Whatif they were Onogurs?I2-M423 and R1b-U106 were almost certainly both present in Hungary before the Magyars arrived. They would have been brought respectively by the Slavic migrations and the Germanic migrations a few centuries earlier. But both of them would also have been found further east, e.g. in Ukraine, and it's not impossible that these specific samples were really invaders from the north-east. It's just that they weren't true Magyars but were assimilated on the way from Siberia to Hungary.
The exonym "Hungarian" is thought to be derived from Ugor or the Bulgar-Turkic On-Ogur (meaning "ten" Ogurs),[25] which was the name of the tribes who joined the Bulgar tribal confederacy that ruled the eastern parts of Hungary after the Avars. Nonetheless, written sources called Magyars "Hungarians" prior to the conquest of the Carpathian Basin (in 837 "Ungri" mentioned by Georgius Monachus, in 862 "Ungri" by Annales Bertiniani, in 881 "Ungari" by the Annales ex Annalibus Iuvavensibus) when they still lived on the steppes of Eastern Europe eastward from the Carpathians. The Hungarians probably belonged to the Onogur tribal alliance, and it is possible that they became its ethnic majority.[25] In the Early Middle Ages the Hungarians had many different names, such as "Ungherese" (in Italian) or Ungar (in German) or Hungarus.[26] The "H-" prefix is an addition in Medieval Latin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarians
Please, spare me your cheap and sad sarcasm, it's really rude and out of topic when you talk about an early medieval culture and link it unlogically to a prehystoric culture to denigrate other people's thoughts.
Observations on anthropological research concerning the
period of Hungarian conquest and the Arpadian age
http://www2.sci.u-szeged.hu/ABS/Acta%20HP/44-95.pdf
The work of Tibor Tóth extended the range of investigations
(Tóth 1958, 1965, 1973). In his opinion the conquering
Hungarians came to a relatively similar morphological
environment in the central Danubian Basin. Later on their
Mongolid character faded. Their ethnogenesis had already
taken place in the North-Caspian region. In 1992, he reworded
his earlier observations. As opposed to former opinions, he
thought that the elements of the Mongolid great-race had
been as completely insignificant in the ethnic composition
of the conquering Hungarians as in that of the Avar Khaganat,
and also in other, “historic populations of the 2nd millennium
AD”. He interpreted the Hungarian conquest as the last
migration wave of the Europid Pontic race proceeding from
the North Caspian region into the Central Danubian region.
borderline: 'bulgar' gave the french word "bougre" (pejorative qualificative for peopl= 'ned', 'hooligan', like "vandal" or "apache" before being softened in meaning: "un bon bougre") - 'hungarian' gave french "hongre" concerning castrated stallions... for the fun.
Concerning Onogur (I had red it in Wiki) it seems almost evident it's the basis of their exonym (h)Ungarian - From what I red, the Magyars elites had incorporated a great proportion of turkic speaking tribes themselves already well mixed with Central Asia I-E speaking tribes ('europoids' hyper-dominant) ; seemingly Avars in Hungaru cimeteries elites were mixed, but had kept more diverse 'east-asian' types ('sinid', 'mongolid' and siberian 'tungid' less mongoloid types);
Concerning Onogur (I had red it in Wiki) it seems almost evident it's the basis of their exonym (h)Ungarian - From what I red, the Magyars elites had incorporated a great proportion of turkic speaking tribes themselves already well mixed with Central Asia I-E speaking tribes ('europoids' hyper-dominant) ; seemingly Avars in Hungaru cimeteries elites were mixed, but had kept more diverse 'east-asian' types ('sinid', 'mongolid' and siberian 'tungid' less mongoloid
By the way till reading the paper as to know if the type of cemetery correspond to Magyars or locals it's not sure that such DNA was aloctone.
berun:"The Y DNA samples can't be trusted as to be from true Magyars"
Who are the true Magyars?
Sorry for the uneasyness, maybe you might develop a deeper thinking to understand the irony. Take it easy.
Don't worry about Berun... Everything is r1b and connected with cultures of conquerors is false for him. If there were quivers and weapons, I want to know if they are found in the four males' tombs... this would be a correct way to know if they were magyars, i.e. to link material culture with genetics. Obviously, a biased person like our friend only thinks about the dna (with a lot of prejudice) and not both the dna AND the archaelogical environment.
THE CEMETERIES
OF THE CONQUEST PERIOD
A picture differing markedly from the other areas of the
Carpathian Basin emerges in the Upper Tisza region. The
cemeteries in this area have a conspicuously high number of
male burials (accounting for up to fifty per cent of the buri-
als) equipped with a wide array of weapons. Almost all the
men were buried with their archery equipment; sabres and
axes are also quite frequent. Their real wealth, however, is
indicated by their insignia of rank: sabretaches ornamented
with mounts or metal plaques, belt sets, sabres covered with
silver or gold plaques, bow cases fitted with mounts and lav-
ishly ornamented horse harness. These burials undoubtedly
represent the graves of the highest-ranking leaders of the
10th century Hungarians (Karos and Rakamaz; Fig. 34).
http://www.regeszet.org.hu/images/angol/a_011.pdf
What kurgans?