Somogyvári Ágnes – V. Székely György szerk.: „In terra quondam Avarorum…” Ünnepi tanulmányok H. Tóth Elvira 80. születésnapjára - Archaeologia Cumanica 2. (Kecskemét, 2009)
Fodor István: Van-e honfoglalás kori emlékanyagunkban „friss belső-ázsiai beütés"?
FODOR ISTVÁN: VAN-E HONFOGLALAS KORI EML EK ANYAGUNK BAN ... RÉVÉSZ 1996 Révész László: A karosi honfoglalás kori temetők. - Die Gräberfelder von Karos aus der Landnahmezeit. Miskolc. RÓNA-TAS 1986 Róna-Tas András: A magyar rovásírás és a Mátyás-kori humanizmus. - The Hungarian Runic Scropt and Humanism in the Age of King Matthias. Néprajz és Nyelvtudomány 29-30 (1985-1986) 173-179. RÓNA-TAS 1995 Róna-Tas András: A magyarság korai története. (Tanulmányok.) Szeged. (Magyar Őstörténeti Könyvtár, 9.) SINOR 1967 Sinor Dénes: Történelmi hipotézis a magyar nyelv történetében. NyÉ LVIII, 195-200. SZAVINOV 1984 CaBiiHOB.fl. E: Hapodbi IOMHOÜ Cuóupu e dpeenemwpKCKyw anoxy. /IemiHrpafl SZAVINOV 1994 CaBiiHOB, fl. E: Tocydapcmea u Kynbmypoeene3 na meppumopuu IOMHOÙ Cuóupu e anoxy panneeo cpedneeeKoebH. KeMepeBO TALLGREN 1917 Tallgren, A. M.: Collection Tovostine des antiquités préhistoriques de Minoussinsk conservées chez le Dr. Karl Hedman a Vasa. Helsingfors. TALLGREN 1928 Tallgren, A. M.: Die russischen und asiatischen Sammlungen im Nationalmuseum Finnlands. ESA, III, 141-167. TYEPLOUHOV 1929 Ten/ioyxoB, A. C.: Onbim K/iaccu(ßuKau,uu dpeeHux MemannmecKux Kynbmyp MwHycMHCKoro Kpafl. (B KpaTKOM M3/io>KeHMM.) Maiepna/ibi no 3THorpa(J)MM,T. 4, Bbin. 2. /lemiHrpafl, 41-62. VÉKONY 2002 Vékony Gábor: Magyar őstörténet - magyar honfoglalás. Budapest. István Fodor Are there „fresh Inner Asian features" in the archaeological material of the 10th century Hungarians? Nándor Fettich, the well known Hungarian archaeologist was the first to suggest in his study of 1931 that belt and horse harness decorations of the Tovostin Collection (collection was situated in Helsinki and included find material from the Minusinsk Basin) show similar features with metal decorations found in Hungary. The latter objects came to light in Avarian and 10th century Hungarian sites. Fettich compared certain pieces of the collection (fig. 1) with decorations from 10th century Hungarian sites of Kenézlő (fig. 2) and Ókécske (fig. 3). In his opinion 10th century Hungarian finds were made in the East, in the Dnieper Region, and the Minusinsk finds represent an earlier stage of the same culture. He also suggested that after mid-9th century an Inner Asian Turkish ethnic group joined Hungarians. As a consequence,"fresh Asian features" appeared in the Hungarian archaeological material. Fettich's opinion was supported by the famous turkologist of the age, Gyula Németh. In his book published in 1930 he originated Hungarian tribal name Kürt from the Jenisei Region Turkish language and suggested that the runic writing of the Siculs (Székelys) can be connected with the Jenisei Turkish writing. However, archaeological material of the Jenisei Kirgizians of the Minusinsk Basin does not show any similarity with the 10th century Hungarian finds. Similar features are common in the whole nomadic culture of the steppe. Pattern of the golden bowl from Kopjony (fig. 4) is very far from the Hungarian material, similarly to the horse harness plates decorated with masques and tendrils (fig. 5), or Kirgizian belt applications (fig. 7) and decorations from Turk burials in the Altai-Sayan Region (fig. 8). Analogies of the Hungarian decorations are known from the Saltovo Culture and from the vicinities of Kiev (fig. 6), as it had been always agreed by most of the researchers. It is true that there are connections with the material of the Minusinsk Basin, like deer shaped decorations of Scythian type. However, these connections come not from direct relations, but can be explained with the phenomenon of the so-called "Scythian Renaissance" observed in the 9th-10th cent, in the whole steppe zone. So, we can assume that there are no fresh Asian impacts in the 10th century Hungarian archaeological material, which could attest to the joining of an Inner Asian ethnic group. Today linguistic arguments of Gy.Németh cannot be taken into consideration any more. 71
