Roman Catholics from Romania - csango W E L C O M E on the  "Dumitru Mărtinaş" Roman-Catholic Association site. Chromosomal Diversity in Europe 1 READ HERE Mitochondrial genome diversity in two Hungarian populations 2 READ HERE Under 3% of Hungarians are descendants of conquerors from Asia 3 READ HERE

The truth about the peoples so-called "Csango's"

On

the

17th

of

March

2001,

the

Statute

and

the

Coordination

Committee

of

the

association

were

publicly

debated

in

the

presence

of

approximately

1000

representatives

coming

from

40

Moldavian

localities.

As

a

result

of

the

unanimous

vote

of

the

participants,

„Dumitru

Mărtinaş”

Association

was

authorized

to

represent

and

to

defend

the

interests

of

those

265,000

Moldavian

Romano-Catholics,

regarding

problems

about

these

communities

past,

present

and

future.

Our

association,

through

its

entire

activity,

obeys

and

promotes

the

principles

and

values

admitted

by

the

European

Union,

including

those

related

to

the

defense

(protection)

of

identity and to the preservation of the cultural specificity.

Confronted

with

the

various

tendencies

of

distorting

the

truth,

which

(mistakenly)

erroneously

present

the

community

of

the

Roman-Catholics

of

Moldavia

as

an

ethnical

minority,

giving

it

different

names

as

“Csangos”,

”Magyars-Csangos”

or

“Csangos-Magyars”,

the

Roman-Catholics

Association

“Dumitru

Mărtinaş”

shows

its

disponibility

for

a

dialogue

reflecting

the

whole

reality.

By

the

authorized

voice

(spokesmen)

of

our

association,

the

265.000

of

Roman-Catholics

in

Moldavia

are

at

your

disposal

with

clear

arguments

demonstrating

that

the

name

“Changes”

represents

an

abuse

permanently

fired

by

the

false

and

distorted

statements,

having

the

desire

of

sustaining,

in

spite

of

all

realities,

that,

in

Romania,

the

rights

of

these

communities are broken.

In

this

context,

the

reaffirmation

of

the

truth

that

the

majority

of

the

members

of

our

community

didn’t

and

don’t

consider

themselves

“Csangos”,

but

Roman-

Catholics.

Taking

this

into

account,

they

can

not

be

considered

an

ethnical

minority

as

the

Hungarians,

the

Germans,

the

Jews,

the

Slovakians,

the

Greeks,

the

Italians,

the

Bulgarians,

the

Turks

from

Romania.

That

is

why,

the

Association

of

the

Roman-Catholics

“Dumitru

Mărtinaş”

invites

you

respectfully

to

consider

an

“ethnical

minority”

submitted

by

a

so-

called

“assimilation”,

having

no

bounds

to

reality,

no

rights and freedom.

There

is

a

way

of

tackling

the

problem

of

the

Roman-Catholics

from

Moldavia

and

this

belongs

to

the

Hungarian

side,

which

starts

by

using

the

writings

of

an

Szekler

Catholic

missionary,

Zold

Peter,

who

wrote

in

1781.

Coming

in

Moldavia,

he

introduced

a

linguistic

innovation,

“Csangos-Magyars”

denoting

the

Roman-

Catholics’

community

and

thus,

creating

a

false

term.

Starting

with

that

moment,

the

Hungarian

investigators

begun

to

search

the

origins

of

this

imaginary

ethnical

group,

even

speaking

about

the

“csangos”

of

Cumanian,

Cabarian,

Pazinakian,

Hun

or

Hungarian

origin.

These

theories

carefully

avoid

the

possibility

for

these

Moldavian

Catholics

to

belong

to

the

Romanian

people,

avoid

traditional

elements

that

obviously

integrate

them in this cultural area, being considered as result of the assimilation of the Romanian majority.

Treating

things

like

this,

the

Hungarian

side

invariably

reaches

conclusions

having

had

in

mind

from

the

very

beginning

that

in

Moldavia

there

is

an

ethnical

minority

of

Hungarian

origin,

a

mysterious,

exotic

and

fascinating

one,

the

“Csangos”,

which

is

in

danger

of

extinction

because

of

the

Catholic

Church

and

of

the

Romanian State.

Unfortunately,

the

European

organizations

were

caught

in

the

traps

smartly

built

by

the

Hungarian

propagandistic

system

and,

without

previously

starting

a

scientific

research

of

the

problem,

they

rushed

to

endorse

documents

to

“save”

the

supposed

minority.

This

was

the

way

to

reach

the

1521

Recommendation

that

mentions

the

“Csangos”

and

their

“Csango”

language,

considering

them

of

a

certain

Hungarian

origin

and,

only

at

the

end

of

the

document,

there

is

made

the

proposal

of

“researching

and

cataloguing

the

linguistic and traditional elements” for these.

Such

paradoxes

could

have

been

avoided,

if

there

had

been

the

willingness

of

listening

to

other

arguments

than

those

of

the

Hungarian

part.

It

would

have

been

noticed

that

the

Catholic

Moldavians

are

and

have

always

considered

themselves

as

being

Romanians.

There

also

could

have

been

observed

that,

since

1781

to

present,

the

Hungarian

part

has

constantly

been

warning

about

“the

impending

danger

of

the

assimilation

of

the

Hungarians

from

Moldavia”,

calling

that

region

as

“the

great

cemetery

of

the

Hungarian

nation”.

If

things

were

like

this,

there

would

rise

a

question:

how

did

the

supposed

minority

manage

to

survive

and

increase

its

number?

How

did

it

have

equality

of

rights

with

the

majority

for

more

than

300

years?

Would

all

these

have

been

possible

in

the

context

of

the

so

much

denounced

assimilation

policy

of

the

Romanian

state

for

which

nobody ever have brought any reliable proof ?

The

Hungary’s

desire

to

expand

its

influence

in

the

Eastern

side

of

the

Carpathians

manifested

variously

in

time.

Very

important

was

the

assuming

of

the

role

of

a

state

with

a

missionary

mission.

For

this,

the

Hungarian

Catholic

Church

made

effort

to

impose

its

supremacy

in

Moldavia.

The

argument

brought

by

the

Hungarian

missionaries

in

front

of

their

Polish

or

Italian

competitors,

and

also

in

front

of

the

Vatican,

was

the

idea

that

the

Moldavian

Catholic

parishioners

are

Hungarians

and,

thus,

they

need

a

Hungarian

clerical

hierarchy.

After

the

year

1781,

together

with

the

frenzied

research

of

the

origins

of

the

supposed

minority

of

“Changos”,

whenever,

when

the

historical

background

allowed,

there

was

a

direct

tendency

transferring

these

population

to

Magyars,

ignoring

both

these

community

members’

desire

to

be

considered

Romanians

and

also

scientific truth.

An

eloquent

example

is

offered

by

the

post

IInd

War

period,

when

the

Moldavian

Roman-Catholics

were

under the huge pressure of the communist system, a pressure of assuming the Magyar identity.

The

process

of

“building

the

communist

society”

had

the

aim

of

“cleaning”

the

Romanians’

consciousness

and,

in

this

way,

of

controlling

the

society.

The

leading

circles,

under

the

direct

protection

of

Moscow,

developed a policy of emphasizing the nationalism of the ethnical minorities.

As

a

part

of

this

policy,

an

important

role

was

given

to

the

instruction

in

the

mother

tongue,

and

the

excesses

which

had

nothing

in

common

with

the

real

situation.

We

are

speaking

about

education

in

the

Hungarian

language.

In

Transylvania,

it

was

the

result

of

undeniable

ethnical

realities,

while,

in

Moldavia

this

far-fetched

constraint

was

a

political

action

of

undermining

those

communities

in

spite

of

the

fact

that

they

declared

themselves

as

a

population

of

“Romanian

origin,

nationality

and

citizenship”

for

the

censuses.

The

people’s

attitude

was

presently

confirmed

by

their

refusal

to

attend

Hungarian

schools,

insistently

asking

for

education

in

the

Romanian

language.

These

are

the

cases

in

Luizi

Călugăra,

Cleja,

Pustiana

or

Nicolae

Bălcescu,

mentioning

only

the

important

localities,

which also today, are confronted with such problems.

In

fact,

reading

all

this

material,

you

will

be

able

to

recognize

other

similarities

between

the

tendency

of

adopting

the

Hungarian

identity

of

the

50s

and

the

imaginary

“campaign

of

saving

the

Csangos”,

which

we

are facing today.

If

the

idea

of

an

instruction

in

the

Hungarian

language

was

of

Soviet

origin,

its

practice

found

embittered

supporters

in

the

Hungarian

communists

settled

in

Transylvania.

These

emissaries,

confronted

with

the

refusal

of

the

population,

put

pressure

and

adopted

methods

of

“briefing”

of

the

Roman-Catholics

regarding

the

national

problem,

which,

according

to

the

methods

of

the

50s,

probably

the

darkest

and

murderous

period

of

the

Romanian

communism,

meant,

in

fact,

constraints

and

indoctrination

in

order

to

accept

this

policy.

This

method

also

aimed

the

breaking

of

the

relationship

between

parishioners

and

priests,

the

representatives

of

the

Catholic

Church

in

Moldavia

being

the

best

defenders

of

the

Romanian

Catholics’

identity and feared opponents of the communist system.

Coming

out

that

the

foundation

of

new

Hungarian

schools,

initially

adopted,

has

none

of

the

expected

results,

they

got

to

the

abusive

method

of

changing

the

Romanian

schools

in

Hungarian

language

schools,

allowing their artificial development.

Following

the

same

policy,

that

time’s

authorities

also

adopted

the

idea

of

teaching

uneducated

adults

in

the

Hungarian

language

too,

facing

the

people’s

refusal

in

this attempt.

The

above

-

mentioned

methods

perfectly

matched

the

Communist

Party’s

latest

propaganda

innovation

the

solving

of

the

problem

of

nationalities.

That

policy

had

nothing

in

common

with

offering

a

real

protection

for

these,

having,

in

fact,

the

role

of

imposing

the

party’s

control

using

ethnical

manipulation

and,

finally,

ending

with massive immigration of the true ethnical minorities.

This

is

the

moment

about

which

various

people

sustain

to

be

used

today

as

an

example.

These

rapporteurs

proceed

to

a

terrible

misleading,

talking

about

the

50s

as

about

a

period

where

there

was

“possibility”

of

studying

the

Hungarian

language

in

some

Moldavian

schools,

“possibility”

later

limited

by

the

nationalist

communist

campaign, as they say.

Those

who

treat

things

like

this

forget

about,

don’t

know

or

purposefully

ignore

the

fact

that

the

so

called

“possibility”

of

studying

at

the

Hungarian

schools

was

a

Soviet

imposal

with

no

connection

to

realities

and

followed

by

the

whole

series

of

constraints

specific

to

totalitarian

regime.

Also,

they

deny

the

fact

that

the

Moldavian

Roman-Catholics

strongly

declared

their

Romanian

identity,

constantly

refusing

to

attend

Hungarian

schools.

Further

more,

the

Hungarian

language

not

being

the

Moldavian

Catholics’

mother

tongue,

the

pupils’

school

results

were

somewhere

between

satisfying

and

insufficient.

The

communist

regime

was

also

put

in

the

situation

of

bringing

Hungarian

teachers

to

teach

Hungarian

but

who

couldn’t

almost

at

all

speak Romanian and were not able to communicate with the pupils.

A

forgotten

truth

was

the

one

that

not

the

communist

system

abolished

the

Hungarian

schools,

but

they

themselves

imposed

them.

They

naturally

disappeared,

each

of

them

surviving

for

only

some

years,

being

a

proof of the pitiable failure of a preposterous experiment.

Europe

is

preparing

itself

to

become

part

of

a

family

with

other

outlooks

and

with

a

new

life

style.

Unfortunately,

in

this

context,

too,

some

consider

timely

to

bring

back

to

life

phantoms

of

the

past,

coming

back to the same obstinate ideas, a bit changed and wearing the footprint of our time’s ways of expressing.

After

the

year

1989,

invoking

the

legislation

regarding

the

minorities

protection,

there

started

a

new

campaign

of

considering

the

Moldavian

Catholic

community

as

“the

most

Eastern

and

the

oldest

constituent

of

the

Magyar

nation”.

Following

the

Hungarian

missionaries

of

the

period

between

the

16th

and

18th

centuries,

the

19th

century

Hungarian

researches

and

the

communist

emissaries

who

tried

the

adoption

of

the

Hungarian

citizenship

for

the

Moldavians

Catholics

at

the

middle

of

the

last

century,

now,

a

new

generation of “apostles of Hungarian identity” have tried their methods on our community.

We

shall

only

mention

some

of

the

aggression

directed

towards

the

Romanian

identity

of

the

Roman

Catholics

in

Moldavia,

just

for

you

to

be

offered

an

image

about

the

psychological

pressure

given

to

this

community

by

a

small

group

of

people,

who

had

never

claimed

their

Hungarian

origins

until

they

were

given

a

financial

stimulus,

a

material

one

or

one

consisting

in

tending

them

to

studies

in

Hungary.

These

are

different

from the Magyar people of Transylvania, who have always declared their national identity.

Thus,

some

for

Hungarian

associations

were

founded,

having

a

number

of

members

as

large

as

the

sum

of

their

members,

which,

in

spite

of

the

fact

that

they

never

obtained

the

right

to

represent

the

Catholic

community

from

Moldavia,

they

started

to

speak

in

its

Behalf

in

front

of

the

Romanian

institutions,

the

European

forums

and

the Catholic Church.

But

which

are

the

main

ideas

promoted

by

the

militants

of

the

so

called

campaign

of

saving

the

Moldavian Csangos.

The

first

one,

a

strange

one,

is

that

the

tackling

of

the

problem

of

the

Moldavian

Catholics

in

an

European

manner

would

require

the

ignoring

of

the

discussion

about

their

origins

if

this

leads

to

the

conclusion

that

the

members

of

the

community

are

Romanians.

But

the

same

problem

of

the

ethnical

origins

is

not

avoided

any

longer

when

some

people

want

to

declare

everybody

as

belonging

to

the

Magyar

nation,

calling

them

an

ethnical

minority who had rights that should be obeyed, but which, in fact, are broken by nobody.

This

is

the

source

of

the

accusations

that

the

Romanian

state

and

the

Catholic

Church

would

develop

a

policy

of

assimilation

of

the

Csangos,

refusing

their

access

to

the

religious

and

educational

assistance

in

the

Hungarian language, insistently asked for, but without any real support, by the for – Hungarian associations.

These,

embracing

the

thesis

of

the

Hungarian

origin

of

the

Moldavian

Catholics,

using

different

grievances

and

complaints,

wave

the

slogan

of

obeying

the

human

rights

and

the

minorities

rights,

using

various

logical

makeshifts,

hoping,

not

to

improve

the

living

standard

of

the

Moldavian

Catholics

or

to

preserve

their

national

identity,

but

to

make

known

the

idea

that

Romania

is

not

an

European

propensity

country,

but

a

state

incapable

of

admitting

and

obeying

the

rights

of

its

citizens

who

belong

to

the

different

types

of

minorities.

So,

we

find

ourselves

in

the

situation

of

facing

associations

existing

only

because

of

their

2

or

3

members

but

which

approach

a

diversity

of

problems,

starting

with

external

affairs

analysis

and

ending

with

putting

forward

suppositions

in

fields

totally

strange

to

them

(as

history,

linguistics,

ethnography

etc.),

organize

press

conferences,

present

communiqués,

give

advice

to

the

Romanian

state,

to

the

Catholic

Church,

and

the

most

and

really

strange

thing,

to

the

Romanian

Romano

Catholic

population

from

Moldavia,

about

how

they

should

naturally

accept

the

Magyar

origin

of

the

members

of

this

community.

In

other

words,

they

ask

us

to

ignore

that

the

self

identified

and

self

declared

“Csango

Magyar”

belongs

to

a

Romanian

family

with

parents,

grandparents

and

great

grandparents

who

considered

themselves

and

declared

themselves

as

being

Romanians.

By

virtue

of

this

thinking,

we

should

accept

the

idea

of

the

Hungarian

origin

of

the

so

called

Csangos

and

to

give

rights

to

a

minority

which

doesn’t

exist,

with

the

more

Western

variants

“affirmative methods”, “positive discrimination”.

The

for

Magyar

circles

speak

a

lot

about

the

assimilation

policy

of

the

Romanian

state

and

of

the

Roman

Catholic

Church,

about

the

pressure

the

population

is

under

because

of

wishing

to

declare

the

membership

to

the

Hungarian

nation,

but

they

never

speak

about

the

methods

used

to

lure

the

few

hundreds

of

new

members

for

“the

cause

of

the

Magyars

in

Moldavia”.

Those

associations

always

forget

to

mention

that

they

overwhelm

people

with

material

help

and

financial

support

“to

bring

them

back

in

the

middle

of

the

Hungarian

nation”

and

they

say

no

word

about

the

repeated

frauds

committed

when

drawing

up

the

list

of

signatures

on

applications

for

using

the

Hungarian

language

in

schools

and

churches.

In

these

conditions,

we

ask

the

question:

what

kind

of

freedom

of

consciousness

is

this

and

how

reliable

is

this

kind

of

self-

identification?

In

the

given

context,

it

is

interesting

the

approach

of

the

results

of

1992

census

by

these

associations

when

95%

of

the

Moldavian

Catholics

declared

themselves

as

being

Romanian.

The

Hungarian

groups

developed

a

large

campaign

of

contesting

the

results

of

the

consensus,

sustaining

that

they

wore

falsified

by

the

agents

who

refused

to

record

some

of

the

Catholics

as

being

“Csangos”

or

“Magyars”.

We

mention

that

these

interpretations

are

based

on

later

testimonies,

after

the

year

1992

and

they

come

from

a

small

group

of

people

who

forgot

that

in

the

moment

of

the

census

they

had

no

reaction,

although

they

would

have

had

at

least the possibility of not signing the questionnaire considered untruthfully filled in.

The

press

related

that,

for

the

census

of

2002,

the

for

Hungarian

organizations

adopted

foreseeing

methods,

even

directing

some

conflicting

episodes

in

order

to

be

later

able

to

dispute

the

possible

unfavorable results.

In

spite

of

all

these,

after

12

years

of

propagandistic

pressures

of

the

for

Hungarian

groups,

the

Moldavian

Roman

Catholics

understood

that

they

had

again

the

right

of

self-identification,

declaring

themselves,

repeated

by,

Romanians

in

a

percent

of

95,7.

This

percent,

as

well

as

other

data

(information)

used

here,

refer

to the population of Bacău, who we consider representative for the situation in entire (the whole) Moldavia.

Thus,

in

2002,

in

Bacău

County,

from

the

entire

number

of

706.623

inhabitants,

119.618

declared

themselves

as

being

Roman

Catholics.

Reminding

you

that

not

all

Hungarians

are

Romano

Catholics,

we

mention

that

in

the

same

county,

at

the

last

census,

4317

inhabitants

were

registered

as

Hungarians,

but

among

these,

2720

can

not

be

taken

into

consideration

because

they,

unquestionably,

belong

to

the

Magyar

minority

from

Romania,

living

in

Ghimeş

Făget

commune

and,

from

an

ecclesiastic

point

of

view,

they

belong

to

Alba

Iulia

Archbishopric.

The

conclusion

is,

that

1597

are

Hungarians

to

whom

we

can

add

a

number

of

796

persons

who

declared

themselves

“Csangos”.

Thus,

we

get

the

entire

number

of

2393

persons,

who

could

constitute

the

target

group

for

the

for

Hungarian

associations,

but

this

figure

is

also

irrelevant

because

we

have

to

skip

those

people

belonging

to

the

other

religions

than

the

Roman

Catholic

one

(specific

for

the

so

called

“Csangos”).

Also,

the

above

mentioned

number

has

to

be

lowered

by

excluding

the

Hungarian

people

who

came

in

Moldavia

in

the

20th

century,

most

of

them

intellectuals

established

in

towns,

who

cannot

be

part

of

the

“Csangos’

problem”

and

can’t

be

helpful

in

bringing

arguments

by

the

for

Hungarian

groups,

as

well

as

helpless

for

them

are

those,

who

declared

Themselves

as

“Csangos”,

but

consider

the

Romanian

their

mother

tongue

which

they

want

to

learn

at

school

and

to

use

in

churches.

The

1992

statistics

indicate

the

proportion

of

the

latest

mentioned

situation:

from

a

number

of

2062

“Csangos”

nationally

declared,

1489

consider

their

mother tongue the Romanian, and only 403, the Hungarian language.

From

the

data

previously

presented

results

that,

from

119.618

Roman

Catholics

in

Bacău

county,

114.505

(

i.

e.

95,72%)

self

identified

as

Roman

Catholics,

and

those

2393,

who

declared

themselves

as

“Hungarians”

or

“Csangos”

and

who

could

be

of

any

interest

for

the

“Csangos’

problem”,

represent

only

2,00%

of

the

community and only 0,33% of the whole county population.

We

mention

that,

in

villages

and

communes,

those

“Hungarians”

and

“Csangos”

don’t

establish

compact

communities,

but

they

are

scattered,

presenting

almost

similar

percentages

as

in

the

general

statistic

table.

For

example,

in

the

two

main

action

centers

of

the

for

Hungarian

associations,

where

the

propagandistic

pressure

and

the

attempts

of

financial

and

material

attraction

have

had

amazing

levels

for

more

than

a

decade,

the

following

situation

is

noticed:

in

Cleja.

From

6903

inhabitants,

declaring

themselves

as

Hungarians,

were

108

(i.

e.

1,56%);

in

Pârjol

commune,

to

which

Pustiana

village

belongs

from

6773

inhabitants,

360

people

declared

themselves

as

Hungarians

(i.

e.

5,31%),

these

being

in

fact

the

highest

percentages

and

the

most

favorable

for

the

associations

and

which

don’t

legitimate

for

the

classes

and

sermons in Hungarian to be allowed in these localities.

If

we

are

to

analyze

the

data

offered

by

the

1992

census

and

to

compare

them

with

those

of

2002,

speaking

about

the

people

considering

themselves

Hungarians

and

“Csangos”,

we

shall

notice

the

following

situation:

in

1992

there

were

4373

Hungarians

and

1137

“Csangos”,

that

is

a

total

of

5510

persons,

and

in

2002

there

were

4317

Hungarians

and

796

“Csangos”,

which

is

a

sum

of

5113

people.

It

is

obvious

that,

in

the

context

a

demographic

diminution

nationally

registered,

there

also

is

a

slight

diminution

of

the

number

of

Magyars

(with

56

people)

and,

in

the

same

time,

a

significant

diminution

of

the

number

of

“Csangos”

(with

341

people),

despite

the

intense

for

Hungarian

propaganda.

These

numbers

have

to

be

interpreted

also

by

talking

into

consideration

the

pressures

of

the

filo

Hungarian

associations,

which

asked

the

population

to

declare

themselves

directly

“Hungarians”,

not

only

“Csangos”,

for

the

census.

To

sustain

this

idea

there

is

a

relevant

example

of

mass

media

in

Bacău

exactly

during

the

census

of

2002.

So,

an

old

man

from

Pustiana,

who,

initially,

declared

himself

“Csango”,

being

influenced

by

his

son

and

daughter

in

law,

changed

his

option

asking

for

registration

as

Hungarian.

The

inhabitants

declared

that

the

dissatisfied

man’s

son

works

for

the

UDMR

branch

in

Miercurea

Ciuc,

and

his

wife

is

the

sister

of

the

President

of

The

Csango

Hungarians

Association

from

Moldova,

the

main

sustainer

of

the

thesis

speaking

about

the

Hungarian

origin

of

the

“Csangos”.

Naturally,

the

results

of

2002

census

are

are

still

too

recent

and

they

are

going

to

be

read

and

analyzed

in

different

ways

from

now

on.

Our

approach

doesn’t

want

to

draw

all

the

possible

conclusions,

which,

we

are

sure

will

be

offered

to

us

soon

by

researches

justified

to

do

it.

We

just

wanted

to

give

a

brief

presentation

of

some

of

the

information

of

the

census,

with

the

purpose

of

emphasizing

that

the

conscious

freedom

and

the

right

of

self

identification

are

not

limited

in

Romania.

In

such

conditions,

the

Roman

Catholics

of

Moldavia

firmly

and

in

a

huge

proportion

express

their

Romanian

identity,

giving,

practically,

a

slight

possibility

of

maneuver

to

those

who,

whishing

to

artificially

extend

the

borders

of

the

Hungarian

nation,

ignore

the

scientific

truths

and

the

desire

of

the

Roman

Catholic

community

groundlessly

speaking

about

the

“problem

of the Csango – Hungarians”, about whose lack of rights they lament in the most possibly hypocrite way.

The

childish

argument,

according

to

which

these

Catholics

would

like

to

declare

themselves

Hungarians

but

they

can’t

for

fear

of

the

state’s

pressure,

is

denied

by

the

fact

that

those

tests

(surveys)

offered

confidentially

for

the

data

given

by

the

people

and

allowed

people

to

declare

any

identity

they

would

have

liked

(for

example,

the

information

of

March

2002

census

was

confirmed

by

an

independent

survey

in

March

April

2002

made

by

The

Urban

and

Regional

Sociology

Center

(CURS)

and

by

Bucureşti

University,

entitled

“The

villages

with

Csangos

from

Moldavia”).

Further

more,

the

Moldavian

Roman

Catholics

never

restrained

themselves

from

overtly

expressing

their

options

regarding

the

Romanian

identity,

even

when

the

historical

conditions were unfavorable for such a gesture.

We

consider

at

least

strange

the

fact

that

the

leaders

of

the

for

Hungarian

associations

never

manage,

even

when

using

forgeries,

to

gather

a

significant

and

constant

number

of

supporters,

the

numbers

inexplicably

fluctuating

between

some

tens

and

a

couple

of

hundreds

of

people,

in

the

conditions

in

which

only

the

population

of

a

commune

counts

some

thousands.

And

this

is

the

case

of

a

community

who

ardently

wishes the introduction of the Hungarian language in churches and schools.

These

claims

ignore

the

strong

and

constant

desire

of

Moldavian

Roman

Catholics

of

being

educationally

and religiously assisted only using the Romanian Language, which all of them speak and understand.

Without

the

population’s

help,

the

for

Hungarian

associations

need

to

adopt

all

kinds

of

forgeries

to

overcome

this

hindrance.

The

most

common

used

method

is

to

assail

the

institutions

of

the

Romanian

state

and

of

the

Catholic

Church

with

a

huge

amount

of

complaints

aiming

the

adoption

of

the

Hungarian

language.

To

hide

the

fact

that

they

are

the

conception

of

the

same

20-30

filo

Hungarians

in

the

area,

they

make

up

lists

of

supporting

signatures.

The

procedure

would

be

normal,

if,

in

actual

fact,

they

didn’t

commit

forgeries

which belong to the area of offences punished by the Criminal Code.

Any

time

the

list

accompanying

the

complaints

were

checked,

the

result

was

they

were

not

well

worked

out.

The

for

-

Hungarians

associations

leaders

promise

all

kind

of

helps

and

facilities

for

the

people

who,

in

exchange,

would

sign

for

confirmation.

Later,

these

tables

are

added

to

the

applications

for

the

adoption

of

the

Hungarian

language

in

school

and

churches.

The

cases

presented

by

the

media

and

by

the

population

are

numerous

and

their

simple

listing

would

be

as

long

as

our

material.

That

is

why

we

shall

give

only

three

examples.

In

the

autumn

of

1997

the

Education

Inspectorate

in

Bacău

received

from

Andras

Beress,

at

that

time

state

secretary

of

UDMR,

a

complaint

signed

by

29

inhabitants

of

Cleja,

who

asked

for

the

“possibility

of

studying

of

the

Hungarian

language

and

literature

in

school”.

Because

of

the

fact

that

the

Inspectorate

had

not

received

an

application

from

the

villagers,

an

investigation

of

the

list

of

signatures

added

to

the

complaint

was

ordered.

It

was

revealed

that,

from

the

29

signatories,

only

eight

had

children

with

the

age

fit

for

school

and

having

the

justification

to

solicitate

such

a

thing.

More

than

this,

the

majority

of

those

names

whose

names

were

on

the

list,

didn’t

even

know

that

they

had

really

signed,

because

Andrei

Duma,

the

leader

of

AMCM

Cleja

and

the

promoter of the complaint, misinformed them, pretending they were signing to get foreign help.

For

the

2002

2003

school

year,

AMCM

pretended

that

classes

in

Hungarian

should

be

introduced,

claiming

that

they

were

speaking

in

the

behalf

of

150

families

of

Cleja

and

Pustiana.

Finally,

it

was

proved

that

only

11

children

in

Cleja

and

12

in

Pustiana,

attend

such

classes

approved

by

the

School

Inspectorate

County.

In

the

same way other institutions could be mislead to offer rights asked by AMCM.

In

April

2001,

the

AMCM

leaders

requested

the

introduction

of

sermons

in

Hungarian

in

Pustiana,

adding

to

the

complaint

a

list

of

253

signatures

supposed

to

belong

to

the

parishioners

in

the

village.

The

Iaşi

Roman

Catholic

Bishopric

Committee

noticed

that

21

people

had

signed

no

applications,

six

had

signed

for

other

purposes

(a

village

doctor,

the

building

of

a

school,

workplaces

in

Hungary)

and

seven

had

solicited

sermons

in

Hungarian,

but

one

had

changed

his

mind.

In

other

64

cases

there

had

been

registered

people

who

hadn’t

even

lived

ever

or

any

longer

in

the

village,

people

with

severe

handicaps,

people

without

religion

or

non

applying

Catholics,

under

aged

people

coming

there

on

holiday,

signatures

twice

registered

in

the

list,

people

declaring they had signed to get material goods.

The

promoters

of

such

action

glaringly

contradict

the

Vatican’s

reglementations,

obeyed

by

the

entire

Catholic

world,

by

bringing

Hungarian

priests

from

Transylvania

and

Hungary

to

solemnize

sermons

in

Iaşi

Bishopric’s

parishes

in

a

foreign

language

for

the

population.

On

the

other

hand,

the

Hungarian

language

media,

which

is

never

too

tired

for

deploring

over

“the

extermination”

“the

Csangos”

were

victims

of,

resort

to

misinformation

about

the

high

Catholic

prelates

using

Hungarian

names

for

them

and

meanly

attacking

their

families.

To

the

misinforming

methods

mentioned

above

we

can

also

add

the

replacing

of

the

traditions

and

the

adoption

of

another

ethnical

belonging,

an

old

historical

procedure.

In

the

autumn

of

2002,

in

Bacău,

at

the

press

conference

organized

by

AMCM,

UDMR

and

the

Embassy

of

Hungary,

the

most

fanatic

speaker

about

the

so

called

Csangos’

Hungarian

origin

was

nobody

else

than

Kallos

Zoltan,

one

of

the

main

participants

at

the

communist

offensive

of

considering

and

changing

the

Moldavian

Catholics

into

Magyars

in

the

period

of

the

50’s.

In

that

time,

the

promoters

of

this

process

realized

that

the

deportment

(costume),

dances

and

songs

of

the

Moldavian

Catholics

had

nothing

in

common

with

the

Magyar

cultural

area.

Consequently,

they

brought

Szekler’s

popular

costumes

for

the

folkloric

ensembles

in

Transylvania

and

songs

from

the

Hungarian

Transylvanian

received

from

the

researchers

of

Cluj

Folklore

Institute.

Not

long

after,

these

came

in

Moldavia

and

collected

the

songs

brought

from

Transylvania

as

a

proof

of

the

Hungarian

origin

of

the

“Csangos”.

Among

the

“experts”coming

from

Cluj

to

Bacău

Area

for

this

so

called

scientific

purpose,

there

was

the

ethnographer

Kallos

Zoltan,

the

one

who,

on

October

24,

2002,

couldn’t

have

been

stopped

from

talking

about

his

endless

scientific activity to collect information about “the Csangos’ folklore”.

But who are the Catholics from Moldavia and why has their problem created so many controversies?

Why do some people try to make them part of the Hungarian nation by calling them “Csangos”?

It

is

right

to

talk

about

the

rights

of

a

community,

ignoring

or

reproving

a

preliminary

scientific

research

of

its origin?

Can

we

ignore

the

Romanian

self

identification

of

more

than

95%

of

the

Moldavian

Roman

Catholics,

giving priority to a few tens of pro – Hungarians?

What

elements

should

we

take

into

consideration

when

speaking

about

identity?

Do

we

rely

only

on

the

simple

declaration

of

a

few

people?

Let

us

not

forget

that

the

law

never

considers

as

a

sufficient

evidence

the

accused’s declaration, even if this one admits the perpetration of the deed.

We

consider

that

the

identity

problem

can

not

be

discussed

about

without

bringing

about

some

main

elements

of

this,

like

those

deriving

from

the

ethnical

belonging.

We

can

not

agree

with

those

who

try

to

accredit

the

false

idea

that

the

debate

upon

the

origin

is

only

an

embezzlement

from

the

obeying

of

the

community

rights.

The

ethnical

belonging,

the

language,

the

history

and

cultural

traditions

representing

the

Moldavian

Catholics’

main

identity

marks,

can

not

be

avoided,

if

the

truth

is

really

searched

for.

From

only

this

point

the

claim

and

the

granting

of

some

rights

(special,

as

those

granted

for

minorities)

can

be

discussed.

As

well,

we

consider

as

groundless

the

based

assertion

regarding

the

Church’s

involvement

in

the

so

called

assimilating

policy

against

“Csango

Hungarians”

having

as

consequence

the

Moldavian

Roman

Catholics’

community

falling

apart.

On

the

contrary,

the

Catholic

Church

promotes

equilibrium

and

harmony

parishioners,

as

it

does

in

the

whole

world.

Statements

as

those

according

to

which

the

Vatican,

by

creating

a

Roman

Catholic

Bishopric

in

Iaşi,

did

nothing

else

than

to

take

part

into

the

process

of

transferring

the

“Csango

Hungarians”

to

the

Romanian

nationality,

prove

not

only

the

serious

lack

of

Christian

spirit,

but

also

a

misunderstanding

of

the

rights

of

people,

because

the

Catholic

Church

reach

the

solution

of

founding

that

bishopric

for

the

very

reason

of

meeting

the

ethnical

and

linguistic

need

in

Moldavia,

which

they

knew

very well and which, until this foundation, could not have been obeyed.

When

sustaining

this,

we

have

in

mind

that

no

international

organism

does

not

want

to

adopt

false

decisions,

considering

the

approaches

of

a

small

group

and

ignoring

the

assertion

of

more

than

95%

of

a

community members, sustained by scientifically confirmed proofs.

We

mentioned

the

Hungarian

historiography

assertions

when

intending

to

demonstrate

the

un

Romanian

origin

of

the

Moldavian

Catholics.

It

is

true

that

the

Romanian

historiography

of

the

beginning

of

the

20th

century

had

the

same

kind

of

challenges,

having

to

pay

later

for

an

indirect

tackling

of

the

problem

and

rather

rising

questions

than

offering

credible

answers.

As

well

as

some

Hungarian

researchers,

some

Romanian

historians

were

mislead

by

the

stereotype

“Catholic

means

Hungarian,

Orthodox

means

Romanian”.

In

the

same

way,

the

terms

“Hungarian”

or

were

used

to

call

people

coming

from

Transylvania,

which

was

called

in

the

past

“The

Hungarian

Country”,

ignoring

the

fact

that

such

names

given

at

that

time

to

some

individuals

or

communities

had

no

ethnical

basis,

but

indicated

the

origin

in

a

certain

geographic

and

political

area.

In

the

same

way,

the

problem

of

bilinguvism

was

superficially

treated,

considering

that

the

use

of

the

Csango

dialect

is

a

satisfactory

argument

for

the

Moldavian

Catholics’

Hungarian

origin,

excluding

the

deeper

elements

that

demonstrate

the

Romanian

origin

of

the

users

of

this

dialect.

These

are

the

reasons

for

which

the

for

Hungarian

associations,

neglecting

the

basic

rules

for

a

historical

research,

falsely

interpret

the

interrogations

of

some

Romanian

historians,

naming

them

as

being

taken

out

of

the

real

context,

as

cogent

proofs of the Moldavian Catholics un – Romanian origin.

In

exchange,

intellectuals

as

professors

Iosif

Petru

M.

Pall

and

Dumitru

Mărtinaş,

coming

among

the

Moldavian

Catholics,

started

demonstrating

with

scientific

arguments

their

Romanian

origin.

This

tendency

is

followed and enlarged today by other researchers who, by their approaches bring the truth closer to us.

The

results

of

their

work

demonstrate

that

the

Moldavian

Roman

Catholics

never

called

themselves

“Csangos”.

More

over,

they

reject

this

term

which

is

considered

ironical,

and

they

adopt

the

term

Romanian

Catholics.

The

situation

is

the

same

even

nowadays,

from

the

beginning

of

the

18th

century

when

Dimitrie

Cantemir registered that the Moldavian Catholics “Have this name referring to nationality and to religion”.

What

more

eloquent

proof

of

their

Romanian

identity

could

they

produce

for

more

than

300

years,

than

the

constant

rejection

and

the

strong

one

of

a

name

as

“Csangos”

given

to

them

by

someone

out

of

their

community with a clear desire of awarding them an ethnical origin strange to them?

We

can

be

more

clear

than

the

pitiable

failure

of

the

linguistic

innovation

of

the

Szekler

priest

Zold

Peter

in

the

very

context

of

this

community

who

never

stop

claiming

their

Romanian

identity?

Maybe

only

the

life

together

of

the

Romanian

Orthodox

and

Catholics,

they

both

of

sharing

both

good

and

bad

things

given

by

an

unlenient

history

for

this

piece

of

land.

They

together

fight

in

all

the

moments

of

national

assertion,

they

together

pay

taxes,

suffer

from

epidemics

and

hunger

brought

by

wars,

the

restrictions

imposed

by

totalitarian

systems

and,

today,

here

they

are

to

overcome

the

restrictions

produced

by

a

too

long

transitory

period.

Unfortunately,

some

people

consider

these

insufficient

and

add

a

new

burden

on

the

community’s

shoulders, trying, again and again, to change their identity.

The

traveling

of

people

from

Transylvania

to

Moldavia

is

a

well

known

phenomenon

which

made

the

relations

between

the

two

provinces

to

be

constant

and

strong.

Of

course,

because

of

the

unfavorable

position

of

the

Transylvania

Romanian

population

until

the

1918

Unification,

the

flux

was

from

the

province

to

Moldavia.

When

the

situation

of

the

Transylvanian

Romanians

became

unbearable,

they

found

refuge

in

Moldavia.

This

is

the

way

the

Catholic

Romanians

came

here,

their

establishment

in

the

area

being

accelerated

and

increased

in

the

18th

century.

While

living

in

Szekler

identity,

which,

automatically,

meant

learning

the

Magyar language and, most of the times, giving up the Romanian names for their Hungarian translations.

That

is

how

we

can

explain

the

popular

costumes,

the

architecture,

the

folklore,

the

customs

and

traditions

that

have

resemblances

allowing

the

identification

with

the

cultural

area

of

the

Transylvanian

Romanians.

In

the

same

way

we

can

explain

the

Transylvanian

Romanian

dialect,

being

known

that

the

Moldavian

Catholics

don’t

use

the

Moldavian

Romanian

dialect,

which

excludes

the

theories

sustaining

that

the

people

coming

into

contact

with

the

Romanians

adopted

their

identity.

The

Transylvanian

language

elements

preserved

and

the

siflant

characteristic

of

speaking,

specific

only

to

the

area

of

the

Romanian

language

in

its

period

of

formation,

clearly

demonstrates

that

the

Moldavian

Roman

Catholics’

ancestors

spoke

Romanian

when

living in Transylvania and this has always been their mother tongue.

The

dialect

called

“Csango”

is

a

heritage

from

the

period

of

Transylvanian

establishment,

being

a

partly

adapted

Magyar

language,

only

orally

and

mixed

with

a

lot

of

Romanian

elements,

used

to

be

used

as

a

means

of

communication

with

their

Hungarian

or

Szekler

neighbors.

Once

coming

in

Moldavia,

some

Catholics,

in

an

incipient

stage

of

adoption

the

Szekler

or

Hungarian

identity,

naturally

abandoned

the

Csango

dialect,

and

those

strongly

adopting

these

identities

kept

(preserved)

it

but

without

having

a

written

language;

it

is

important

that

the

priest

Zold

Peter

himself,

the

father

of

the

false

name

“Csango

Hungarian”

mentioned

about

the

Moldavian

Catholics’

imperfect

Hungarian.

And

this

was

in

the

year

1781,

when

the

Transylvanian

Catholics had not had time yet to support the supposed assimilation pressures of the Orthodox natives.

In

fact,

as

it

can

today

be

observed,

the

dances

and

popular

costumes

from

Moldavia

belong

to

the

traditional Romanian field.

We

consider

that,

together

with

the

results

of

the

scientific

research

results,

the

problem

of

how

representative

are

the

associations,

dealing

with

the

Moldavian

Catholics

and

reporting

to

a

target

group,

is

very important in debating upon the Moldavian Roman – Catholics.

As

far

as

we

are

concerned,

“Dumitru

Mărtinaş”

Association

had

the

courage

to

let

people

vote,

to

organize

a

general

meeting

where

participants,

rejecting

their

identification

as

an

ethnical

minority,

sustained

their

quality

of

Romanian

religious

community.

The

adherence

of

the

association

among

people

is

proved

by

the

great

number

of

branches

founded

or

about

to

be

founded,

over

20,

in

less

than

two

years

of

proper

functioning.

What do the for – Hungarian associations present and whose behalf do they speak in?

We

ask

this

question,

because

it

seems

that

those

associations

have

big

problems

regarding

representative.

It

is

noticeable

that,

after

12

years

of

intense

activity,

they

managed

to

attract

only

a

small

number

of

people,

a

few

hundreds,

from

some

Moldavian

localities,

these

being,

not

accidentally,

exactly

the

villages

where

the

above

mentioned

organizations’

leaders

had

been

born.

More

eloquent

is

the

fact

that

the

number

of

people

involved

in

actions

for

introducing

the

Hungarian

language

in

schools

and

churches,

has

never

been

the

same,

the

conclusion

being

that,

despite

the

different

methods

of

material

luring

exerted

upon

people,

their

“convictions”

about

their

Hungarian

origin

are

deviously

not

as

strong

as

the

leaders

of

for

Hungarian

associations

would

like.

In

order

to

evade

this

reality,

those

leaders

have

recently

sustained

that

they

have

35

branches

in

Moldavia.

Even

for

a

person

who

doesn’t

know

the

situation,

the

number

is

obviously

unrealistic

because

in

Moldavia

there

don’t

exist

35

communities

to

use

the

Csango

dialect.

We

shall

infer

from

the

AMCM

leaders

that

they

militate

for

the

introduction

of

Hungarian

even

in

the

localities

with

100%

Romanian

Catholic population.

Regarding

the

dimensions

of

the

group,

in

the

behalf

they

pretend

to

be

speaking,

we

could

also

notice

great

fluctuations,

because

the

self

entitled

saviors

of

the

Hungarian

Csangos’

identity

initially

claimed

the

entire number of 265.000 members of the Moldavian – Catholics community.

Later

on,

they

came

to

another

approximation

of

60-70

thousands

of

“Csangos”

in

Moldavia,

including

bilingual

Catholics,

who

use

the

Romanian

Transylvanian

and

the

Csango

dialects.

Unfortunately,

these

numbers

have

been

considered

by

the

reporters

of

the

European

Council,

who

have

not

noticed

that

in

the

localities

with

bilingual

communities

statistics

mention,

as

well

as

in

the

Catholics

villages

using

only

the

Romanian language, over 95% citizens declaring themselves Romanians.

Finally,

if

one

of

these

assessments

could

not

be

assumed,

the

for

Hungarian

associations

found

refuge

in

the

2000

“Csangos”

declared

for

the

census,

although

nearly

1500

of

them

indicated

Romanian

as

their

mother

tongue.

In the end, we again appeal to your Kindness by asking you to analyze the following situation:

From 265.000 Catholics in Moldavia, over 95% consider and declare themselves Romanians.

They

reject

being

seen

as

an

ethnical

minority

and

being

named

with

the

unsuitable

name

of

“Csangos”,

sustaining that they are part of the Romanian people, a Catholic community of this one.

The results of the scientific researches confirm and support these truths.

On

the

other

hand,

some

people,

in

the

name

of

their

personal

interests

and

with

the

clear

desire

of

fulfilling

other

interests

than

the

Moldavian

Roman

Catholic

community’s

wealth,

want

to

demonstrate

that

there

is

a

minority

of

the

“Csangos”,

considered

of

Magyar

origin,

who

is

almost

extinct

because

of

the

Romanian

state

and

of

the

Catholic

Church’s

pressures.

These

people

try

hard

to

obtain

the

admittance

of

this

forgery

by

the

European

organisms,

not

only

for

a

moment

forgetting

to

remind

the

fact

that

Romania

doesn’t

obey

the

minorities’

rights

and,

so,

it

doesn’t

deserve

to

be

part

of

the

of

the

European

and

Euro

Atlantic

structures.

But

they

forget

the

detail

that

for

12

years

Romania

has

been

making

clear

progress

in

the

field

of

admitting

and

guaranteeing

the

minorities’

rights

in

the

country.

Why

should

they

then

be

against

the

“Csangos”

rights?

What

makes

them

different

from

Germans,

Gypsies,

Hungarians,

Jews,

Turks,

Armenians,

Tartars,

Serbians,

Polish,

Ukrainians

or

others,

in

this

respect?

Not

this

very

fact

makes

us

believe

that

the

“Csangos” are an imaginary ethnical minority?

An

eloquent

proof

of

the

fact

that

the

real

target

of

the

for

Hungarian

is

compromising

Romania

in

the

process

of

becoming

part

of

the

European

organizations,

and

not

in

the

least

the

wealth

of

the

Moldavian

“Csango”

minority,

are

the

latest

declarations

at

Balvanyos

of

the

AMCM

and

UDMR

leaders.

In

spite

of

the

fact

that

the

Romanian

authorities

offered

them

undeserved

“rights”

for

introducing

the

Hungarian

language

in

the

Moldavian

Schools,

those

people

denied

this

reality,

continuing

to

declare

that

Romania

doesn’t

guarantee

such

rights.

We

believe

it

is

a

good

example

that

the

for

Hungarian

will

never

stop

pretending,

no

matter how many concessions, even unjustified, the Romanian part would make.

MtDNA and Y chromosome polymorphisms in Hungary 4 READ HERE Hungarians have only 5% incidence of descents with Asian origine 5 READ HERE Modern Hungarian-speaking populations seem to be specifically European 6 READ HERE

The English version is not available

for the moment to all pages.

Please try again later.

Documents about genetic structure of “csangos”: Large majority of Hungarians (95%) belonged to European populations 7 READ HERE Hungarians have a small influence of Asian populations 8 READ HERE Csángó population which is clearly different from the Székely populations 9 READ HERE Hungarian mitogenomes similar to East and West Slavs 10 READ HERE Human Chromosomal Polymorphism in a Hungarian Sample 11 READ HERE “Csango” dances are Romanian “Csango” traditions are Romanian
"Dumitru Mărtinaş" Roman-Catholic Association representing Roman-Catholics of Moldavia (so called "Changos", French - Tchangos, Hungarian - Csango, German - Tschangos)
Asociatia Dumitru Martinas - romano-catolici din Moldova - denumiți de literatura maghiară ceangăi, ciangăi, csango
“Csango” clothes are Romanian “Csango” clothes are Romanian

MtDNA and Y chromosome polymorphisms in Hungary,

Csángó and the Székely populations

which confirms the Romanian origin of the csangos

and their belonging to the Romanian cultural space

DNA

tests

for

determining

the

ethnic

origin

of

the

Csangos

have

established

that

from

the

genetic

point

of

view

(as

well

as traditional culture), Roman Catholics in Moldavia (Csango) are Romanian and are different from Hungarians.

These

tests

have

established

that

the

Hungarian

population

today

is

of

European

origin

not

Mongoloid,

Hungarians

are

not

genetically

related

to

Hungarian,

Huns,

Turks

or

Finnish-Estonian

(Finnish,

Estonian)

populations,

not

to

populations

in

the

area

Caucasian

or

Iranians,

but

that

the

Hungarians

are

the

descendants

of

the

European

population

that

existed

in

Panonia

and

the

Carpathian

Basin

before

the

arrival

of

the

migratory

tribes

and

the

magyarization

was

made

by

the

ruling

elites.

Hungarians

are

a

mixture

of

Romanians,

Slavs,

Germans

and

Gypsies

Magyarized

linguistically.

Today's

Hungarians

are

most closely related to Slavs and Gypsies.

The

genetic

diversity

of

the

Hungarians

is

extremely

high,

reaching

99.9%

in

a

combined

sample.

Genetic

analysis

in

a

geographically

defined

area

allowed

the

identification

of

71

different

subclasses

of

mitochondrial

DNA

in

Hungarian.

This

analysis

of

the

ancestor

revealed

a

complex

genetic

structure

highlighting

the

genetic

influence

of

the

populations

of

different parts of Eurasia, with the contribution of the European populations being the most pronounced.

At

least

8%

of

the

ancestral

haplotypes

found

in

the

Hungarians

show

their

genetic

similarity

to

Slavic

populations

in

the

East

and

West

(subclasses

H1c23a,

H2a1c1,

J2b1a6,

T2b25a1,

U4a2e,

K1c1j

and

I1a1c),

while

the

influence

of

the

Asian

populations is very little visible (subclasses A12a, C4a1a and U4b1a4).

The

genetic

analysis

of

the

Hungarian

genomes,

conducted

to

show

the

genetic

composition

of

modern

Hungarians,

has

shown

that

there

has

been

a

mixture

of

Hungarians

and

neighboring

populations,

as

well

as

a

mixture

with

migratory

populations.

The

results

show

that

most

modern

Hungarian

maternal

lines

have

European

origins

from

the

late

and

Neolithic

and

links

with

modern

Danish,

Belgian,

Dutch

and

Basque

populations,

as

well

as

with

neighboring

populations

(Serbs,

Croats,

Slovaks,

Romanians).

The

largest

haplogroups,

found

in

the

Hungarian

population

in

proportions

of

30%

and

24%,

respectively,

are

specific

haplogroups only to European populations, these haplogroups being absent in other areas of the planet.

At

the

same

time,

it

was

found

that

the

modern

Hungarian

population

has

only

a

small

genetic

contribution

(less

than

3%)

coming from Hungarian ancestors who have conquered the territory that became their homeland.

Other

genetic

studies

based

on

variations

in

the

human

genome

have

concluded

that

the

vast

majority

of

subjects

examined

belong

to

common

haplogroups

in

other

European

populations,

and

the

haplogroup

M

which

is

classified

as

a

haploid characteristic for Asian populations is about 5% of the total population modern Hungarian.

The

analyzed

evidence

showed

that

the

Hungarians

are

mostly

descendants

of

European

populations,

coming

from

the

Neolithic,

in

combination

with

Danes,

Belgians,

Dutch,

Basques,

Serbs,

Croats,

Slovaks,

Romanians,

Russians,

Ukrainians,

Gypsies.

The

analysis

of

the

mitochondrial

DNA

(inherited

from

the

maternal

line)

and

DNA-Y

(inherited

from

the

paternal

line),

samples

taken

from

the

Hungarian

population

concluded

that

only

5%

of

the

Hungarians

have

Asian

descendants

but

less

than

3%

of

the

Hungarians

are

the

descendants

of

the

conquering

tribes

from

Asia

and

95%

of

the

Hungarians

are

descendants of the European populations Magyarized during the time.

If

we

apply

these

percentages

to

the

size

of

the

Hungarian

population,

which

-

according

to

official

data

-

is

less

than

10

million

inhabitants,

it

can

be

noticed

that

less

than

300,000

of

the

Hungarians

are

descendants

of

the

Huns

conquerors,

about

200,000

of

Hungarians

are

descendants

of

Asian

populations

,

Magyarized,

either

by

force

or

by

matrimonial

alliances,

and over 9,500,000 of the Hungarians are descendants of the European populations who have lived here since ancient times.

See the sources mentioned below

Genetic analysis, tests about the ethnic origin of the "Csangos" in Moldavia

Hungarians are similar to Bulgarians 12 READ HERE Biggest haplogrups of Hungarians (30 % and 24 %) are found only in Europe 13 READ HERE Hungarians have 13 % common genes with Czechs and Slovaks 14 READ HERE