“The historical reality seems to be that the Huns, a Turkic people from the Central Asian steppes, began to move west around the year 370 and attack the Ostrogothic kingdom in the area of the modern Ukraine. What caused this movement is unclear, but it may have been pressure from other tribes further east. The Ostrogoths were defeated again and again and forced to leave their homes and farms in panic. A vast number of them crossed the Danube into the Balkans, still ruled at this time by the Roman Empire. Here the fugitive Goths, in their desperation, inflicted a massive defeat on the Roman army at Adrianople In 376, when their cavalry ran down the last of the old Roman legions. Now that their horizons were expanded there was no stopping the Huns. They raided the Balkans in the aftermath of the Roman defeat but also attacked the rich provinces of the east, coming through the Caucasus and Anatolia to pillage the rich lands of Syria.”
[1]
“The Huns were far from invincible, however, and in 439 the Visigoths of Toulouse showed their power by defeating Litorius’ attempt to take the city and killing the dux himself. Throughout this time, the Huns in Gaul acted as mercenary soldiers and, as far as we can tell, they had no territorial or political ambitions in the region. All this changed with Attila’s rise to power. It was Attila who gave the Huns a clear identity and made them, briefly, into a major political power. After his death, they disintegrated with remarkable speed.”
[2]
“After Attila’s death his sons divided up the subject nations equally among themselves, so that, as a shocked Goth puts it, ‘warlike kings with their peoples should be divided among them like a family estate’. We do not know how many sons there were: we only have Jordanes’ statement that ‘through the boundlessness of [Attila’s] lust, they were almost a people in themselves’. At any rate, this was the only occasion in Hun history, so far as we know, when a father’s kingdom was thus shared out by his sons… It was not many months after their father’s death that they began to quarrel. As to the cause of their quarrel, it would seem that one or more tried to dispossess the others from their share of the inheritance, and that several great battles were fought between them as a result.”
[3]
[1]: (Kennedy 2002: 25-26) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
[2]: (Kennedy 2002: 37) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
[3]: (Thompson 2004: 167-168) Thompson, E.A. 1996. The Huns. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/49W8PAAS
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| present |
| present |
| Year Range | Kingdom of the Huns (hu_hun_k) was in: |
|---|
“Finally they reached Attila’s base, which Priscus describes as a ’very large village’. The Huns must originally have lived in tents, probably round felt ones similar to the yurts and gers of modern Central Asia; but for his permanent base, Attila had abandoned these and both his own palace and those of his leading nobles were constructed in wood. Nor were they simple log cabins, for the wood was planed smooth, and the wooden wall which surrounded them was built with an eye ’not to security but to elegance’, though it was also embellished with towers. The only stone building was a bath-house, constructed on the orders of one of Attila’s leading supporters, Onegesius. He had had the stone imported from the Roman province of Pannonia across the Danube. It was built by a Roman prisoner of war who had hoped to secure his release after the job was done. Unhappily for him, he had made himself indispensable and was kept on to manage the bath-house. The exact location of Attila’s village unfortunately remains a mystery and no traces of it have been found; but it probably lay a short distance east of the Danube, in northern Serbia or southern Hungary.” [1]
[1]: (Kennedy 2002: 44) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
“It was Attila who gave the Huns a clear identity and made them, briefly, into a major political power. After his death, they disintegrated with remarkable speed… In 434 Attila became king, ruling initially with his brother BIeda.” [1]
[1]: (Kennedy 2002: 37-38) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
Nomadic villages rather than permanent settlements. “Before they invaded the Empire, the Huns, like other nomads, probably lived in fairly small tenting groups, perhaps 500-1,000 people, who kept their distance from their fellows so as to exploit the grassland more effectively. Only on special occasions or to plan a major expedition would larger numbers come together and even then they could only remain together if they had outside resources. The image of a vast, innumerable swarm of Huns covering the landscape like locusts has to be treated with some scepticism.” [1]
[1]: (Kennedy 2002: 31) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
squared kilometers. “Priscus says that Attila ruled ‘all Scythia’. How far did his dominions extend towards the east? Kiessling supposes that the Alans between the Don and an area somewhat west of the Aral Sea also recognized without qualification the overlordship of Attila. This seems scarcely likely to be correct. True, the Alans had never won their independence, but they would appear to have been ruled by Huns who owed little, if any, allegiance to Attila. We shall see that the Hun tribe of the Acatziri, who lived east of the Black Sea, were leading an independent life under their own chieftains until the year 448 (pp. 104ff below), and there is no reason to suppose that they stood alone. We may conclude then that all the Germanic and other nations between the Alps and the Baltic, and between the Caspian (or somewhat west of it) and a line drawn an unknown distance east of the Rhine, recognized Attila and Bleda as their masters. Although the two brothers always acted in concert, so far as we know, and regarded their empire as a single property, they divided it between them and ruled separately; but we do not know which portion was allotted to each.” [1]
[1]: (Thompson 2004: 84-85) Thompson, E.A. 1996. The Huns. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/49W8PAAS
“Before they invaded the Empire, the Huns, like other nomads, probably lived in fairly small tenting groups, perhaps 500-1,000 people, who kept their distance from their fellows so as to exploit the grassland more effectively. Only on special occasions or to plan a major expedition would larger numbers come together and even then they could only remain together if they had outside resources. The image of a vast, innumerable swarm of Huns covering the landscape like locusts has to be treated with some scepticism.” [1] “What is most important in Ammianus’ account is his observation that Hun society was fundamentally pastoralist, without agriculture and without permanent settlements. In its essentials, life on the semiarid steppes that stretch across Asia from Mongolia to the Black Sea has changed little in sixteen hundred years.” [2] “Finally they reached Attila’s base, which Priscus describes as a ’very large village’. The Huns must originally have lived in tents, probably round felt ones similar to the yurts and gers of modern Central Asia; but for his permanent base, Attila had abandoned these and both his own palace and those of his leading nobles were constructed in wood. Nor were they simple log cabins, for the wood was planed smooth, and the wooden wall which surrounded them was built with an eye ’not to security but to elegance’, though it was also embellished with towers. The only stone building was a bath-house, constructed on the orders of one of Attila’s leading supporters, Onegesius. He had had the stone imported from the Roman province of Pannonia across the Danube. It was built by a Roman prisoner of war who had hoped to secure his release after the job was done. Unhappily for him, he had made himself indispensable and was kept on to manage the bath-house. The exact location of Attila’s village unfortunately remains a mystery and no traces of it have been found; but it probably lay a short distance east of the Danube, in northern Serbia or southern Hungary.” [3] : 1. The King’s base :: 2. Nomadic villages
[1]: (Kennedy 2002: 31) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
[2]: (Kelly 2009: 16) Kelly, Christopher. 2009. The End of Empire: Attila the Hun and the Fall of Rome. London; New York: W. W. Norton & Company. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/NCDATP6U
[3]: (Kennedy 2002: 44) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
“Ammianus explicitly notes the absence of kings from their society, ‘they are not subject to the authority of any king’.14 Instead of kings, he says, each group was content with the improvised leadership of their leading men (tumultuario primatum ductu). Who these chief men (primates) were he does not say, but it is clear from his language that their leadership (ductus) existed only in time of war. Indeed, we may guess that even in war-time they could not so much exercise any legal or traditional power as merely use personal influence: they had, one may suspect, little or no right of coercion.” [1] “The Huns had had kings before Attila. Around 420 we hear of one Rua and his brother Octar. however, as with many other nomad groups, the power of the king seems to have been very limited and real authority lay with chiefs of much smaller groups who were largely autonomous and did very much what they liked. Perhaps it was only when dealing with outside powers, notably the Eastern and Western Roman Empire, that the kings had a leadership role. In 434 Attila became king, ruling initially with his brother BIeda.” [2] “In 435 a Roman embassy, led by a Gothic soldier and a Roman diplomat – a typical division of labour at that time - met Attila at Margus (on the Danube just east of modern Belgrade)… Eventually it was agreed that the Romans would pay him the vast sum of 700 pounds of gold per year. It was also stipulated that the Romans would not receive or protect anyone fleeing from Attila’s anger and that the Huns should have open access to markets. This treaty established the Hunnic monarchy on a new basis. We can have no doubt that these large sums of gold were to be paid to Attila. This completely changed his relationship with the lesser tribal chiefs for he was now the source of patronage and all good things. If they wanted to be rewarded, the chiefs would have to obey Attila’s orders. Now, probably for the first time, the Huns had a king with real authority.” [2] : 1. King :: 2. Chiefs
[1]: (Thompson 2004: 50) Thompson, E.A. 1996. The Huns. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/49W8PAAS
[2]: (Kennedy 2002: 38) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
The Hunnites were nomadic pastoralists and so would not have set up permanent water supply systems.
The Hunnites were nomadic pastoralists and so would not have set up permanent water supply systems.
Bathhouses. “Finally they reached Attila’s base, which Priscus describes as a ’very large village’… The only stone building was a bath-house, constructed on the orders of one of Attila’s leading supporters, Onegesius. He had had the stone imported from the Roman province of Pannonia across the Danube. It was built by a Roman prisoner of war who had hoped to secure his release after the job was done. Unhappily for him, he had made himself indispensable and was kept on to manage the bath-house.” [1]
[1]: (Kennedy 2002: 44) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
Bathhouses. “Finally they reached Attila’s base, which Priscus describes as a ’very large village’… The only stone building was a bath-house, constructed on the orders of one of Attila’s leading supporters, Onegesius. He had had the stone imported from the Roman province of Pannonia across the Danube. It was built by a Roman prisoner of war who had hoped to secure his release after the job was done. Unhappily for him, he had made himself indispensable and was kept on to manage the bath-house.” [1]
[1]: (Kennedy 2002: 44) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
“The Huns honored Attila in death as in life. His body, draped in rare oriental silks, glittered with magnificent jewelry, costly gifts from Roman emperors hoping to buy off an enemy whom they had repeatedly failed to defeat. On his shoulder gleamed a great golden brooch set with a single slice of onyx the size of a man’s palm… That night, far beyond the frontiers of the Roman empire, Attila was buried. His body was encased in three coffins: the innermost covered in gold, a second in silver, and a third in iron. The gold and silver symbolized the plunder that Attila had seized, while the harsh gray iron recalled his victories in war. The tomb was filled with the weapons of enemies defeated in battle, precious jewels, and other treasures. The servants responsible for preparing the burial were killed so that they could not reveal its location.” [1] “What is most remarkable about the presence of the Huns in Europe is the striking lack of archaeological evidence. Only some seventy burials have been identified that, on the basis of their characteristic features, might be thought to belong to Huns. This small number could simply be a reflection of their relatively brief domination of the middle Danube—roughly from 410 to 465, ten years after the death of Attila. The chances of survival play a part, too: leading Huns, as Priscus’ description of Attila’s funeral confirms, were interred beneath great earthen mounds, that—despite the brutal precautions taken at the time of burial— acted as prominent markers for tomb robbers.” [2]
[1]: (Kelly 2009: 6) Kelly, Christopher. 2009. The End of Empire: Attila the Hun and the Fall of Rome. London; New York: W. W. Norton & Company. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/NCDATP6U
[2]: (Kelly 2009: 64) Kelly, Christopher. 2009. The End of Empire: Attila the Hun and the Fall of Rome. London; New York: W. W. Norton & Company. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/NCDATP6U
“When the Huns first crossed over the Straits of Kerch into the Crimea and into the stream of European history they were illiterate. When they finally vanished in the turmoil of the fifth and sixth centuries, they were illiterate still.1 The songs which Priscus heard them singing when the torches had been lit in the banqueting-hall, songs in which they extolled the warlike deeds of Attila, might in time have produced an epic record of some of their achievements. Certainly the Ostrogoths, among whom they lived for so long, remembered their own early history in a cloudy fashion ‘in their ancient songs, in almost historic fashion’, and used to sing of the deeds of their ancestors to the strains of the harp.2 But the Huns vanished so quickly that if such epics began to develop among them they were never written down and did not survive the society which sang them.” [1]
[1]: (Thompson 2004: 6) Thompson, E.A. 1996. The Huns. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/49W8PAAS
“The Huns did not use spurs either but urged their horses on with whips; whip handles have been found in tombs. Gold and silver saddle ornaments discovered in tombs make it certain that some wealthy men rode on wooden saddles with wooden bows at front and rear to support the rider.” [1] “In 435 a Roman embassy, led by a Gothic soldier and a Roman diplomat – a typical division of labour at that time - met Attila at Margus (on the Danube just east of modern Belgrade). The negotiations took place on horseback outside the city walls. For the Huns, it was natural to do business without dismounting; the Romans, however, would have much preferred to have got off their horses and relaxed their aching limbs, but to save face they too remained on horseback. Attila’s demands were not for territory but for money payments. Eventually it was agreed that the Romans would pay him the vast sum of 700 pounds of gold per year.” [2] “The Huns honored Attila in death as in life. His body, draped in rare oriental silks, glittered with magnificent jewelry, costly gifts from Roman emperors hoping to buy off an enemy whom they had repeatedly failed to defeat. On his shoulder gleamed a great golden brooch set with a single slice of onyx the size of a man’s palm… That night, far beyond the frontiers of the Roman empire, Attila was buried. His body was encased in three coffins: the innermost covered in gold, a second in silver, and a third in iron. The gold and silver symbolized the plunder that Attila had seized, while the harsh gray iron recalled his victories in war. The tomb was filled with the weapons of enemies defeated in battle, precious jewels, and other treasures. The servants responsible for preparing the burial were killed so that they could not reveal its location.” [3]
[1]: (Kennedy 2002: 30) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
[2]: (Kennedy 2002: 38) Kennedy, Hugh. 2002. Mongols, Huns and Vikings: Nomads at War. London: Cassell. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZN9N624X
[3]: (Kelly 2009: 6) Kelly, Christopher. 2009. The End of Empire: Attila the Hun and the Fall of Rome. London; New York: W. W. Norton & Company. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/NCDATP6U
“Similarly, since the Huns minted no coins, it might reasonably be expected that the numismatic evidence would be slight. This is indeed the case, but from the distribution of Roman coins found in some of the territories once ruled by the nomads it does seem possible to draw one or two inferences.” [1]
[1]: (Thompson 2004: 9) Thompson, E.A. 1996. The Huns. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/49W8PAAS
Roman coins may have been used. “Similarly, since the Huns minted no coins, it might reasonably be expected that the numismatic evidence would be slight. This is indeed the case, but from the distribution of Roman coins found in some of the territories once ruled by the nomads it does seem possible to draw one or two inferences.” [1] “In addition, the annual tribute paid to the Huns under the treaty of 435 was to be trebled, and Attila was now to receive 2,100 lb of gold per annum. Further, every Roman prisoner who escaped from the Huns was to be ransomed at 12 solidi a head in place of the 8 solidi stipulated in 435.“ [2] “
[1]: (Thompson 2004: 9) Thompson, E.A. 1996. The Huns. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/49W8PAAS
[2]: (Thompson 2004: 94) Thompson, E.A. 1996. The Huns. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/49W8PAAS