tartományok kormányzói titulusát viselte,mint tejhatalommal rendelkező vezető,aki Róma érdekeit képviselte keleten.

Bejegyzés: A római - perzsa háborúk I. Crassus és Carrhae

Szabo Ilona 2018.10.31. 04:24:57

Pesztránszky/i családnévre tudtok valami eredetet mondani? Családi emlékezetben lengyel származás szerepelt, de ennek nyomát sehol nmem találtam. Az összes monográfia Kempelen, Orosz, Illésy cédulagyüjtemény szerint 1725-ben hírdetik ki nemessségüket,( Heves vármegye). Két testvér telepedik le Biharból hoznak igazolást Váradolasziból.
Pestránszky alias Galgóczy mk. Pesztránszky alias Szücs. 1731-től Dévaványán vezetett anyakönyvekben Nánai Pesztránszki Szücs; Pesztránszki Szücs, Pesztránszky; s csak Nánai bejegyzéssel is szerepelnek. Utódaik számosan ma is ott élnek. Köszönettel várom válaszotokat! Dr Szabó Ilona

Bejegyzés: Lengyel-magyar dinasztikus kapcsolatok II/2. rész

Gery87 2018.01.11. 22:23:12

"Fontos persze megemlíteni, hogy nem az etnikai, hanem a vallási ellentétek miatt."

Kicsit erőltetnek érzem ezt az állandó "nem etnikai/népi/nemzeti ellentétek miatt, hisz népi tudat sem volt még.." féle örökös mantrát és visszakozást...

nyilván a korban a vallás a hit fontosabb volt, de ne mondja senki hogy akkor egy ukrán (na jó rutén) paraszt nem tudatosította magáról hogy rutén/szláv ők meg litvánok és ez semennyire nem volt fontos.
A különbséget tudták, átélték...

Pl a török korban is nyilvánvaló hogy a 'magyarság' Zrinyinél, nem csak a nemességet jelentette....az hogy a politikai, jogi egyenlőség a nemzeten belül később született csak meg, nem jelenti hogy előtte nem volt ilyen identitás és "később találták ki"...a problémáival, konfliktusaival együtt...

Bejegyzés: Kelet - Európa egykori nagyhatalma - A litván nagyfejedelemség

Csorba István 2017.12.27. 15:19:33

@PSG70 (törölt): Az azért a szálka-gerenda hasonlatnál figyelembe kellene venni, hogy az utódállamokhoz csatolt területeken rekedt magyar lakosság lélekszáma - akik ma "még" magyarnak vallják magukat - legalább olyan arányban, de inkább nagyobb arányban csökkent mint a hazai nemzetiségek. Ennek oka egyrészt az erőszakos asszimiláció, vegyes házasságok, elköltözések. Talán így teljesebb a megközelítés!

Bejegyzés: A szlovákok eredete

Benkő István 2017.10.30. 19:40:17

@hami: Te tényleg azt gondolod, hogy "pont azt jelenti"?

Bejegyzés: Albánia - a Kaukázusban

birfer 2017.10.17. 13:07:10

@Landauer Szilárd: TE NEM MAGYAR NEM IS OLAH HANEM EGY HAZUG BUDOS OLAH VAGY

Bejegyzés: A románok eredete I.

Kollarics Gábor 2017.08.21. 03:33:50

Azt hiszem, mire "megcáfolta" Noszlopi Németh Péter kutatási irányát, Önt is meggyőzte, hogy az Árpád-kori (nem "ős")Budát teljesen ésszerű az Esztergom és Dömös közötti térségben keresni. Németh Péter említi, hogy a Helemba-szigeten tártak föl Árpád-kori romokat, de a Margitszigeten nem. Ez például egy igen figyelemre méltó tény és azonnal kulcsot ad az oklevelek helyszíneinek beazonosításához. Miért kell ennek belátásához "amatőrnek" lenni? Németh Péternek volt annyi esze, hogy meg sem próbált 17-18. századi metszetek alapján azonosítani egy addigra eltűnt, elköltöztetett, széthordott települést. Egyébként most néztem meg a Szamár-hegyi és búbánatvölgyi hévízes fürdőket, amiket Noszlopi még nem ismert, csak feltételezte a létüket. Herculia létezését immár nem csak erődítmények, hanem felkereshető fürdők is megerősítik a térségben. Ha a "szakma" nem tud ezekről a régészeti emlékekről, az már nem Németh Péter hibája, hiszen ő már nem tud beszámolni- mint annak idején - az MTA-nak.
Tisztelettel: Kollarics Gábor
kollarics.g@gmail.com

Bejegyzés: A pilismaróti Ősbuda I.

Nimeni Altul 2017.07.31. 20:49:43

The final thing that i want to add, is that dacians don't exist anymore, their culture is gone and everything. However, I don't believe that they died out completly, as I stated above, all people living in the geographical are once occupied by dcians DO descent from dacians. Also, i believe that there are customs of today whou could very likely come from those people, just like haloween for the english speaking people is a christian celebration that once used to be a celtic custom, we have many of this kind of celebrations here, our haloween equivalent is st andrew, the one who is presumed to have christianised the daco-romanians, but most people especialy on country side don't give a crap about that, for them it is the night when ghouls vampires and werewolves roam the night, and you can see similar traditions in all the balkans and even slavic neighbours. the Martisor celebration we have on the 1st of Mars exists in Bulgary too, though they atribuate it too a different origin.
If you are to look at traditional cloathing, to me it is very similar to what dacians are depicting using, sure with variations, but very similar.

And the final word that i want to say here: you claim that you are doing this simply because you love history, while romanians can't have a true look on it because we have a bias and a nationalistic agenda. bear in mind that the same principles apply to you. bear in mind that people in the past killed eachother and commited atthrocities on both sides, and they hold grudges, and apparently still hold grudges to this very day.
it is time i think to live this dark moments behind. you as hungarians don't fall under the indo-european category but i do consider you as europeans, as most of the people do, and a true european alliance (not the one that is currently controlled by bruxelles and other forces) is for the benefit of all of us. I'm always open for debates, and new perspectives, but i'm not at all keen to debate with people who think they know in advance what the truth is, or even worse, talk to people who only want to troll or insult.
I saw a few such commentaries around here, and i chose to not address them, and i completly understand that many romanians do the same thing, it's enough to scroll down the youtube comment section on something regarding transilvania to see both sides in a shameful display of backwards rageing.
... but i guess now you can't say we don't have things in common :))

Anyway, I enjoyed reading all the 5 parts, even if it was hard to understand it at times.

Bejegyzés: A románok eredete V.

Nimeni Altul 2017.07.31. 20:27:12

Part II:

Then there's the fact that there's almost nothing regarding romanians or vlahs or moldavians or whatever after the fall of dacia for a few good centuries.
I understand that you guys completly disregard the Gesta Hungarorum document. Very convenient... :) Fine, let's not talk about it.
Will you at least admit that by the early 14th century in the territories known as wallachia and moldavia there lived people who spoke this romance language? If yes, let's ask ourselves why? You say that it is because of latin shepards from the balkans known as vlahs (or blak) who migrated north and outbred the cumans, the pechenegs, the avars, the alans, the goths, and the rest of the salivc, germanic tribes and even the hungarians in transilvania. This seems an unchievable feature to me, groups of shepards grow to about 20 milionn and they get their own country too, seems unlikely to me. What seems more likely however, is that all the slavic and germanic tribes in what was to become wallachia and transilvania adopted that form of latin as a second language and eventualy adopted it forever, even if groups of slavs and pechenegs, and even tatars, still preserve their languages to this very day. Why Latin? I really don't believe the vlah shepards were so numerous. I do believe they migrated north but i tihnk there were already people there speaking some sort of latin, how else could it have become the major language in the region? how many children did those shepard had? do you see the problem here? now why was latin existant in the region? I don't know, did the dacians already spoke some sort of latin? I don't know. Did roman mercenaries (who most likely spoke latin or knew latin as a second language) and roman soldiers prolifireted in the area? could be, but I know nothing for certain. the fact is, in those regions, wallachia and moldavia, there lived people at least by the early 14th century who spoke this language, called it romanian, and later formed an union on the basis of it.
now how about transilvania? as far as my understanding goes, you guys claim the dacians died out in the region, the roman colonizers left, and it was repopulated with cumans, avars, and germanic tribes, that you fought, and so finaly transilvania got into your hands. no romanian presence here until:
a) until these vlahs came and started to outbred you (this is the theory of the person who made this blog and i assume most hungarians, possibly, i'm not sure)
b) until romania got transilvania in the early 20th century and ceausescu started to enthnic cleanse you and replace you with colonizers from moldavia and south romania (wallachia).

The second version (b, the one with ceausescu) seems extremly unlikely to me? why? first, there are many misconceptions regarding communism in romania, it was far far from what is in north korea. also, ceausescu was a communist, not a nazi, he did not care for ethnicity, he was against burgeois class and boyars and nobility etc. In fact, i even saw a movie called Capcana Mercenarilor (the mercenaries trap) in which an austrian lord massacrates a romanian village in transilvania as retaliation for losing ww1, but it is a hungarian who risks his life and gets shot in an attempt to alert the authorities, dieing as a hero, so you really cannot complain. and if you believe that transilvania was colonised during this times, let me ask you this: why are their customs over there different from the rest of us? I'm a moldavian, i can very easily spot differences between me and bucharest people, and the transilvanian romanians are very different, in terms of their accent, culture, cuisine, music, house making etc how could this all happen in less than a century? it is obvios to me, romanians lived there for far long than ceausescu times.

I don't believe in the theory a), because it seems unlikely that these shepard vlahs will breed so succesfuly. Plus, our sources, your sources, plus 3rd party sources say that many of the nobles of the times came from diverse ethnic backgrounds, so basicaly what this prooves to me is that transilvania was a huge melting pot. But i do believe however that romance speaking people were majoritary, since i can't explain the vast majority of romanian speaking people in transilvania today.

Bejegyzés: A románok eredete V.