LÁSZLÓ BOTOS

THE HOMELAND RECLAIMED

                                               Chapter 10

                                       Dentumagyaria

    Long before the Magyars entered the Carpathian Basin, they lived in the territory which they called "Dentumoger" (Dentumagyaria), which was also the name of the Magyars at that time. The name of their leading group was "Megyer". Some historians called them Dentumogor which means "the Magyars who live at the foot of the Don mountain".

    Dr. Novotny has a Sumerian analysis of this name.[1]  Historians agree with the fact that the Sabirs (Subareans), also known as Hurrites, were the original inhabitants of this territory. The Curator of the East Asian Museum in Berlin, E. Mayer, states that the Hurrites were not Semites and their name in Sumerian was SUBAR or SUBIR. In about 3500 B.C., the Sumerian people settled among the Sabir/Subir/Subarean people who lived in this territory. This is probably the explanation of the expression KAS-GAR which was found on the Sumerian tablets. KAS-GAR means "double origins" (Sabir/Hurrite and Sumerian). Dr. Novotny compares this expression with the name of a church in Lagash, E-KASGAR, and the name of a city in Inner Asia, Kasgar. He states that the name "Kazar" may have derived from the Sumerian KAS-GAR. (Therefore it cannot be of Semitic origin).[2]

    According to Sir Leonard Woolley, the Sumerian economy attracted the nomadic northern Mesopotamian Semitic Akkadians who took over the culture and script of the Sumerians.[3] This is why, in the Sumerian scripts, several dialects are obvious. At the turn of the third and second millennium B.C., the Sumerian states ceased to exist. According to Ede Mahler, a Hungarian researcher, the Sumerians migrated to the Zagros Mountains, the territory of the lower Zab river and the steppes, which later became Assyria. This land was already occupied by the Subarean/Hurrite people who practiced animal husbandry. The Sumerians moved more to the East where we can find their remains in the settlements of Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro.[4]

     Sergei Pavlovich Tolsztov, after 10 years of excavations, discovered an irrigation system from the 13th century B.C. in the territory of the Chorezm (Sumerian KU-MA-AR-IZ-MA) which had been populated by nomads. Pressured by the Assyrians, Subarean/Hurrite peoples settled on the territory called Holy Kanga = KI-EN-GI. According to Professor Kramer of the University of Pennsylvania, KI in Sumerian means "land" and the Sumerians called their land KI-EN-GI. Dr. Badiny states that "-E" or "-EN" is the possessive suffix.[5] The geographical names witness the Sumerian settlements in this territory. Dr. Novotny writes that in 1967, he sent a letter to Dr. Tolsztov calling his attention to the Sumerian names. He also writes that, according to Tolsztov, the Subarean/Hurrite people were the ancestors of the Huns.[6]

     Constantine Porphyrogenitus, in A.D.956, writes that the Magyars were called Sabartoi Asphaloi.[7] He writes that Bulcsu Horka and Tormas, descendants of Árpád, and leaders of the Megyer "nation" which was the leading "nation" of the Magyars, visited him personally and told him that the name of their people was Sabartoi-Asphaloi. "Asphalo" in Greek means "free" and Subartu was the name of Northern Babylon. So the name means "free northern Babylonians". They were originally called Sabar/Sabir (Subareans), a people that historians have identified as the Huns. Bulcsu and Tormas became Christians of the Eastern rite and Constantine Porphyrogenitus was their godfather.

    Historians call the Magyars who inhabited Dentumoger (Dentumagyaria), the Dentumogers but they called themselves the Sumuh-ger (Sabar/ Sabir). Subarkuduk (Sumerian SU-BAR-KUD-UKKU) was the name of the tribal union of the Sabar-Sabir, Hun-Moger, Muh-ger, Mah-gor peoples, east of the Ural mountains, whose name indicates that they held the right to make decisions. The Subar/Sabir tribe was the leading tribe of the union. SU-BAR means Sabar/Sabir. KUD means "decide, rule, decree, ordain" and UK, UKKU means "descendant, progenitor". So the name Subarkuduk is "Subar people who decide".[8]

    After the Hun Empire had spread to the West and after the death of Atilla, there was a tribal union in the West around the Bosporus. They were called the Bosporus Huns.[9] In A.D. 527 and 528, the Hun leader, Gordas, became Christian and tried to impose Christianity on his people. The priests and people revolted against him and killed him. The leader of the revolt, his brother Mogeris, was elected as leader of the Huns. The people of Mogeris took over the leadership of the union from the Sabirs. According to some historians, the Magyars received their name from Mogeris. Anonymus called those Magyars "Dentumoger" (in Hungarian "döntő Magyar" which means "The Magyar people who decide", a word similar in meaning to Subarkuduk.) The Dentumogers (Megyers), therefore, took over the position of leaders from the Subarkuduk (Sabirs) when Mogeris took over from Gordas.

     Dr. Novotny analyzes the name Dentumoger in Sumerian: DI-EN-TUMUH-GER. DI or GI means "law, truth". EN (E-NE) = "his, hers" possessive case. TU, DU = does, makes, MUH, MAH = exalted; GER, GAR = child; so the meaning of the word DI-EN-TU-MUH-GER is "the Magyar people who make the law".

     It is very significant that the name Dentumoger can be analyzed in the Sumerian language because this indicates a close connection between the Magyars and the Sumerians. Jules Oppert was the first linguist to categorize the Sumerian language into the Ural-Altaic group.[10] A.J. Sayce, Colonel Rawlinson and Francois Lenormand supported Oppert's opinion. Rawlinson called the Sumerian language "Scythic".[11] The hypothesis that the Sumerian people died out after a life and death struggle against the Akkadians is no longer valid. It is a known fact that the Sumerian people migrated to the mountains to the north of Mesopotamia and beyond. They settled there and created new states under different names. These Sumerian fugitives often intermingled with Persians. IBISIN, the last Sumerian king fled to Elam and lived as a fugitive in the Hittire, Hurrite and Medean mountainous territories. This is why we can presume that the Sumerian culture was not only continued in the Akkadian and Assyrian societies but was also spread by direct contact between the Sumerians and the peoples of the northern part of the territories of Asia Minor. It is also a known fact that in 1000 B.C., a caste of Magus priests lived in New Babylon. There are several written documents which mention them. One is the Book of Daniel in the Old Testament- I. 4; II and III. Another is Arianus, VI.7 and a third is Strabo XVI. 1. This is the explanation for the fact that the Sumerian language remained in Semitic Babylon.

    The writers of the Old Testament, the ancient historians, and the documents of the Assyrian King of Niniveh all mention that one of the ancient lands of the Sumerians in southern Mesopotamia was called Chaldea. The cuneiform writings of the 8th and 7th centuries B.C. call the Taurus mountain territory the Chaldean Empire. The language of this territory was a mixture of Caucasian languages. Lehmann Haupt and others stated that this composite language was neither Indo-European nor Semitic.[12]

    The Chaldeans fought to the end against the Assyrians until both peoples were devastated. In the 8th and 7th centuries B.C. the Scythians were in communication with the peoples of Asia Minor and Mesopotamia. Beyond the Caucasus Mountains where today the Ukraine is located, the Scythians practiced agriculture, animal husbandry and handcrafts and some of them lived in cities. Russian researchers have recently excavated some ancient Scythian cities, the largest of which were Neopolis, Barda, Min and Sigal. The city of Kiev was rounded by the Scythians. The name of the city indicates the language of the Scythians. In Sumerian KI = land and "e" is the possessive suffix. In 612 B.C., the Scythians in an alliance with the Medes, came to the aid of the Babylonians against the Assyrians. Justinius informs us that from the first century A.D. the Scythians ruled Asia Minor. At that time, Asia Minor was populated by Sumerian refugees.

     According to Kálmán Gosztonyi, the Graecized distortions of Scythian words in the writings of Herodotus can be deciphered only with the aid of the Sumerian language. The Orientalists did not accept his statements because their hypothesis is that the Scythians were descendants of the Iranians. The Sumerian language, like the Magyar and the other Turanian languages, was an agglutinative language, whereas the Iranian language was an inflected language. Trogus Pompeius mentioned that the ancient writers stated that the Scythians were "the most ancient masters of Mesopotamia".[13]

     The burial customs of these peoples also reveal that the Scythian people could not have been descendants of the Iranians because the Iranians considered the corpse to be "unclean" and they did not even bury it, but displayed it on top of their house or on a mountain peak so that it could be prey to the birds. The Turanians - Scythians, Magyars, Huns, Avars, Parthians and Subareans all buried their dead in graves or kurgans together with their most prized possessions, tools and even horses.

    H. Howarth and J. Klapproth call the language of the Kazars not "Turkish" but "Turkic".[14] The contemporary Arab writers like Ibn-Haukal, who was a geographer, write that the language of the Kazars was different from the "Turkish" language and all other languages known at that time. The Sumerian cuneiform tablets had not yet been discovered so the Kazar language stood alone. Later the Turkic nature of the language connected it to the Sumerian language.

    According to Kálmán Gosztonyi, certain characteristics of the Sumerian language are evident in the languages of the territory of Caucasia and north of the Black Sea. This can only be seen by studying the Scythians and their related peoples.[15] There is no connection between the Scythian language and the Iranian language.

    The Scythian names for the gods can be analyzed only with the Sumerian language. I do not intend to do a detailed analysis of these names because that would be too long and complicated. I will analyze only a few Scythian names to prove that they come from Sumerian. SACA is the name the Persians gave to the Scythians. SAGAR is a Scythian weapon.[16] This word originated from the Sumerian word SAG-AR-ZU which means "battleaxe". SAG -- head, AR = crush, ZU = able, i.e "able to crush head". In Hungarian SAGAR-ZU is "szekerce" more commonly known as the "fokos" which is an axe-adze or a battleaxe. This is why "szekerce" is a Hungarian word and is not originated from the Slav word "sikirica". The borrowing is in reverse. The same situation occurs with the surviving Kazar words which cannot be analyzed or understood by means of the Turkish language, but only with the Sumerian language. The historical events loosely tie together the Scythian, Kazar, Magyar and Sumerian languages. Although we do not have a thorough knowledge of the Kazar language, those words which we do know allow us to make this conclusion. In the 8th and 9th centuries A.D., the Kazars and Magyars lived in Kiev.

     Andras Zakar states that Oppert, Lenormand and others only determined a Sumerian/Ural-Altaic relationship. At that time they did not have adequate data to state any different. Since that time, Zsigmond Varga, Ida Bobula, Kálmán Gosztonyi of the Collège de France d'Assyrologie and András Zakar of the University of Eastern Languages in Hungary, came to new conclusions. Zakar published a tabular account of the structural characteristics of the Sumerian language which can be found scattered throughout twenty different languages.[17] The Sumerian language shows a complete basic structural identity with the Magyar. The Caucasian languages which show some structural resemblance to the Sumerian, show no similarity to the Sumerian in their vocabulary. The passive voice is totally different from Sumerian. The Sumerian remains in the Scythian language can be noticed in the Caucasian languages, but we cannot talk of genetic descent, just borrowings. Structural relationships exist between the Turkic and the Sumerian languages but at the same time similarities in vocabulary are minimal. Zakar writes: "Where occupational words are identical in two languages, where the root words and linguistic segments are identical, there is a complete relationship. And, where the vocabulary is identical and the phonetics and morphology are identical, together with anthropological and archeological connections and a similar cultural history, we can declare a partial or a complete descent. The vocabulary is the body of the language, the grammar is the soul. Where both exist there is no dispute."[18]

    The Magyar language shows connections with some elements of the Sumerian language. The Scythians were neighbors of the Finno-Ugric peoples to the north. It is from here that the similarities between the Magyar and Finno-Ugric languages occur. The Finno-Ugric peoples borrowed many of their words and grammatical structures from the Scythians, the ancestors of the Kazars and the Magyars. Anthropologists have disproved the theory that the Finno-Ugric people were ruled by a "Turkish" leader. The cranial index of the Ob-Ugrians is not identical to that of the Magyars. Lajos Bartucz writes that the Turanid and Dinaric types made up 25% of the Magyar people.[19] Forty to sixty percent of the modern Magyar skulls are identical to the Sumerian skulls. Among the skulls of the modern Magyars, there are no Semitic or Oriental types.

    The Scythian people who lived on the Caspian Sea and the Volga river territories received the name "Turk" According to Kálmán Gosztonyi, the name "Turk" comes from the Sumerian TUR-UG, and means "separated from", i.e. a people separated from the Sumerians. The Magyars were also called "Turks". The crown of King Géza, which he received from the Byzantine Emperor, was engraved with the inscription: "A Turkok Királya", which means "King of the Turks".

     The so-called "Turkish loan-words" in the Magyar language are almost all of Sumerian or possibly Persian origin. These words entered the Turkic languages from the Scythians. So these Turkic words had a distant connection with the Sumerians but this does not indicate that the Turks are descended from them. The Magyars could not have borrowed these words from the Turkish language (the language of Turkey) because these words from ancient times were their own. The Finno-Ugric hypothesis that a small warlike Turkish tribe conquered the proto-Magyars (Ugors) remains a hypothesis without any proof. The Sumerian vocabulary and the future word analysis will be the proof that the so-called "Turkish loan words" existed long ago in Sumerian and in Magyar. The borrowing is in reverse. It is from the Magyar that the words entered the Turkish language.

    The etymological dictionary published in 1941 by Géza Barczi states that a large part of the Magyar words originate from the Slavic language, yet the only Slavic words existing in the Hungarian language are religious words. Here the borrowing is also reversed. The Slavs took these words from the Magyars. András Zakar writes that, if a Slavic word exists in six different Slavic languages, and at the same time this word can be found in the Magyar vocabulary but it is non-existent in the Finno-Ugric and Turkish languages, then we can declare it to be of Slavic origin. As we can see, the ratio is 6 to 1. We have to look for that ratio because the Slavs, in the sixth century A.D., lived in a unified group in the Vistula and Baltic Sea territories. Therefore their language was not divided except in dialect. The different Slavic languages were formed much later, in more recent times. In a comparison between the Slavic and Magyar vocabulary, only the ancient form of the Slavic language can be used as a measuring stick. If a Slavic word exists in Sumerian, it cannot be of Slavic origin, only Scythian or Sumerian origin. Here we have to consider also that the Scythians, even when they lived a nomadic lifestyle, were much more advanced than the Slavs. We can hardly find any ancient Slavic artifacts. At the same time there are numerous Scythian artifacts.

     When the Old Slav hypothesis was proposed, archeologists had not yet discovered the artifacts in Asia Minor. It is a known fact that, in the Middle Ages, the Magyar language was called "Lingua Scythica". The name "Ugor" was not even mentioned until the twelfth century. Is it possible that the historians of the Middle Ages would not have heard of the Ugor name?

    According to Constantine Porphyrogenitus, the Magyars were also called the "Sabartoi-asphaloi" people. "Savartoi" is the geographical name Subartu which originates from the Sumerian name SUBIR-KI (Subir land). (DSL. 1.7 and L.7) The meaning of SUBIR-TU is Subir land and from this word formed the Akkadian name SUBARTU. The Greek "asphal(oi)" is the same as the Sumerian US-BAR (DSL II.181-182 and L.185) The meaning of US-BAR is "relatives on the woman's side". That means the Persian, Mede or Hurrite descendants on the woman's side. The Sumerian fugitives were mostly male and married Persian, Mede or Hurrite women. The SUBARTU-USBAR connections can be proven by the fact that they used the same cuneiform signs. (DSL II.182) There is a document which mentions that SUBARTU was a part of the Persian city of ANSAN. Ungnad says that ANSAN-KI is the same as SUBIR-KI.[20]

     Gyula Németh has another decipherment for the name Sabartoi-asphaloi. He takes it from a Turkish tribal name. He states that the "asphaloi" is the plural of the Greek word "aspholes" meaning "strong, firm solid". István Horváth says that Constantine Porphyrogenitus writes that the Sabartoi are the remaining Avars.[21] Zakar writes that they were more likely Sabirs (Subareans) than Avars. The name "Sabartoi-asphaloi" was known in Kazaria.  Constantine Porphyrogenitus writes: "Those Magyars who left Etelkőz and traveled east are called Sabirs".[22]

    In the second millennium B.C., the war between Babylon and Assyria took place on the territory of the Sabirs in Mesopotamia. In the time of Hammurabi, the horse was introduced as a means of waging war with chariots and horsemen. At that time, a well-equipped group of equestrian nomads, whose origin was unknown, appeared in Mesopotamia from Central Asia. They were the Scythians and Turanians whose main strength was the cavalry. Hammurabi adopted the custom of using the horse and chariot from the Kassites. The implementation of this new way of making war must have had great importance because Hammurabi, in his writings, boasted of the numbers of horses and chariots he possessed. When Hammurabi lost power, the equestrian Kassites took over and remained for almost 500 years on this territory which we now call the Babylonian empire. The Kassites called their empire KUR-TEN-IZ, the country of TENIZ. Their strength was their superior cavalry. The Kassites divided their empire into territories inhabited by equestrian tribes. Their center was the city of Assur on the bank of the River Zab. In the Sumerian language, Assur was ASSZA-UR and means "horse-lord".

    Viktor Padányi writes that the Mitanni were defeated by the Assyrians in 1360 B.C. They lost territory and their status as a strong power.[23]  Forty Mitannian equestrian tribes went over to the side of the Hittites under the name of Manda. In the Hittite Empire, they took a very honored position. In 1200 B.C. the Hittite Empire also collapsed. The forty Manda tribes migrated to Subartu and settled in Uzzu. A Semitic revolution removed the last Kassite Emperor in 1171 B.C. The remaining Kassite populace fled to the territory of Lake Van where there was a Kassite religious center, established 80 years earlier by the Kassite magus (priest) class who had to flee from Assur in 1251, when the Assyrian King Tukulti-Ninurta I conquered Babylon and carried the statue of the god Marduk to the city of Assur. Around Lake Van the Kassite people developed a theocratic culture which historians call a Chaldean civilization. The Mitannian Manda people who came from Asia Minor also belonged to this civilization. They settled in the territory of Late Urami around 1101 B.C. when Tutulti-apal, the Assyrian king, annexed Babylon to Assyria. South of Lake Van he annexed the remainder of the territories of the Mitanni and the populace was again forced to flee from the merciless Assyrian rule to their relatives, the Manda people, with whom they united, establishing a confederacy in 1070 B.C. At the end of the 9th century B.C. the confederacy became a kingdom which the Assyrians called URARTU.

     It is not accidental that these different groups all settled around Lake Van. We already have sources from the 4th century B.C. which mention these territories as URZU and HAYASHA. The facts prove that the magi of the Kassites, the Manda people, and the surviving Mitanni, all came to settle and find refuge in territories where their relatives lived. The name of the first king of the Manda was URAMI according to Zakar. Probably Lake Urami received its name from this king.

    On the Steppes north of the Caspian Sea, as far as northeast of Urartu and the Caucasian mountains, lived the Huns. Herodotus called the people who lived on this territory the Scythians. After the Assyrians conquered the Hittites they remained the only rulers of that territory. Assur quickly developed from a country town to a mercantile Semitic city where luxury and riches became the only goal of the populace. The Assyrians imposed high taxes on the people of the countries they conquered. Their rule soon became almost unbearable. The entire populace of the Assyrian state was merciless to the slaves. The Assyrian king, Tiglat-pilesar, tried to re-establish connections between Babylon and Assyria. He did that with the purpose of stopping the continuous revolutions which broke out against the Assyrians. The people of Babylon were unable to accept that their one-time vassals, the Assyrians, were now the rulers. The city of Babylon had been for almost a whole millennium the cultural capital of the world. Although under the Assyrian yoke it still carried some dignity, it was humiliating that the viceroy of the Assyrians, the "harku", lived in Babylon.[24] Tiglat-pilesar tried to solve that problem by giving Babylon equal status to Assur and by declaring himself king of Babylon. As a result, his son changed his residence to the city of Babylon and Assur became the residence of the "harku". This action infuriated the army.

     The "harku" was the younger son of Tukuli-apal, whose name was Sarrukin, which became distorted to Sargon. He took the leadership of the revolution, restored the power to Assur and took the throne for himself. Sarrukin's first action as king was to start a war against the Palestinian states. While the Assyrian army was occupied there, the Chaldean king made an alliance with Humbanik, the king of the Medes and unexpectedly they attacked and liberated Babylon from the Assyrians. A group of cavalrymen from Uz went over to the king of the Manda whose name was Manua and they settled on the territory of Lake Urami, on the land where their relatives had settled earlier. Sarrukin (Sargon), as he returned, attacked the rebels but he lost that battle. At the same time, Syria also revolted against Sarrukin who had to go there to put down the rebellion. Several smaller states also rebelled against the Assyrians and these rebellions were started in a country called Manni. The rebels deposed the ruler who was appointed by Sarrukin. Sarrukin went to Manni and defeated the rebellious states one by one. He captured the leader of the revolution, Bagdatu, and skinned him alive, then appointed a new ruler who a year later, in 717 B.C. also revolted against Sarrukin.

     Urartu supported this revolution, which Sarrukin, after three years of intense fighting was able to subdue. Sarrukin took a terrible revenge on the populace. The king of the Manda, Ruzsa I[25], and his remaining soldiers, all committed suicide in the mountains. Part of the remaining Manda people fled into the Mede Empire and another part fled to the Caucasus Mountains. Sarrukin finally conquered Urartu but that was his last offensive campaign. The son of Sarrukin, Sinaherib, was already forced to look for an alliance with the so-called "barbarians" of the north. We have numerous data about these "barbarians" of the north only none of the sources mention their names. All the sources describe them as an equestrian people who wore pointed hats, leather pants and knee length coats. They carried lances, swords, bows and arrows, battleaxes, and they used a lasso. At the sound of a horn, they turned together as one man. Their country was in the north in the territory of the Kur river and the Caspian Sea and the Caucasus. Herodotus called them Scythians.

    After the fall of Assyria in 612 B.C., a new era was introduced in the territory of Subartu and the Caucasus. A new, great power arose, the Medes, who had a close relationship with the people of Subartu, Uz and Chaldea. When Babylon regained its independence the Chaldean magi quickly organized themselves and they returned to the territory of Lake Urami. From this Manda center the magi and the Manda organized a new Sabir (Subarean) Empire. They restored the Sumerian heritage but this restoration was not long-lived because again the Persian leaders overcame them under the leadership of Cyrus whose actual name was Kuras. This short-lived Sabir restoration was ended because Tamar the queen of the Sabirs (also known as Tomyris queen of the Scythians) was not strong enough to unite the Subareans, Uz, Cimmerians and Armenians against the aggression of Kuras (Cyrus). She did not have enough time to unify these peoples into a strong nation.

    The Mede Empire opened up a new chapter in history. Up to this point history was known as ancient history. The information we have obtained was from unsure decipherments and interpretations. From the 5th century B.C. when the Persian Empire came into ascendance records were kept. There are Persian, Greek and Latin sources. Among these sources, we know that there are a lot of distortions and the sources are not always accurate but we are able to read them. Herodotus for example writes Cyrus for the name Kuras and he calls the son of Kuras, Kombices. His actual name was Kambudzia. He names the people who lived north of the Caspian sea, Scythians and the people who lived south of the Caspian Sea, the Massageta. He gave Greek names to all the peoples. From him, we know that the Persians, after conquering Lydia and Babylon, also conquered Sabiria after a long war. He is the one who gave the name Tomyris to Tamar the Scythian (Sabir) queen.

     Here is a very interesting case of a fictitious name. Three different historians call one people with three different names. We can state for sure that that people did not call itself Scythian, Massageta or Saca. We have written proof from Herodotus, writes Zakar, that when Herodotos talks of the people of Asia Minor, he says: "Super hos (i.e. Persians) ad ventum Aquilonem habitant Medi, super Medus, Sapires, super Sapires Colchi.." Neither the Armenian nor the Persian writings mention the name Scythian or the name Massageta, so the queen Tamar had to be the queen of the Sabirs (Subareans). According to the map of Ptolemy, the land of Subartu was cut into two by an Armenian wedge, into an eastern part and a western part. The Western branch of the Subareans absorbed the Hun and the Uz peoples. The Eastern Subareans and those of the Caspian territories never came under Persian rule. Zakar writes that, because the Western Subareans came under the rule of the Persians, the Subareans remained separated in two parts. Another factor rendered the situation more serious and that was that the Western Subareans became a part of the Armenian Empire which was just forming but they retained their name.[26]

    Alexander the Great overthrew the Persian Empire, and the Subareans together with the Armenians came under the rule of Macedon. The Macedonian Empire was overthrown by the Parthian Arsak dynasty (who were Avar), together with the Uz people. This territory, as a Persian-Armenian territory was ruled by the Arsak dynasty in what became known as the Parthian Empire. In the Parthian Empire, nations who were related to the Subareans received a preferred status. Their prosperity was destroyed by the campaigns of the Roman Empire. After defending themselves successfully for 500 years, the Armenians finally became a part of the Roman Empire. The Parthian Empire which had exhausted itself in the wars against Rome lost its power over Persia which became independent. Persia now attacked Rome and the wars against the Romans lasted for centuries. Constantinople took over the leadership of the Western Roman Empire instead of Rome. In the 6th century A.D. the Roman Empire lost its strength during the rule of Emperor Justinian and the Persian Empire flourished under Emperor Kosru. The trouble between Constantinople and the Persian Empire meant a continuous war took place on the territory of the Subareans. While these two powers were exhausting their resources, a third world power arose in the 7th century A.D., the Arabs.

     While all these events were taking place, the ancestors of the Árpád Magyars, the Subareans, after fleeing from the Sumerian territory, lived in the mountains of the Caucasus and in territories to the north of it until they were forced to leave. In A.D. 226, when the new Persian Empire came into being, just the name was Persian and under Persian rule, life was bearable for the Turanian peoples - Uz, Avars, Huns, Subareans, Scythians. Their culture and religion were Turanian (i.e. Sumerian) because the Persians, already in ancient times, had adopted the Mede customs and during the 500 years of Parthian rule these customs became more Turanian. After the long wars between Persia and Byzantium, the Arabs rose to power but they were racially very foreign to that territory. The fanaticism of Islam took over. This was a different language, culture and religion than those of the Persian Empire. From this point on, life became unbearable.

    Twenty years after the flight of Mohammed, in AD. 622, the Arabs had conquered Syria and Egypt. Fifty years later, the northern part of Africa came under their rule and at the end of the century, Asia Minor was in danger from Islam. Damascus was the center of the Arab world but, at the turn of the century, problems arose. The Arabs could not bridge the distance between Damascus and Carthage, writes Zakar, and they were still conquering new territories. For the time being, Byzantium successfully stopped the Arab advance, but it was already in danger. At this time, the Arabs lost a few battles to Byzantium and that caused the Arabs to reintroduce "the Assyrian mercilessness". This made the Arab rule completely unbearable.

    Padányi and Zakar write that the Sumerian people, from the Mesopotamian territories, continuously migrated and settled in the territories in the Northeast and the Northwest and also the territory of Central Asia, where they intermingled in some places with the ancient Mongolian populace. In this way they formed the ancient Turkic, Turanian or Ural-Altaic ethnic group, the largest part of which was made up of Subareans, Dahae, Huns and Avars. All these peoples had a common custom which was the raising of horses. These peoples lived in tribal unions under a Khan or Kagan. The Khan ruled over the equestrian empire. All these peoples were interrelated, linguistically and racially. Such empires were the different Hun Empires, the Avar Empire, the Parthian Empire and the Kok-Turk Empire of the 5th century. This last mentioned empire in a short existence brought many significant changes to the history of Europe. First they took over the territory of the strong Varkuns who were forced to leave their land and settle in the Carpathian Basin in the 6th century. After the Varkuns (Avars) settled in the Carpathian Basin they conquered the empire of the Onugors which was established by Irnik, the son of Atilla. This conquest toot place between 570 and 620 A.D. The attacks of the Avars pushed the Subareans to the south of the Caucasus.

     The Arab advance collided with this not completely settled and not unified Subarean resistance. The Subareans defended themselves against the Arabs but, in spite of all their efforts, this resistance against the Arabs could not be successful because they could not defend themselves against a fanatic, well-organized world power. The Arabs advanced slowly toward the north and forced the people who lived on this territory to flee. The Arab conquest was directed against the Subarean, Armenian, Hun, Uz, Greek, and Persian people with the greatest fanaticism.

     In the northern part of Caucasia, lived the warlike Kazar people. Kazaria was formed in A.D. 680, when the Kazars conquered the Onugor Empire. In the Kazar Empire, in great numbers, lived Persians and refugees from the Chorezm who were also forced out of their homeland by the Arabs. These people could only flee to the west because to the east the Caspian Sea was in the way. These refugees found refuge in a plateau in the mountains. Many of them surrendered to the Arabs but that meant that the men became slaves and eunuchs and the girls went into the harem. That was the fate of a giaour (non-believer). The desperate populace tried to resist whenever they could but when the local resistance was overcome, the revenge was terrible. Therefore everyone who was able to, fled their land in a northwest direction to the Kuban river territory. This was an immeasurable area of swamplands where the Arab soldiers were scared to follow. It was also known as the Meotis Marsh.

    The refugees increased their numbers during their stay in the marshes. The power of the refugees developed quickly. The neighboring states were forced to acknowledge them. A big secrecy surrounded them. Nobody knew them yet their language was the old language which they used when they lived in the Caucasus and the territory south of the Black Sea. Historians called them different names such as Uz, As, Chus, Ghus, and Turk and finally agreed to call them a Turkic people.

    There are three very important data in the Arab sources concerning the Magyars. All three sources describe the same events in the same way so they must be acknowledged. These sources are: the Bal'ami chronicles, published by the Russian Academy in 1844, the Baladhuri chronicles, published in Germany in 1866, under the name Futuh al-Buldan and the Ibn-al-Athir chronicles, published in Cairo in 1921. All three are Arab works written in the Middle Ages. In these works, the most important note in connection with the Magyars is the section labelled "Al-laks" territory. This location is south of the Caucasus on the western part of the one-time Armenia, between Azerbaijan and Asia Minor. According to the writings, this territory has a plain, a mountain and two rivers. One river is called Samur and the other Shabiran. All three sources write the same history and describe the geography of the area in the same way. On this territory, we have two places where there are two rivers and a plain. One of the possibilities is that this is the source of the Euphrates and the Tigris. The second is that it is the rivers Kur and Ruzsa which are now called Cyrus and Araxes. It makes no difference which it is because the distance between the two locations is about a hundred miles. Only one mountain range separates the two. From the Hungarian point of view it is especially important that the neighboring territory to the northwest is Kuban or Meotis.

     Marwan, the commander of the Arab army in the northern territories was involved in suppressing a very serious revolution which lasted from A.D. 735 to 743, occupying all the Arab armies. Revolutions against the Arab occupation occurred daily, but this revolution spread to a very extended territory and the center of the revolution was in the Al-laks territory. The name of the leader of the Al-laks territory, according to the Arab writings, was Upas-Ibn-Madar. Ibn after the name denoted the nation the individual came from. This meant that Upas came from the Madar or Magyar nation. There is no doubt that the here-mentioned Madar people, or the Mazar (Matzal) people mentioned by Byzantine historians, is the same people which appeared in this territory of Meotis, a few decades later, as a nation calling itself Magyar. There is no doubt that those letters "z .... tz .... d" are historians’ rendering of the Magyar "gy" writes Zakar, and which the Latin writers have to write with two letters "gy" to represent the sound. In the ancient Magyar runic script there was a single letter to render the sound "gy". Because the Western nations did not have this sound in their alphabet, the transliteration resulted in distortions. Zakar did not find an exact replica in the Árpád era of a name such as Upas, but the Magyars have several Opos. It is possible that the Arab name Upas is an Arab distortion or that the present Magyar name Opos is the result of historical progression. If that is so then Upas could have been an ancestor of Árpád. These suppositions seem to be supported by the Arab sources. The Arab sources write that when Marwan, the commander of the Arab army in the northern territory, after a long war was finally able to overcome the territory of Al-laks, Upas-Ibn-Madar, with his remaining men, in A.D.739, closed himself into his castle which Marwan encircled and began to attack. When the situation became hopeless, Upas-Ibn-Madar, with the remainder of his men, at night broke out of his castle and broke through the Arab ring and fled north to the Kazar king towards the Meotis Moor. When Upas arrived at Meotis, he took the leadership and organized the fugitives into a unified group. In that way Dentumagyaria came into existence. In a short time, it became a considerable factor in this territory.[27]

     Contemporary Byzantine sources called the people of Dentumagyaria, Uz and Alans. The Old Slav sources called them the Sabirs, and made a distinction between the Kazars and the Onugors. In A.D. 751, they took part in the Kazar-Arab war as an independent state. Here we have to mention the inside struggle of the Arab Empire which cut the empire finally in two. The Western Arab Empire, when they separated, became independent with its center in Cordova. The Eastern Arab empire, unified with new annexed territories, gave up Damascus as its center and chose Baghdad to be the center. This inside struggle of the empire, for a long period of time, weakened the Arab imperialism which up till then had remained unified. This inside weakening gave more hope for the states under their yoke, and these states sent an envoy to the Kazars to persuade them to go into a war against the Arabs. The Kazar regiments attacked the Arabs from three different directions. The Subareans, who were in Meotis, joined the western Kazar regiment. This regiment speedily re-conquered from the Arabs their former territories. Furthermore, they re-conquered the one time Subarean capital which the Greek and Roman sources call Gudea. Mansur, the Arab governor of this territory fell in the battle. The new governor went over to the side of the Kazars, so the Kazars left him in his position as ruler of this territory within the Kazar union.

    With this the Kazars ended their war against the Arabs but it was not ended from the side of the Subareans who would not give back their territories to the Arabs. When the Arabs of Baghdad finally overcame their inside struggle, they took back Damascus from the Subareans and unified their power. Yazid-Ibn-Usayd al-Sulami began to re-conquer the territories for the Arabs, from the Subareans. In the war which started in A.D.755, the Subareans began to lose ground. The Subarean populace was forced to flee again. One part of the populace fled to the east towards the Caspian Sea territory. The other part joined with the Subarean soldiers who retreated into the Meotis Marsh. This retreat was a complete exodus. A1-Tabari, an Arab source, mentions 50,000 as the number who fled to Meotis. This was the second Subarean wave to take refuge in the Meotis marsh.

    When the Arabs re-conquered the northern territories, they reinforced the peace with the Kazars by a marriage which took place in A.D.758. but the Kazar princess died in childbirth in A.D. 759 and, soon after that, the baby also died. The trust was broken on the part of the Kazars and they decided to make another war against the Arabs. The Subareans from Meotis, fought independently against the Arabs. The sources called the army commander Astarchan, but Zakar writes that this is not a name but a rank in the army. It originates from Uz-tarchon which means, Uz commander. This Astarchan cannot be the earlier mentioned Upas-Ibn-Madar because 20 years had passed. It is probable that it was his son.[28]  The Choresmians fought alongside the Kazars against the Arabs. The Subarean army in a short time reconquered the Al-laks territory but we have no further information about the war. However, we know that, at the end of the war, the Arabs were attacking the borders of Byzantium and they re-conquered the northern territories from the Subareans. At this time another group of fugitives fled into Meotis. In A.D. 764, the Meotis Subarean state came into completion. In time, their numbers were too many for the territory to support them and many of them, now called Magyars, migrated to Lebédia and from there to Etelköz, between the rivers Szeret and Prut. It is from Etelktöz that the Magyars of Árpád made their final journey back to their homeland in the Carpathian Basin.

     One of the many unanswered questions in Hungarian history concerns the language of the homecoming Magyars of Árpád. Numerous historians have noted that the Arpád Magyars spoke a Turkish language. The anthropological research also seems to prove that the majority of the people belonged to the brachycephalic Turkic group. I use the term "Turkic" rather than "Turkish" because the people of Turkey developed much later than the leading nation of the Magyars, the Subareans or Megyers, who were also brachycephalic. The waves of refugees from Mesopotamia, who lived in the Caucasus and the territories of Lake Van and Lake Urami, and also north of the Black Sea territory and in the territory of Meotis, formed new states throughout the millennia.

    Kálmán Gosztonyi deciphered the name of the Turks from the Sumerian TUR-UG (a break-away people). Even today, in the Hungarian language the meaning of "tőr" (Sumerian TUR) is "to break". It appears that the Turkic languages were a combination of the Sumerian language and the languages of different nations who lived in Caucasia, which later became known as the Caucasian language group. The people whose language developed as described were the majority among the homecoming Árpád people whom historians have labeled as "Turkish". They all spoke the same basic language with dialectical differences. There were two reasons for the differences in dialect. One was the enormous territory on which they lived in smaller groups and the other was the fact that they were joined from time to time by waves of refugees from their former territories.

    When the Kazar Empire made peace with the Arabs, the Subareans continued to defend their territories against the Arabs who finally overcame them. The Subareans who were forced out of their homes, reorganized themselves into a unified strong nation together with the "Turks" who for centuries were refugees from the Sumerian territories and lived in the Caucasus. This is the explanation for the fact that the homecoming Magyars had different languages. One of these languages was the Sumerian language which went through many changes and which Gosztonyi called the Turkic language. The language of the Megyer nation was the Subarean or Magyar language which was the same as the language which was spoken by the ancient populace in the Carpathian Basin. With this observation of Kálmán Gosztonyi it seems that the confusion about the origin of the language of the Magyars and the ancient populace is now resolved. It is now clear why Anonymus and the author of the TARIHI UNGURUSZ state that, when they arrived in the Carpathian Basin, the Magyars found a people speaking their language. It is also clear that the military superiority of the homecoming Magyars can be explained by the fact that, as Sabirs (Subareans), for many years, they had the chance to exercise their military tactics against the Arabs.

     The research of Etelka Toronyi, Zsófia Torma, John Dayton and others, proves that civilization began in Central Europe and spread south to Mesopotamia and Egypt, not the reverse. The people who migrated to the south and southeast were later forced to abandon their new territories as Zakar has presented and returned to their homeland in the Carpathian Basin. The wheel has come full circle. It is time to reconsider.