ცერცვა.Gyula László suggests that late Avars, arriving to the khaganate in 670 in great numbers, lived through the time between the destruction and plunder of the Avar state by the Franks during 791–795 and the arrival of the Magyars in 895. László points out that the settlements of the Hungarians (Magyars) complemented, rather than replaced, those of the Avars. Avars remained on the plough fields, good for agriculture, while Hungarians took the river banks and river flats, suitable for pasturage. He also notes that while the Hungarian graveyards consist of 40–50 graves on average, those of the Avars contain 600–1,000. According to these findings, the Avars not only survived the end of the Avar polity but lived in great masses and far outnumbered the Hungarian conquerors of Árpád.
He also shows that Hungarians occupied only the centre of the Carpathian basin, but Avars lived in a larger territory. Looking at those territories where only the Avars lived, there are only Hungarian geographical names, not Slavic or Turkic as would be expected interspersed among them. This is further evidence for the Avar-Hungarian continuity. Names of the Hungarian tribes, chieftains and the words used for the leaders, etc., suggest that at least the leaders of the Hungarian conquerors were Turkic speaking. However, Hungarian is not a Turkic language, rather Uralic, and so they must have been assimilated by the Avars that outnumbered them
László's Avar-Hungarian continuity theory posits that the modern Hungarian language descends from that spoken by the Avars rather than the conquering Magyars.
Based on DNA evidence from graves, the original Magyars most resembled modern Bashkirs, a Turkic people located near the Urals, whereas the Khanty and Mansi, whose languages most resemble Hungarian, live some ways to the northeast of the Bashkirs. Neparáczki 2017
The only whole genome sequencing study of Turkish genetics (on 16 individuals) concluded that the Turkish population forms a cluster with Southern European/Mediterranean populations, and the predicted contribution from ancestral East Asian populations (presumably Central Asian) is 21.7%.[343] However, that is not a direct estimate of a migration rate, due to reasons such as unknown original contributing populations.[343] Moreover, the genetic variation of various populations in Central Asia "has been poorly characterized"; Western Asian populations may also be "closely related to populations in the east".[342] Meanwhile, Central Asia is home to numerous populations that "demonstrate an array of mixed anthropological features of East Eurasians (EEA) and West Eurasians (WEA)"; two studies showed Uyghurs have 40-53% ancestry classified as East Asian, with the rest being classified as European.
Central Asian contribution to maternal, paternal, and autosomal genes were detected, consistent with the historical migration and expansion of Oghuz Turks from Central Asia.
უიგურებზე რომლებიც ჩინეთში ცხოვრობენ და არიან თურქები ტესტირება აჩვენებს რომ 50 პროცენტით ევროპელები არიან, იქაც ბერძნები ცხოვრობდნენ
ქართველთა ეთნოგენეზი, ეთნოგენეზი
