The Huns are nomadic tribes that at one time moved from Asia to Europe. Well, that's all the knowledge about the Huns that most people have. But you can tell a lot of interesting things about them, this is what the article is devoted to.

Who are the Huns?

These tribes begin their history from the 3rd century BC. e. Historians connect the origin of the Huns from the Hun tribes that lived on the territory of modern China, on the banks of the Yellow River. The Huns are a people of Asian origin who were the first to create a nomadic empire in Central Asia. History says that in 48 BC. e. The Huns were divided into two clans: Southern and Northern. The Northern Huns were defeated in the war against China, their association broke up, and the remaining nomads migrated to the west. The connection between the Huns and the Huns can be traced by studying the heritage of material culture. For both nationalities, the use of onions was characteristic. However, at present, the ethnicity of the Huns is questionable.

In different time periods, the word "Huns" pops up in history books, but this name most often denotes ordinary nomads who lived in Europe until the Middle Ages. In the present, the Huns are conquering tribes who founded the great empire of Atilla and provoked the Great Migration of Nations, thereby accelerating the course of historical events.

Tribal Invasion

It was believed that the Huns, under the onslaught of the emperor of the Han Dynasty, were forced to leave their native lands and go west. Along the way, the refugees conquered the tribes they came across and included them in their horde. In 370, the Huns crossed the Volga, at that moment they included the Mongols, Ugrians, Turkic and Iranian tribes.

From that moment on, the Huns begin to be mentioned in the annals. Most often they are spoken of as barbarian invaders, without denying their strength and cruelty. Nomadic tribes become the main root cause of important historical events. Even today, historians argue about where the Huns really came from. Some insist that these tribes were the ancestors of the Slavs and have nothing to do with Asia. Although at the same time the Turks claim that the Huns were Turks, and the Mongols say: "The Huns are the Mongols."

As a result of the research, it was only possible to find out that the Huns are close to the Mongol-Manchurian peoples, as evidenced by the similarity of names and culture. However, no one is in a hurry to refute or confirm this with 100% certainty.

But no one belittles the role of the Huns in history. It is worth noting the features of the invasion of the Hun tribes into enemy territories. Their attacks were unexpected, like an avalanche, and the tactics of warfare introduced the enemy into complete confusion. Nomadic tribes did not engage in close combat, they simply surrounded the enemies and showered them with arrows, while constantly moving from place to place. The enemy fell into bewilderment, and then the Huns finished him off, leaning on the whole cavalry. If it came to hand-to-hand combat, they could skillfully wield swords, while the soldiers did not think about their safety - they rushed into battle without sparing themselves. Their furious raids took the Romans by surprise, the tribes of the Northern Black Sea region, the Goths, the Iranians and representatives of other nationalities, who became part of a large Hunnic union.

Captured lands

For the first time, the Huns are mentioned in the annals of 376, when they captured the Alans of the North Caucasus. Later, they attacked the state of Germanarich and completely defeated it, which provoked the beginning of the Great Migration of Nations. During their reign in Europe, the Huns conquered a significant part of the Ostrogoth tribes, and the Visigoths were pushed back to Thrace.

In 395, the tribes of the Huns crossed the Caucasus and set foot on the lands of Syria. The leader of the Huns at that time was King Balamber. Literally in a matter of months, this state was completely devastated, and the invader tribes settled in Austria and Pannonia. Pannonia became the center of the future empire of the Huns. This was the starting point from which they began to attack the Eastern Roman Empire. As for the Western Roman Empire, the tribes of the Huns up to the middle of the 5th century were their allies in the wars against the Germanic tribes.

From Rugil to Atilla

All inhabitants of the conquered lands were forced to take part in military campaigns and pay taxes. By the beginning of 422, the Huns again attacked Thrace. Fearing war, the emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire began to pay tribute to the leader of the Huns.

After 10 years, Rugila (the leader of the Huns) began to threaten the Roman Empire in breaking the peace agreements. The reason for this behavior was the fugitives who were hiding in the territory of the Roman state. However, Rugila did not carry out his plan, and died during the negotiations. The new rulers were the nephews of the late leader: Bleda and Attila.

In 445, under unclear circumstances, Bleda died while hunting. Historians speculate that he may have been killed by Attila. However, this fact has not been confirmed. From that moment on, Atilla is the leader of the Huns. He entered the pages of history as a cruel and great commander who wiped out all of Europe from the face of the earth.

The empire of the Huns acquired the greatest greatness in 434-453 under the leader Atilla. During his reign, the tribes of Bulgars, Heruls, Geids, Sarmatians, Goths and other Germanic tribes retreated to the Huns.

Attila's reign

During the sole reign of Attila, the state of the Huns grew to an incredible size. This was the merit of their ruler. Atilla (the leader of the Huns) lived on the territory of modern Hungary. From this place, his power extended to the Caucasus (east), the Rhine (west), the Danish Isles (north) and the Danube (south).

Atilla forced Theodosius I (the ruler of the Eastern Roman Empire) to continue paying tribute to him. He devastated Thrace, Media, Illyria, subjugated the right bank of the Danube. Having reached the borders of Constantinople, he forced the emperor to pay off military operations and provide the Huns with the land of the country on the southern bank of the Danube.

Having settled in Constantinople, Atilla goes to Valentine the Third, the ruler of Western Rome, with a request to give his sister for him. However, the ruler of the Western Empire refuses such an alliance. Insulted by the refusal, Atilla gathers an army and begins to move west. The leader of the Huns passes through Germany, having crossed the Rhine, destroyed Trier, Arras and many other cities.

In the autumn of 451, a grandiose battle of peoples began on the Cataluan Plain. It can even be assumed that this was the first large-scale battle in the history of our era. In this confrontation, the advance of the Huns was stopped by the united army of the Roman empires.

Death of Attila

Under King Atilla, a large political entity was formed, in which, until the 6th century, the main part of the population was made up of Sarmatians, Huns and other tribes. All of them obeyed a single ruler. In 452 Attila's Huns entered Italy. Under the threat of military conflict were such cities as Milan and Aquileia. However, the troops retreat back to their territories. In 453, Attila dies, and due to misunderstandings about the new leader, the Gepids attack the Huns, who led the uprising of the tribes of Germany. Starting from 454, the power of the Huns turns into a historical past. This year, in the confrontation at the Nedao River, they are being forced out in the Black Sea region.

In 469, the Huns make their last attempt to break into the Balkan Peninsula, but they are stopped. They gradually begin to mix with other tribes arriving from the east, and the state of the Huns ceases to exist.

housekeeping

The history of the Huns began and ended suddenly, in a short period of time an entire empire was formed, which conquered almost all of Europe, and just as quickly it disappeared, mixing with other tribes that came to explore new lands. However, even this small gap was enough for the Huns to create their own culture, religion and way of life.

Their main occupation, like most tribes, was cattle breeding, as the Chinese historian Sonya Qiang says. Tribes constantly moved from place to place, lived in mobile yurts. The main diet consisted of meat and koumiss. Clothes were made from wool.

Wars were an important part of life, the main goal of which was initially to capture prey, and then to subjugate new tribes. In peacetime, the Huns simply followed the cattle, hunting birds and animals along the way.

Nomadic pastoralism consisted of all kinds of domestic animals, including the two-humped camel and the donkey. Particular attention was paid directly to horse breeding. It was not only a reserve for military operations, but a kind of confirmation of social status. The larger the number of horses, the more honorable the nomad.

During the heyday of the Hun empire, cities were founded where the inhabitants could lead a settled way of life. As a result of the excavations, it was clear that the tribes were engaged in agriculture for some time, and special places were created in the cities for storing grain.

In fact, the Huns were nomadic tribes and were engaged in cattle breeding, but the presence of small pockets of a settled way of farming should not be discounted. Within the state, these two ways of life harmoniously existed.

The social side of life

The Hun tribes had a complex social organization for that time. The head of the country was Shany, the so-called "son of heaven" with unlimited power.

The Huns were divided into clans (clans), of which there were 24. At the head of each of them were "managers of generations." At the beginning of the wars of conquest, it was the governors who divided the new lands among themselves, later the shanyoi began to do this, and the governors became simple bosses over the horsemen, who numbered 10 thousand each.

In the army, everything was also not so simple. The temnik was responsible for the appointment of thousanders and centurions, as well as for the distribution of land between them. On the other hand, a strengthened central authority did not turn the empire into a monarchy or autocracy. On the contrary, in society there were popular assemblies and a council of elders. Three times a year the Huns gathered in one of the cities of their empire to make a sacrifice to Heaven. On such days, the heads of generations discussed the policy of the state, watched horse races or camel races.

It was noted that there were aristocrats in the society of the Huns, all of them were connected by marriage alliances with each other.

But, since there were many conquered tribes in the empire, who were forcibly adapted to the society of the Huns, slavery flourished in some places. Slaves were mostly prisoners. They were left in the cities and forced to help in agriculture, construction or crafts.

The heads of the Hun state had a plan to unite all peoples, although Chinese and ancient sources constantly make barbarians out of them. After all, if they had not become a catalyst for the Great Migration of Nations in Europe, then it is likely that the crisis and the slave-owning mode of production would have dragged on for several more centuries.

Cultural Organization Segment

The culture of the Huns takes its continuation from the tribes of the Saxons, includes their main elements and continues to develop. Iron products were common among these tribes. The nomads knew how to use a loom, processed wood and began to trade in handicrafts.

The tribes developed material culture and military affairs. Since the Huns hunted for raids on other states, they had a highly developed wall-beating technique, which helped to crush the fortifications.

The Huns are a nomadic people. However, even in the world of perpetual motion, there were settled agricultural oases that were used as winter quarters. Some settlements were well fortified and could serve as a military fortress.

One of the historians, describing the refuge of Attila, said that his settlement was large, like a city. The houses were made of wood. The boards were nailed to each other so tightly that it was impossible to see the joints.

Their fellow tribesmen were buried on the banks of rivers. On the sites of nomadic camps, mounds were built, enclosed in a circle with a fence. Weapons and horses were "buried" with the dead. But more attention was given to the Hun mausoleums - groups of mounds with underground chambers. In such mounds, not only weapons were left, but jewelry, ceramics and even food.

As for the rock carvings, you can most often see drawings of a swan, a bull and a deer. These animals had their sacred meaning. It was believed that the bull is the personification of power. The deer brings prosperity and shows the way to wanderers. The swan was the keeper of the hearth.

The art of the Hun tribes is directly related to the artistic style of the Saxons, however, they pay more attention to inlay, and the animal style remains unchanged until the 3rd century, when it was replaced by polychrome monuments.

Religion

Like every self-respecting state, the Hun empire had its own religion. Their main god was Tengri - the deity of Heaven. The nomads were animists, revered the spirits of Heaven and the forces of nature. Protective amulets were made of gold and silver, images of animals, mainly dragons, were engraved on the plates.

The Huns did not bring human sacrifices, but they had idols cast from silver. Religious beliefs implied the presence of priests, sorcerers and healers. It was not uncommon to meet shamans in the ruling elite of the Huns. Their duty was to determine the auspicious months of the year.

Characteristic of their religion was also the deification of heavenly bodies, elements and roads. Horses were offered as blood sacrifices. All religious ceremonies were accompanied by military duels, which were an obligatory attribute of any event. In addition, when someone died, as a sign of grief, the Huns were obliged to inflict wounds on themselves.

The role of the Huns in history

The invasion of the Huns had a great influence on the course of historical events. Unexpected raids on the tribes of Western Europe were the main catalyst that provoked changes in the situation of the nomads. The destruction of the Ostrogoths prevented the possibility of the Germanization of the Sklavens of Europe. The Alans withdrew to the west, and the Iranian tribes of Eastern Europe were weakened. All this testifies to only one thing - only the Turks and Sclavens influenced the further development of historical events.

It can even be shown that the leader of the Huns, having invaded Europe, freed the Eastern Proto-Slavs from the Goths, Iranians, Alans and their influence on the development of culture. The Sclaven troops were used by the Huns as an auxiliary reserve for military campaigns.

During the reign of Attila, the territory of the Huns occupied unimaginable areas. Stretching from the Volga to the Rhine, the empire of the Hun conquerors reaches its maximum expansion. But when Attila dies, the great power disintegrates.

In many sources that describe the historical events of the Middle Ages, the Huns are called different nomadic tribes that are found in different parts of Eurasia. However, no one has been able to prove their relationship with the European Huns. In some publications, the word is interpreted simply as a term meaning "nomadic tribe". Only in 1926, K. A. Inostrantsev introduced the concept of "Huns" to designate the European tribes of the state of Atilla.

Thus, in the end, only one thing can be said: the Huns are not only nomadic tribes with an irresistible thirst for power, but also the key figures of their era, who caused many historical changes.

The Huns are an ancient nomadic tribe that invaded Eastern Europe in late antiquity (370s).

By origin, the Huns were Asians, and their language, according to most scientists, belonged to the Turkic group.

Also, most researchers recognized that the Huns were descendants of the Central Asian Xiongnu, known for their wars with the Chinese Empire.

Huns in Europe

The invasion of the Huns radically changed the history of European civilization. It was the beginning of the so-called Great Migration of Peoples - a process in which the "barbarian" European tribes, primarily the Germans, settled in different parts of the continent and invaded the boundaries of the Roman Empire.

As a result, the once integral empire was divided into several geographical parts, separated by barbarian settlements, which in some cases formed their own states.

On the other hand, many Germanic tribes wanted to become Roman citizens, so the government allowed them to settle in the outlying areas of the empire, in exchange for which they were obliged to protect the borders from other barbarian tribes.

Nevertheless, the Huns managed to subjugate a number of European peoples, who, with great difficulty, were able to free themselves from their dominion. More precisely, the state of the Huns weakened and collapsed after the death of Attila, the most powerful and famous Hun ruler, and this allowed the Germans to gain freedom.

The Alans and Germanic tribes were the first to suffer from the onslaught of the Huns:

• Ostrogoths;
• Burgundy;
• Heruli.

Asian nomads organized real "races of peoples for survival." The end result of this process, in particular, was the fall of the Western Roman Empire and the consolidation of the Slavs and Germans throughout Europe.

Origin of the Huns

While most scientists recognize the Huns as an ancient Turkic tribe, some researchers tend to bring them closer to the Mongolian and Manchu peoples. The Turkic origin of the Huns is evidenced by linguistic data, but the material culture is too different from the traditional Turkic.

For example, all the ancient Turks are characterized by a round dwelling “ib”, which later became the prototype of the yurt; the Huns lived in dugouts with an L-shaped couch.

Rulers

The first known Hun ruler is Balamber. It was he who in the 4th century subjugated the Ostrogoths, and forced the Visigoths to retreat to Thrace. The same king devastated Syria and Cappadocia (then Roman provinces), and then settled in Pannonia (the territory of present-day Hungary) and Austria. Information about Balamber is legendary.

The next known ruler is Rugila. Under him, the Huns concluded a truce with the Eastern Roman Empire, but Rugila threatened to violate it if Emperor Theodosius II did not give him the fugitives pursued by the Huns. Rugila did not have time to actuate his threat, as he died in time.

After him, his nephews, Bleda and Attila, began to rule the nomads. The first in 445 died for an unknown reason during a hunt, and from that moment Attila became the sole ruler of the Huns. This ruler, in the words of one Roman author, was "born to shake the world."

For the imperial authorities, Attila was a real "scourge of God", his image was used to intimidate the masses who inhabited the remote provinces of both Roman empires (Eastern and Western) and thought about gaining independence.

In the 6th-8th centuries, a kind of "kingdom of the Huns (Savir)" existed on the territory of Dagestan. Its capital was the city of Varachan, but most of the inhabitants of the state continued to maintain a nomadic way of life. The ruler of the state bore the Turkic title Elteber. In the 7th century, the next ruler of Alp-Ilitver, having received an embassy from Christian Caucasian Albania, deigned to convert to Christianity himself.

After the 8th century, there is no reliable information about the fate of the Dagestan "Kingdom of the Huns".

Lifestyle

The Huns were absolute nomads. The Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus reports that they never built any buildings for themselves and even in conquered cities tried not to enter houses; according to their beliefs, it was unsafe to sleep indoors. Most of the day they spent on horses, often even sleeping on them.

However, the Roman ambassador to the Huns, Priscus, wrote that Attila and some of his commanders had huge and richly decorated palaces. The Huns practiced polygamy. The basis of their social order was a large patriarchal family.

It is reported that the Huns were well acquainted with cooking, but nomadic life taught them to be unpretentious in food. Apparently, the Huns knew how to cook food, but they refused to do it due to lack of time.

Religion

The Huns were pagans. They recognized the common Turkic Tengri as the supreme god. The Huns had amulets depicting fantastic animals (primarily dragons), temples and silver idols. According to Movses Kalankatvatsi (Armenian historian of the 7th century), the Huns deified the sun, moon, fire and water, worshiped the "gods of the roads", as well as sacred trees.

They sacrificed horses to trees and gods; however, the Huns did not practice human sacrifice, unlike their alleged ancestors the Xiongnu. Perception of the Huns The European population, even the "barbarian", the Huns inspired real horror. Because of their Mongoloid features, they seemed to the noble Romans not as people, but as some kind of monsters, tightly attached to their ugly horses.

The Germanic tribes resented the onslaught of the nomadic Huns, who were not even familiar with agriculture and flaunted their savagery and ignorance.

Everyone has heard about them. But no one knows exactly what they were. Including scientists. But what is now known about them thanks to ancient historians and modern archaeologists and anthropologists.

In the quarry of a brick factory near the village of Beloglazovo, on the Ob, a burial of a warrior was found. The belt of the deceased was decorated with golden and silver plaques, a golden hryvnia with the heads of predatory animals at the ends hung around the neck, the weapons laid in the grave - a sword, a dagger, a knife, a bow and a quiver with arrows - shone with gold trim, were colored with inserts of carnelian and blood-red almandine .

Thousands of kilometers separated the grave from Rome. But the descendants of a warrior who was slain on the banks of a Siberian river bathed their horses in the rivers of Italy. The Huns were moving west.

Huns and Roman Empire

All roads still led to Rome. For many centuries, gold, slaves, and booty flocked to the insatiable city along them. For many centuries, legions marched along them, returning home for another triumph. Now it's payback time. Barbarians, greedy for prey, hurried along the roads.

Rome was still fighting. He was strong, no longer so much in weapons as in his former glory, the fear he had once inspired. With his ability to divide and rule, to set some barbarians against others. Finally, with its gold, which made it possible to hire, bribe, lure, or, in extreme cases, simply pay off. But all this only delayed the end. The "Eternal City" was empty, impoverished. In the Forum, where not so long ago the fate of the world was being decided, grass now grew and pigs roamed.

The 450th Nativity of Christ was celebrated throughout Italy in sorrow and despondency. The coming year did not bode well. Sins, big and small, real and imaginary, were hastily prayed for in the churches. The punishment of the Lord never seemed so inevitable. The "scourge of God" - Attila, the king of the Huns - was preparing to cross the borders of the Empire.

Attila demanded in his harem Honoria, the sister of Emperor Valentinian III, and with her a significant part of his possessions and treasures as a dowry. Honoria herself agreed to the marriage. She did not sacrifice herself for the love of her native city. From childhood, Honoria was destined for an unenviable fate. Her future husband - the daughter of one emperor and the sister of another - could claim the throne. This should have been avoided. Therefore, Honoria was doomed to celibacy, locked up in the palace and prepared for monastic life. For many years, an ambitious and energetic woman fought against powerful relatives. A secret marriage with the manager of her estates, Eugene, was revealed. The unlucky spouse was executed, and Honoria was sent to Constantinople, to the court of her cousin. The last hopes for freedom, power, ambitious dreams of the throne collapsed. In desperation, Honoria secretly sent a faithful eunuch to Attila with an offer to marry her and sent him a precious ring as a pledge.

Rome was outraged. “A completely unworthy offspring,” wrote an ancient historian, “to buy yourself the freedom of voluptuousness at the cost of evil for the entire state.” But Attila was pleased. Of course, in his harem there would be women both younger and more beautiful than a thirty-two-year-old Roman woman. But marriage with her gave the right to the Roman inheritance. War became inevitable. Attila began to gather troops, his own and subordinate tribes. The Huns, Ostrogoths, Heruli, Gepids, Rugii and others, only a few hundred thousand soldiers, moved on Rome.

Of all the barbarians, the Romans most feared and most hated the Huns. For violent fury in battle and ferocious ruthlessness in robbery, for bloodthirstiness and cruelty. Where the Huns passed, there were no people, no buildings, only ashes and corpses. They were insatiable, and the gold sent to them in the form of tribute only inflamed their greed even more.

Migration and wars of the Huns

At the end of the 4th century A.D. e. Huns appear in the steppes of the Northern Black Sea region. Everything was given over to fire and sword, those who resisted were mercilessly exterminated. First, the steppe-Alans were defeated and subjugated. The settled Alans were killed almost all, and part of the nomadic Alans submitted to the Huns. In two streams - through Perekop and from the Taman Peninsula through the current Kerch Strait - the Huns attacked the Bosporan kingdom in the Crimea. His cities were taken by storm and plundered. The Bosporus kingdom, which had existed for over a thousand years, perished, never to be reborn.

Then came the turn of the Germanic tribes - the Goths, who lived to the west and northwest of the Alans. The Visigoths fled to the Danube, the Ostrogoths were defeated. Their king, the 100-year-old Ermanaric, unable to bear the shame of defeat, committed suicide. And now, under the rule of the Huns, there is a vast territory from the Danube to the Volga, with many tribes and peoples living on it, and they themselves become neighbors of the Roman Empire, restless and merciless neighbors. Where was there an interest in the Hunnic past. Events unfolded quickly, and the Romans had no time for historical research.

Origin of the Huns

Where they came from and who their ancestors were, no one knew. The Roman historian wrote about the Huns that none of them can answer the question of where his homeland is: he was conceived in one place, born far from there, nurtured even farther away. Many seriously believed that the Huns were descended from the marriages of unclean spirits with witches, "a ferocious tribe ... undersized, disgusting and lean, which can be considered people only in the sense that it showed a semblance of human speech."

Hatred literally oozes from every line of any contemporary who wrote about the Huns (the Huns themselves did not leave any writings about themselves). For example, Ammianus Marcellinus, a witness of their first appearance in Europe, gave the Huns the following description: “They are all distinguished by their dense and strong limbs, thick nape, and in general such a monstrous and terrible appearance that one can mistake them for two-legged beasts ... With such an unpleasant human appearance, they so wild that they do not use fire or cooked food, but eat the roots of field grasses and half-cooked meat.

In the last century, scientists again became interested in the Huns, primarily in who they are and where they came from to Europe. The Roman version about the descendants of evil spirits and witches, of course, removed all doubts, but no longer corresponded to the prevailing mentality. Hypotheses were born one after another. The Huns were declared alternately, or even simultaneously, by Mongols, Turks, Sarmatians, Slavs, Germans, Iranians, God knows who else.

Then ancient chronicles became known, full of curses against the Xiongnu or Xiongnu people who lived on the territory of modern Mongolia and Transbaikalia. The Chinese also had good reason to hate.

Hun culture

The Xiongnu were nomads, and chronicles characterized them as follows. “According to the customs of the Xiongnu, the people eat the meat of livestock, drink their milk, dress in their skins; cattle eat grass and drink water, moving from place to place depending on the season. "In search of water and grass, they move from place to place ... they have no cities, surrounded by inner and outer walls, no permanent residence, and they do not cultivate the fields."

Every man was a warrior. “When they see the enemy, they rush for self-interest like a flock of birds, and when they are broken, they crumble like tiles, disperse like clouds.” In fact, the life of the Huns consisted of continuous battles.

What did the Huns look like? More or less like this.

History of the Huns

The history of the rise of the Xiongnu begins in 206 BC. e., when Mode became their leader (he was probably the legendary founder of the Huns). According to legend, he was the son of the supreme leader and had ten thousand horsemen under his command, united by iron discipline. If Mode fired an arrow at a target, everyone, without hesitation, should have followed his example. Once Mode shot his beloved Argamak. Some of those close to him did not dare to shoot after him, and their heads were immediately cut off. The same thing happened again when Mode shot an arrow at his beloved wife. But when the target then became the horse of his father, there were no more disobedient. Shortly thereafter, while hunting, Mode shot his father, and following his arrow, the arrows of Mode's associates pierced the unfortunate man. Then Mode killed his stepmother, younger brother, elders who did not want to obey him, and became the sole ruler of the Xiongnu.

Decades of wars and raids began. Chinese troops were beaten more than once. The Xiongnu invaded the territory of the Celestial Empire, robbed, killed, burned, and the strings of slaves again and again stretched into the inhospitable northern steppes. In folk songs it was sung: There is no more family and no home ... Trouble - This is the Hunnic horde that invaded.

The mounds of the Xiongnu leaders were found, plundered in antiquity and still containing the remains of luxurious carpets, silk fabrics and brocades, weapons, fragments of gold jewelry and jade products. And all this was only a miserable fraction of what the Xiongnu knew during their lifetime.

Military fortune, as you know, is changeable. In the first two centuries of our era, the Xiongnu entered a losing streak and broke up into several hordes. Neighboring nomadic tribes, in alliance with the Chinese, were able to inflict a number of defeats on them. The northern Xiongnu moved west and reached the Caspian through Central Asia. Apparently, this path took them several centuries, and all this time the Xiongnu wandered, fought with various tribes and at the same time mixed with them. Then they appeared in the Northern Black Sea region, "like a snowstorm in the mountains", and under the name of the Huns became known to the Romans.

So, the ancestral home of the Huns seems to have been found. Alas, this did little to answer the question of who they themselves were. Most likely, the people that the Chinese called the Xiongnu were Turkic in language and Mongoloid in appearance. But moving to the west, the Xiongnu mixed with many peoples, plucked from their homes and dragged entire tribes along with them. No wonder Ammianus Marcellinus wrote with anxiety that throughout the entire space that stretches to Pontus (that is, to the Black Sea), a barbaric mass of tribes hidden so far is agitated, torn from their places by sudden force.

The European Huns were already very different from the Xiongnu, so much so that some scholars generally refuse to recognize them as descendants of the latter. This is probably over-skepticism, but the real and significant differences are quite clear from archeology. She knows the burials of Asian Huns and cannot find traces of European Huns in the ground. A paradoxical situation has arisen. There were many peoples and tribes that were once powerful and instilled fear in their neighbors. Archaeologists know their occupations, settlements and dwellings, their burials, their weapons, jewelry and kitchen utensils have been studied to the smallest detail. Anthropologists have restored their appearance, historians of primitive society have reconstructed their social system in general terms. Only one thing is missing - written evidence, the mention of these peoples in ancient books and annals. And therefore, one can only guess about their history and fate, and the very name of many such peoples is unknown to us.

With the Huns, things are different. Their name and ancestral home are known, their history has been studied. Only they are unknown. It is not known what language they spoke, what was the social structure of the Huns, what race they belonged to, and how different the European Huns were from the Asian Xiongnu. It would seem, what is easier. It is necessary to compare the archeological monuments of the times of the Huns dominance in Europe with those Mongolian and Trans-Baikal ones, which unquestionably belonged to the Xiongnu. Those of them that resemble the Trans-Baikal ones are obviously Hunnic. That's what they tried to do and still try to do. There is just little to be gained from this.

Perhaps, the monuments of the Hunnic time have not been discovered in Europe? On the contrary, many hundreds of burials are known there.

Burials of warriors with weapons decorated in a clumsy and tasteless, at a modern point of view, style, when gold was strewn with precious stones without counting - the more, the better - and if there were no stones, then at least with colored glass, and if there was gold can not afford, then it was replaced at least with gold foil. Burials of barbarian women with decorations made in the same style, household items, simple utensils. And among these burials, there are certainly Hunnic ones. But archaeologists still do not know how to single them out, distinguish them from others. Attempts were made, and repeatedly, but without much success.

No wonder this time is called the era of the Great Migration of Nations. Everything was in motion. Some tribes were divided, others, on the contrary, merged. They learned from each other, adopted other people's customs, culture, even names. Everything became, if not common, then extremely similar - both weapons and jewelry, even the funeral rite. Try to determine here where the Hun is, and where is the Alan, Goth or Gepid! Even when the dead are found with clearly Mongoloid features - and there are only a few such known - one cannot be completely sure that they are Huns. Mixed marriages in that era were practiced more often than ever. True, in the most recent time, the archaeologist I.P. Zasetskaya, apparently, managed to identify a number of Hun burials in the Northern Black Sea region. But this is still too little to solve the whole problem. The northern Black Sea region was only a small part of the "Hunnia", this conditional empire of the Huns, moreover, by the middle of the 5th century - its distant outskirts.

So, at the end of the 4th century A.D. e. the Huns became the new neighbors of the Empire. And immediately made a corresponding performance. In 395 they invade the Transcaucasus and Mesopotamia, in the same year they reach the walls of Constantinople. At the beginning of the 5th century, the Huns captured the Danube lands. From now on, Pannonia, present-day Hungary, a rich and fertile plain that has long attracted nomads, becomes the center of the Hunnic state. The fruits of robbery and tribute flock from everywhere: jewelry, gold, cattle, slaves.

In 433, the Hunnic king Rugila dies, transferring power to his two nephews - Bleda and Attila. For twelve years they rule together, conquer the Germanic tribes, destroy the Burgundian kingdom on the Rhine, disturb Rome. But Attila was not the kind of person to share power with anyone. No wonder the Gothic historian Jordanes wrote about him later: "This man was born into the world to shock peoples and to instill fear in all countries." In 445, Attila treacherously kills his brother and begins to rule with autocracy.

Attila - leader of the Huns

Attila was, of course, an outstanding commander and politician. This was recognized even by the Romans, who had a fierce hatred for him. No wonder he left such a mark, both in the imagination of his contemporaries and in the memory of his descendants. Short in stature, with a broad chest and a proudly set large head, with a narrow slit in the eyes and a sparse beard, Attila instilled fear even with his unusual appearance for the Romans.

Cruel, greedy and voluptuous, consumed by an all-consuming thirst for power, he knew how to make friends, win over to his side, knew how, when necessary, to bestow and caress, was able to heed the advice of others. The owner of untold wealth, he dressed like an ordinary warrior, was moderate in food and drink, ate only on wooden utensils.

This is how Attila is portrayed

Attila struck his first blow against the Eastern Roman Empire. One after another, the fortresses on the Danube fell, and now the Hunnic hordes, like locusts, spread across the Balkans, destroying everything in their path. The Roman army was utterly defeated and scattered in the first battle. Greece is devastated: seventy cities are burned and plundered, thousands of people are driven into slavery. Attila could easily take Constantinople as well, but he reasoned that it was not worth killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. For refusing to attack, he received 6,000 pounds of gold and a promise to pay a regular tribute of 2,100 pounds annually.

By 451, Attila was the ruler of a power that stretched from the Central Asian deserts to the Rhine, from the Baltic Sea to the Black. His headquarters was always crowded with kings and leaders of various tribes. “Wherever he turned his eye, immediately each of them appeared before him without the slightest murmur, but in fear and trembling, or did what he was ordered to do.” In the spring of 451, Attila crossed the Rhine. Burnt cities flared up again. The fate of Rome hung in the balance.

Aetius was at the head of the Roman troops. In his youth, he spent several years as a hostage at the headquarters of the Huns, where he met with Attila, he knew the restless barbarian world well. For thirty years, he managed to support the fading Western Roman Empire with the help of barbarians against barbarians. This time his main hope was the general hatred of the Huns. Visigoths, Alans, Alemanni, Burgundians, and Franks flock under the banner of Aetius. On June 15, 451, a decisive battle took place on the Catalaunian fields, near the city of Troyes. Until the 19th century, there was no larger and more bloody battle in history - several hundred thousand soldiers took part in it from both sides.

The battle lasted all day, and the river flowing through the fields overflowed its banks, overflowing with blood. There were 165 thousand killed. The thirsty wounded drank the water of the river mixed with blood. “Caught by an unfortunate lot, they swallowed, when they drank, the blood that they themselves shed when they were wounded.” Even dry and not prone to lyrical outpourings, Jordan could not stand it and when describing the battle, he excitedly remarked: “It is proved that the human race lives for kings, if, due to the insane impulse of a single mind, a massacre of peoples is carried out and, by the will of an arrogant king, what is nature is destroyed in an instant. produced for so many centuries.

Battle of the Catalaunian Fields, Huns vs. Romans

And for the first time military happiness betrayed Attila. Together with the army, he had to take refuge in a fortified camp. In anticipation of the assault, he even prepared, according to the Hun custom, to burn himself, so as not to fall alive at the hands of enemies. But the assault did not follow. Disagreements broke out in the Roman camp, the Visigoths withdrew their troops, and Attila was able to safely retreat. Soon, weakened, but not exhausted, he rushed south to Italy, again sowing death and destruction around him.

Aquileia, Verona, Mantua, Bergamo were wiped off the face of the earth. Milan submitted voluntarily, he himself opened the gates and for this, as a favor, he was only plundered. It was Rome's turn. He could not defend himself - all the troops were with Aetius. From the "eternal city" an embassy headed by Pope Leo I went to Attila, humbly pleading for mercy. Unexpectedly, Attila turned out to be accommodating: a plague broke out in the Hun army, and Aetius was waiting for him at the Apennine passes. The Hun king left for Pannonia, but threatened that he would return next year if Honoria was not sent to him. Attila did not return.

Rome was helped by chance. Attila decided to take a new concubine, a captive Burgundian beauty Ildiko, into his harem. The next morning after the wedding, the servants found a weeping girl and a dead despot on the marriage bed. According to the official version, he died "from the great pleasure of it and burdened with wine." But in all parts of Europe it was said that Attila was stabbed to death by Ildiko at night, avenging the death of her relatives and the destruction of the Burgundian kingdom.

At the beginning of the 13th century in Austria, on the banks of the Danube, an unknown shpilman, a wandering professional singer, first recorded heroic tales that had been passed down from mouth to mouth among various German peoples for many centuries. Similar stories were later found in ancient Icelandic manuscripts. So the "Song of the Nibelungs" - a medieval German epic - has come down to our days. In it we again meet with the Huns, Goths and Burgundians, with the beautiful Ildiko (she is called Gudruna or Kriemhilda in the epic, but the name Ildiko is an affectionate reduction from Hilda) and the formidable Attila (now he is called Etzel in the German way or in the Scandinavian - Atli ).

"The beautiful princess lived in Burgundy, that girl was the most beautiful of all in the world." The princess was married to Etzel, king of the Huns, and bore him two sons. The Kriemhild brothers, the Burgundian kings, own an incalculable treasure - the gold of the Nibelungs, which they hid at the bottom of the Rhine. Etzel, eager to get the treasure, lures the brothers to his palace. But they steadfastly die under torture, without betraying secrets. The next day, the leaders of the Huns gather at Etzel's palace for a feast. The queen who served them brings her husband a tasty meal - the hearts of her sons. For the sake of revenge, she, like Medea once, did not spare her own children. Horrified, Etzel falls on his bed, and Kriemhilde plunges her sword into his chest, then sets fire to the palace and dies in the flames. This is how real historical events were reflected in the people's memory.

However, there is another version of the Nibelungen. Krimhilda in it takes revenge not on Etzel - Attila for the brothers, but, on the contrary, with the help of Etzel - on the brothers for the death of her first husband, Siegfried. Etzel himself appears before us in this version as a kind, gentle and noble king, a generous patron of the knights of the princely family.

Another joke of history? Maybe so. After all, it happened that bloody despots became virtuous monarchs in the memory of subsequent generations, devoting their lives to caring for the well-being of their subjects. Or maybe those Germanic tribes who were allies of Attila, accomplices in his robberies, remembered the “scourge of God” precisely from the “positive” side?

But back to the real Attila. The body of the dead king was transported to the desert steppe and laid in a silk tent. Women cut off their braids as a sign of mourning, men wounded their faces. The best riders participated in the races around the tent with the dead. The best singers glorified his exploits. Then they built a mound and, after a magnificent feast, late at night, secretly buried the corpse in the ground, having previously enclosed it in three coffins - gold, silver and iron, and putting into the burial the weapons of the killed enemies captured by Attila, expensive horse harness, gold and jewelry without counting. On the same night, everyone who built the tomb of the formidable king was killed so that no one would recognize its place and would not disturb the deceased in search of treasures.

Many people searched for the grave of Attila. So far without success. Somewhere in the Hungarian steppes, probably, even now there is a mound with the remains of a despot, swollen from time to time, whose very death served only as an excuse for new bloodshed. Its discovery would give science a lot. But will they ever find it?

Or maybe the mound should be looked for at all and not in Hungary? Maybe the Huns took the body of their king to the distant Black Sea steppes in order to perform a bloody funeral rite there, away from prying eyes? Finally, it is possible that the robbers dug up the mound with the grave of Attila long ago and stole his jewels, but did not understand who these jewels belonged to. And they lie now in museums and private collections unidentified. Or, even worse, the stones were taken out of their settings, the gold was melted down for the convenience of the sellers, the iron was thrown away as unnecessary trash.

Huns and Slavs

There is another mysterious circumstance in Attila's funeral. Jordan, who described them in detail, especially noted the funeral feast - a grandiose feast, when funeral grief is expressed with jubilation. And he called him "strava". But strava is a word of Slavic origin. In Dahl's Explanatory Dictionary it is said that it means food, food, food, dishes, etc. Where did this word come from to the Huns, which is more appropriate on the funeral feast of, say, Prince Oleg? Accident? Coincidence?

But in 448 Attila's headquarters was visited by the learned Greek Prisk of Panius as part of the Constantinople embassy. And in the notes about his journey, he mentions that in the Danube villages the embassy was offered “instead of wine, honey, which is exactly what is called in those places.” Again, the Slavic custom and the Slavic term for its designation among the Huns!

What is the role of the Huns in the history of the Slavs and vice versa? It is possible that already at the beginning of the 5th century, the Slavs penetrated the Danube, into those areas where the Huns also came, who adopted some words and customs from the Slavs.

The death of Attila did not save Rome. Two years later, weakened by the war with the Huns, the Vandals captured it and carefully plundered it for two weeks. And twenty-one years later, the Western Roman Empire ceased to exist forever.

Fall of the state of the Huns

Soon after the death of Attila, the power of the Huns also collapsed, held together only by fear and force of arms. His numerous sons began to challenge each other's power. Subordinate tribes and peoples revolted. The Huns were utterly defeated and fled to the Black Sea steppes. “So the Huns retreated,” the ancient historian concluded, “before whom the Universe seemed to retreat.”

The subsequent fate of the Huns is practically unknown. Most likely, they mixed with other tribes, finally losing their language and name. But where and when exactly and with whom exactly?

Huns, video

And in conclusion, an interesting documentary about the Huns and their legendary leader Attila.

In the middle of the 1st millennium BC. e. on the territory of Altai, South Siberia and East Kazakhstan, an alliance of Hun tribes began to take shape, called the Xiongnu (Huns). As noted in the genealogical stories of the Huns, recorded at the beginning of our era, "they had a thousand-year history." These tribes declared themselves in the historical events of the “Great Migration of Peoples” era. Of the proto-Turkic unions that created states, the Huns, Usuns and Kangyuis played a significant role in the history of Kazakhstan. The territory of the Huns in the heyday of the empire (177 BC) covered the vast expanses of Eurasia - from the Pacific Ocean to the shores of the Caspian Sea, and later Central Europe, Usuns, according to Chinese sources, the original inhabitants of the northern regions of East Turkestan, then Semirechye and Ferghana, One of the ancient states - Kangyuy occupied the following territory: Southern Kazakhstan, including the Tashkent oasis and the Syr Darya basin, and part of the southwestern Semirechye. However, there are still many controversial issues regarding the localization of the Huns, Usuns and Kangyui. The Huns, who headed the eastern coalition of tribes for many centuries, had a huge impact on the fate of all regions of Eurasia. In the II century. to i. e. the Huns forced the Han dynasty (China) to sign a "treaty of peace and kinship", according to which they received a princess and an annual tribute in the form of "gifts". At that time, the territory from modern Korea to Western China was under the rule of the shanyus (kings). This confederation also included Transbaikal tribes. Following the Yuechzhi, the Huns ended up in Central Asia and created the state of the White Huns (Ephthalites) there. Subsequently, during the time of Attila, the Huns reached Central Europe and defeated the Roman Empire. The “Great Migration of Nations” begun by the Huns became the beginning of a new era - the era of the Middle Ages and feudalism. The Huns at the turn of our era dictated the course of historical events on the Eurasian continent. It is with them that the formation of new states, ethnic structures and cultural trends in this territory is connected. The role of the Huns in the ethnogenesis of the Kazakh people is especially significant. It is with the wide settlement of the territory of Kazakhstan in the Hun period that the dominance of the Turkic language, a mixed anthropological type and the formation of the traditional foundations of nomadic culture, is associated. In terms of race genetics, a Caucasoid-Mongoloid physical basis was formed at the time under consideration, which served as an early ancestral form for the modern mixed turanoid race.

The economy of the Huns

The main occupation of the tribes of the Hunnic cultural circle was cattle breeding, as the Chinese historian Sima Qian (145-87 BC) notes: “They move with cattle from place to place, depending on their wealth in grass and water. Permanent stay is not known. They live in round yurts. from which the exit faces east. They eat meat, drink koumiss. clothes are made from assorted fabrics.
“War and raids with the aim of capturing prey are an important part of their lives,” write eyewitnesses of these times. “In times of peace they follow the cattle and at the same time hunt birds and beasts, thus supporting their existence, and in troubled years, each is trained in military affairs to carry out attacks.” These formulations are traditional for foreign historians in their assessment of the nomads of the early and late Middle Ages of Eurasia. However, a more detailed study shows a complex structure of the economy. The main type of economy of the Hunnic society was nomadic cattle breeding. The herd included all kinds of domestic animals - a sheep, a horse, a cow, a two-humped camel, a goat, a donkey. Horse breeding was especially developed among these tribes. Wealthy nomads owned 4-5 thousand horses. Usun gunmo as a bride price for the Chinese; He sent the princess a thousand heads of horses. The ruling elite of Kangju also preserved the traditions of nomadic pastoralism. Chinese sources mention different locations of summer and winter residences (at a distance of 900 km). Excavations of settlements reveal an abundance of bones of domestic animals. The Huns knew settled way of life and agriculture. The sources mention cities located in the depths of the Hunnic lands and grain reserves stored there. “In the northern lands, the cold sets in early, and although it is inconvenient to sow millet, they sowed in the land of the Huns.” In a Hunnic settlement in Siberia, about 80 dwellings were discovered on an area of ​​75 hectares. The settlement was surrounded by four moats and four ramparts. Millet grains, cast-iron coulters, an iron sickle, stone grain graters and granary pits were found in it. Due to the small size of the coulters, the Huns' plows were small, wooden, and the earth was dug up shallowly. On the territory occupied by the state of Kangyuy (Khorezm, the Aral Sea region, the Tashkent oasis), irrigated agriculture dominated. Already in T. n. e. along the Syrdarya rivers. Chirchik, main canals were built. Traces of canals, remains of dams were traced during the study of the area and during the interpretation of aerial photographs of the monuments and their environs. In all the excavated settlements and urban centers of Kangyui, the remains of cereals, seeds of melons and fruit crops were found. In storage rooms at residential buildings, large clay containers and vessels for storing supplies were found.
Thus, the dominance of nomadic pastoralism as the main type of economic activity, and the presence of small centers of settlement and agriculture, can be considered as a general rule for all states of the Hun era. Within the framework of the state, the nomadic and settled population was harmoniously united. Along with cattle breeding and agriculture, the Huns, Usuns and Kangyui developed home crafts and handicrafts. Jewelery, pottery, blacksmithing were especially widely developed. Finds of various metal products in barrows speak of the development of metallurgical craft. Part of the population is constantly engaged in the extraction of iron and polymetallic ores, the development of gold and silver.

Social organization of the Huns

The social structure of the Hunnic society had a complex picture. At the head of the country was a shanyoi, who in the best years of the powers had unlimited power. He was called the "son of heaven" and officially "born of heaven and earth. Placed by the Sun and the Moon, the great Hun chanyu. According to the sources, the Huns were divided into 24 clans, headed by the "heads of the generation". Subsequently, the shanyoi himself took up the distribution of territory and population by districts, and then the chiefs began to be called "chiefs over 10 thousand horsemen." In turn, the temnik appointed thousanders, centurions and foremen, allocating them land with a nomadic population. Despite the extreme strengthening of the central power, the people's assembly and the council of elders continued to operate in the Hunnic society. Sources report that the Huns had a habit of gathering three times a year in Luntsi, where they sacrificed to the spirit of heaven ... at these meetings, the leaders of the generations talked about state affairs, amused themselves with horse racing and camel running. In the Hunnic society there were aristocratic clans connected by marriage. Therefore, we can talk about a kind of hierarchy of clans in society. Since the Huns were the creators of the empire, there were also many conquered and forcibly adapted tribes among them. Relations with the newly conquered tribes and ethnic groups were carried out in the form of tributary. Slavery also flourished in Tunisian society. Mostly prisoners were turned into slaves: they were settled in towns, they plowed the land, built or were engaged in crafts. Archaeological materials on the Usun kurgans of Semirechye allow us to divide them into groups according to their social affiliation. In the first of them (diameter - 50-80 m, height - 8-12 m) rich burials were found, in the second (diameter - 15-20 m, height - 1 m) - medium, and in the third (diameter - 5-10 m , height 30-50 cm) - poor, where one or two vessels, iron knives, bronze earrings, etc. were found. The last group of burial mounds is the most numerous in Semirechye. [
The appearance of private property is also indicated by metal, stone and clay seals. It is possible that metal seals are (symbols of the power of high-ranking officials in Vusun society, while clay seals, most likely, served to distinguish property. A common occurrence for nomads of this time are various marks, tamgas and other signs, sometimes found on clay vessels or on In the Kanyu state, tamgas were also placed on coins. On the territory belonging to the Kanyu cultural circle, a large number of coins with similar signs were found. The very fact of this phenomenon testifies in favor of the development of commodity-money relations and property relations. The gap in the social development of farmers and nomads ideologically led to a conflict between them.The founders of the Hunnic state and their successors saw their task in uniting all peoples, "pulling a bow and living in felt yurts" and "in dominating people living in adobe houses". , Chinese and ancient sources also try to create from koche the image of the enemy entered: “An unprecedented kind of people, rising like snow from a secluded corner, shakes and destroys everything” (Marcellius about the Huns). Europe's exit from the crisis that struck the slave-owning mode of production in the first centuries of our era, and the transfer of society to feudal rails, were impossible without the Great Migration of Peoples, where most of the Central Asian nomadic tribes participated. In world historical terms, this event is comparable to a successful social revolution.

Ethnic history of the Huns

The name Xiongnu (gun) appeared in the II-I centuries, BC. (proto-Huns) in Chinese sources The development of nomadic pastoralism led to the consolidation of some of the Central Asian tribes into tribal unions. One of the results of this process was the increased frequency of nomadic raids on the fragmented destinies of China. The raids are somewhat reduced only in the IV century. BC e. with the establishment of the hegemony of the principality of Qin. united most of the destinies of the weakened Zhou dynasty. In this century, the Chinese made retaliatory attacks on the nomads and captured a lot of territory. The Huns and Usuns were forced to migrate to the west. China has begun building the Great Wall of China in this border area. The genealogy of the Hunnic rulers goes back to Shun Wei, who lived 1000 years ago before the Mist Shanu (3rd century BC). Unfortunately, this legendary story remains unexplored to this day. More or less reliable written sources have appeared since the reign of Mode (III-II centuries BC). In the very first years of the reign of Mode, Shanyoi dealt a crushing blow to the borders of China, forcing the newly established Han dynasty to return the Huns' nomad camps in Ordos. In 200 BC. e. the Chinese emperor, in order to ensure security on the border with a large army, went against the Huns. After the first clashes, the Huns retreated, the vanguard of the Chinese troops, together with Emperor Gao Di, broke away from the main forces. The nomads, immediately stopping their retreat, surrounded them from four sides: “the Xiongnu cavalry on the western side all sat on white horses, on the eastern side on gray horses with a white spot on the muzzle, on the northern side - on black horses, and on the south side - on red horses. horses." Then, in the east, the Huns subjugated the tribes of the "eastern hu" - uhu-an, xianbi, who lived in Mongolia. In the west, the Hunnic cavalry defeated the Yuechzhi in 177 BC. e. This is evidenced by the words of the shanyu: “by the grace of Heaven, the warriors were healthy, and the horses were strong: they destroyed and pacified the Yuezhi, Loulan, Usun, Hujie and the 36 destinies bordering on them became our subordinates. All of them entered the Xiongnu army and made up one family.” The final victory was won only after 10 years. The leader of the Yuezhi stalemate in battle. and from his skull Laoshan chanyu made a drinking cup. Pushed back to Central Asia, the Yuezhi took possession of the territory of the Greco-Bactrian state, and then created the Kushan state. Thus, in the ethnic composition of the Huns, we see tribes and ethno-political formations of various origins. The crisis of the eastern Hunnic state began in 71 AD. BC, when China, with the help of the nomadic neighbors of the Huns - Wuhuan, Usun, Dinlin, inflicted a heavy defeat. Subsequently, in 56 BC. Huns society split into, 'southern and northern. But, despite this, until the middle of the II century. n. e. the Huns resisted the Chinese advance to the west. Usuns were considered! one of the significant ethnopolitical associations after the Huns. Their ethnic history is closely connected with the nomadic tribes of Central Asia of the times of the Saks. They are in the 2nd century. BC. entered the state created under the auspices of the Huns. Subsequently, having entered into allied relations with China, they became the cause of the death of the state. During the allied era, contacts between the Usuns and their eastern neighbor became more frequent, as a result of which the Han Empire often corrected the problems of succession to the throne. Although the name Kangkha (kangyui) has been known since ancient times (mid-2nd millennium BC), more or less reliable information appears; in the II century. BC. At this time, the Chinese traveler Zhang Qian speaks of the dependence of the Kangju lands on the Yuezhi and the Huns. After the split of the Hun state, the Kangyu supported the North Hun shanyu Zhi Zhi (Shozhe) in the fight against the Usuns, whose ally was China. In the II century. AD Kangyuy becomes a strong state in the territory from East Turkestan to the Aral Sea. Thus, the states created by the Huns, Usuns and Kangyuis in Central Asia were nomadic.

Hun culture

The culture of the Huns, Usuns and Kangyuis was a natural continuation and development of the culture of the Saka tribes, it included and further developed its main elements. By the time of the formation of these states, iron products were widely distributed, a primitive loom appeared, woodworking was widely developed, crafts were born. The Huns had a fairly developed material culture and military skills, wall-beating equipment, which allowed them to crush well-armed opponents, take its fortified cities. The material culture of the Usuns and Kangyuis has also been studied quite closely. Excavations of settlements and cities, cemeteries in the Semirechie and Syr Darya have provided vivid expressive materials that allow us to imagine the nature of the dwellings of the early nomads, their interior, to trace the evolution of ceramics and its main types, to learn about the tools and weapons of these tribes. Despite the strong desire of modern historians to see them as a settled, urban people, the Hun-Usun ethnic groups of the 1st millennium BC. e. were mostly nomadic pastoralists. “They do not engage in agriculture, but migrate with livestock, looking at the water and grass,” notes a Chinese traveler. In the periphery of the nomadic world there were settled agricultural oases that served as wintering settlements. Some of these settlements looked like fortified settlements. Such are the Hunnic settlements in Siberia, the fortified settlement of Chigu Usuns, the settlements of A ktobe, Kokmardan, etc.
The Roman historian Priscus left a description of the headquarters of Attila in Pannonia, according to him, it was like “a vast city” - “its wooden walls, as we noticed, were made of shiny boards, the connection between which was so strong in appearance that it was barely possible notice - and then with diligence - the junction between them. One could also see the triclinic, stretching over a considerable space, and the porticos, spread out in all their beauty. The area of ​​the palace was surrounded by a huge fence: its size itself testified to the palace. This was the dwelling of King Attila, who held the whole barbarian world, he preferred such a dwelling to the conquered cities. The ancestral cemeteries of the early nomads were located along the banks of the rivers, they were built on the places of nomads and usually consist of small barrows. Hun burial mounds are distinguished by ring fences, the presence of stone boxes, the accompanying burial of a horse, the elongated position of the buried on their backs, arrowheads of various shapes, bone onions for bows, broadswords, armored plates, quiver hooks with a transverse bar. The most prominent monuments of Hun architecture are mausoleums of the "melon" type: Kozy Korpesh - Bayan Sulu, Dombauyl, Teke. The main types of tomb structures of the Usuns are native mounds. The burial mounds are located in a group of 2 to 25 with ring-shaped layouts of stones on the embankment and behind the embankment. In all areas inhabited by the Kangyui tribes, burial grounds were located near the settlements. Burial structures consisted of ground mounds and underground chambers. Burials were made in simple soil pits, lined graves and catacombs. He put both earthenware and wooden vessels with food in the grave. Men were buried with weapons - daggers, swords, bows and arrows. Decorations prevailed in women's burials - earrings, rings, bracelets, necklaces made of beads. In the rock carvings of the Huns, images of a bull, a deer and a swan are often found. According to their ideas, the bull personified strength and power, the deer brought happiness and prosperity, showed the way to wanderers. The Huns believed that the swan guards the hearth. They served as totems of the ancient tribes. In the group of monuments of the Hunnic time there is a golden plate with a picture from the life of ancient nomads, "Nomads' rest under a tree" repeats the plot of the poem "Kozy Korpesh and Bayan Sulu", they depict Aibas and Bayan Supu, mourning the death of Kozy Korpesh. The art of the Huns, Usuns and Kanpois is closely connected with the artistic traditions of the Sakas (animal style). At the same time, it is characterized by a wider use of inlay, inserts of gems. In the III-II centuries. BC e. the animal style is being replaced by the polychrome monuments of which have been preserved on. a vast area from Atgay to the Crimea. The most interesting, found in Semirechye, Jety Asare, Sary Ark and Borovoe, are stylized figures of animals and birds decorated with gems, colored stones, ornaments, and surrounded by patterns of grains, filigree belts. Symbols of the spirit of ancestors were unique figurines of men and women from the barrows of the Syr Darya (Kauynshi), Central Kazakhstan (Kara agash). The monuments illustrate the ideological ideas of the ancient tribes, their spiritualization of nature, the cult of ancestors and the sun.

One and a half thousand years ago, the land from China to France trembled under the hooves of the cavalry of the Huns - mysterious, cruel and invincible conquerors.
Huns. Wild tribe of Asian nomads. One and a half thousand years ago, they arose out of nowhere and just as mysteriously disappeared, passing through Eurasia in a swift whirlwind.

In an incredible way, the Huns created one of the most powerful empires in the history of mankind, rallying different peoples. And it is the Huns - a mysterious people whose traces were lost in history fifteen centuries ago - that can clarify many dark spots in Russian history.

Reference:
Xiongnu (Mong. Khnn, Chinese Xiongnu) - according to science, this is an ancient nomadic people, from 220 BC. to the 2nd century AD inhabiting the steppes northeast of China. Khnn means "people, people" in Mongolian. They waged active wars with the Chinese Han Empire, which erected the Great Wall of China to protect against their raids (By the way, for some reason, on this wall, the loopholes look south, towards China. So, who built it and who defended from whom - question).
During the wars with China, the Xiongnu managed to consolidate into a single power that subjugated the tribes of neighboring nomads. As a result of wars with the Chinese, as well as civil strife, the Xiongnu state collapsed and the Xiongnu were divided into several peoples.

According to the widespread opinion, part of the Xiongnu reached Europe and, having mixed with the Ugrians, began to be called the Huns. Part of the Xiongnu mixed with the northern Chinese. In the IV-V centuries AD. people from this tribal union even headed royal dynasties in northern China.
The Huns are a union of tribes, formed in the II-IV centuries. in the Urals from the Xiongnu, who migrated here in the II century. from Central Asia, and local Ugrians and Sarmatians. The Huns created a huge state from the Volga to the Rhine. Under the commander and ruler Atilla, the Huns tried to conquer all of Western Europe (mid-5th century). They subjugated the Alans in the North Caucasus, devastated Syria and Cappadocia in Asia Minor, defeated the state of the Goths of Germanarich in the Crimea, subjugated the Ostrogoths in the lower reaches of the Dnieper, drove the Visigoths into Thrace. Having settled in Pannonia (the territory of present-day Hungary) and Austria, they began to raid the Eastern Roman Empire.

The Hunnic union of tribes (it included the Bulgars, Ostrogoths, Heruls, Gepids, Scythians, Sarmatians and a number of other tribes) reached its greatest territorial expansion and power under Attila (reigned in 434-453). In 451 the Huns invaded Gaul and in the Catalaunian fields were defeated by the Romans and their allies, the Visigoths and the Franks.
After the death of Attila and the strife that arose within the empire, the empire of the Huns fell apart, and they disappeared as a people, although their name was still met as a common name for the nomads of the Black Sea region for a long time.

The Huns are a Russian trace in ancient history.
At the beginning of the first millennium of our era in the south of Russia, the capital (Itil?) of the empire of a mysterious people, which contemporaries called the Huns, arose. Today they are considered to be wild Asian barbarians who enslaved different tribes. But there are facts in favor of the fact that the Russian lands have never been under the yoke of nomads. So who were the Huns really? And what is mysterious about them, if we read so much about their ruler Attila? The nightmare of Western civilization, which found its death on the marriage bed. How much has been said, written and even filmed about him!

And yet, we know practically nothing about the Huns, except for their wars, first with the Goths, and then with the Roman Empire. But before fighting the Romans, the Huns had to come from somewhere, and before that they had to live and develop somewhere. They did not appear overnight on horseback and with weapons?
Where did they come from between the Volga and the Don, and where did the very name of this people come from?
There are three hypotheses for this. The first, official hypothesis of science identifies the Huns with the Mongoloid people who came to Europe from the depths of Asia. This version was also defended by the Russian historian-ethnologist L.N. Gumilyov. It is outlined above.
What happens? First, the Xiongnu - Xiongnu were thoroughly beaten in China, then for some reason they dragged themselves through all of Siberia and the rocky deserts of Northern China to the Volga.
True, the Chinese themselves deny such a dubious honor, arguing that the hieroglyph "Xiongnu" is basically impossible for them, and, consequently, such a name for the people. But who will listen to them? In Western Europe, they know better what is Chinese and what is not. It says Chinese, so Chinese!

It turns out that the rather miserable remnants of an unfinished tribe, having passed half of Eurasia, were able to defeat the Alans, all the tribes living along the Black Sea coast and even a strong kingdom ready with its mighty army, and then "deal" with the Roman Empire? Hard to believe.
The Xiongnu (Xiongnu) in China had a very developed and peculiar culture, which for some reason was completely forgotten on the way to the Volga-Don steppes. On the contrary, they managed to fully master and recognize as their own the culture of the tribes that lived along the banks of the Volga and the Don.
And their own language was so completely forgotten that they did not add a single Chinese word to the speech of the local population.
These Xiongnu, who are Xiongnu, are strange.
Of course, the Romans, describing the Huns, did not spare gloomy colors.
They can be understood, the conquerors from the east (and for the Romans, the east is everything beyond Istrom - the Danube) should have been terrifying, otherwise the Roman legions themselves are worthless. Therefore, the appearance of the "horror of Europe" in the stories turned out to be unthinkably ugly: instead of eyes, holes, a beard in tatters, faces were scarred from birth (before giving the newborn a mother's breast, they were allegedly wounded on the face with a sword).
But these are stories, but on the portal of the Reims Cathedral there is a bas-relief depicting the death of Bishop Nikas at the hands of cruel Huns. The Huns on it are in chain mail and with weapons, it is impossible to confuse them with saints and mourners. Of course, the expression on the faces of the killers is far from benevolent, but there is nothing ugly or terrible in them. And the beards are not in tatters, but either absent or neatly trimmed. Hairstyles are very neat, and the slanting in the eyes is not noticeable even with the most careful examination. But they could portray narrow-eyed freaks ...
And here is what the Byzantine ambassador Priysk Panisky wrote. In 449, he went to the Hunnic king Attila to talk about the size of the Roman tribute. The diplomat was sure that he would see tents made of horseskin and unwashed riders. But the capital of the Huns struck him. The city was located across three rivers to the northeast of the Danube and was built of wood. The royal palace with carved towers towered on the mountain. Guests were greeted with bread and salt, honey and kvass. And the girls in long dresses led round dances, celebrating the arrival of guests ...

The chroniclers testify that Attila's people were mostly with blond hair and blue eyes. Attila himself was from the Volga. His country was called Bulyar (Bulgar?), and it was founded by Attila's great-grandfather King Balamber. Some historians read his name as Vladimir. Attila's brother's name was Bled, which sometimes sounds like Vlad. And in the ancient Bulgarian chronicle "Gazi-Baradj tarihi" (some historians consider this chronicle a fake), the real name of Attila himself is written - Mstislav.
In addition, the Romans said that the thunderstorm of the Roman Empire, the great and terrible Attila, was fluent in several languages, was very knowledgeable in many philosophical issues. And the sister of the Roman emperor Valentinian, Honoria, asked the leader of the Huns for help against her own brother, who doomed her to girlhood for the sake of his political ambitions. As a token of her respect, she even sent Attila a ring. The ruler of the Huns took this as a marriage proposal, and demanded half of the empire as a dowry for marrying an overripe beauty.

In fact, the sister of Emperor Valentinian II Justa Grata Honoria did not suffer from piety and decent behavior from her youth. And when she was over 30, she started an affair with the procurator Yevgeny and became pregnant from him. It is not permissible for anyone to corrupt the emperor’s sisters, even if they have long been of age, the official was executed, and the loving beauty was sent out of sight to Byzantium and there she was promised a wife to the elderly senator Herculaneus. But Honoria decided to fight for her future and sent the eunuch Hyacinth to Attila with a ring and a request for help.
The Hun, apparently not too well versed in the intricacies of Roman politics and female logic, in turn sent a message to Valentinian II with the message that he was already engaged to his sister and therefore demanded that no obstacles be placed on her. Maybe the emperor would have given the obstinate beauty Attila, but the requirement to add half of the empire as a dowry seemed impudent. Attila was told that Honoria had been married a long time ago, and therefore she could not be engaged to anyone.
It is unlikely that the Hun himself really needed the second-hand imperial sister so much, but the refusal turned out to be a wonderful reason for an attack, which the Huns took advantage of. After that, there was no information about Honoria in the sources. Maybe they just strangled her so that she would not announce her engagement to someone else? And her eunuch Hyacinth was brutally tortured and executed.
Such is the tragic story. So was Attila, whom Honoria asked for help, a complete freak? And did he have a Mongoloid appearance?
The second hypothesis connects the Huns with the white race of the Hyperboreans.
It is known that approximately 70 - 110 thousand years ago, in the north of Europe, a glaciation began, called Valdai. It happened either due to the fact that the Gulf Stream changed the direction of its course, or a lithospheric catastrophe occurred, as a result of which the civilization of the Hyperboreans died. The survivors were forced to migrate south.
Approximately 15,000 years ago, the glacier clogged the drains of the high-water Siberian rivers, as a result of which the entire West Siberian lowland, the European part of Russia and the Turan lowland gradually turned into one giant lake. People were forced to flee to elevated places, one of which was the Urals.

Approximately 11,600 years ago, the waters of this lake found their way through the future Bosporus and the Dardanelles into the Aegean and Mediterranean Seas, turning them into what we see now. And before that, there was no Strait of Gibraltar and the Mediterranean Sea itself was a shallow lake with a large number of islands. Naturally, after the formation of the Bosporus, huge coastal territories were flooded - the biblical Flood occurred.
The Russian plain began to dry up gradually, covered with forests and lush vegetation. The Gulf Stream again flowed to the right place, the glacier receded and people began to migrate.
Some went south, some went west, some went east, some went back home to the north. And here the Indo-Aryan "Mahabharata" and the Russian "Book of Veles" help us.
The inestimable advantage of these books is that they cover the period from the exodus of the Aryan Russians from the Cold Land - Hyperborea (Mahabharata) and in great detail (Veles book) - "one thousand five hundred years before Dir", that is, from 700 years BC.

It is also said that the Aryans, moving south, reached the "Aryan Land" (India) and the "Land of Yin" (southern Siberia, Altai, Mongolia, China). The book says that our ancestors did not like it in the "Land of Yin" and they went back to the west, and came to the Semirechye (Central Asia), where they lived in the "cereal steppes for a long time." And from there - to the Volga and the Black Sea steppes.
And the fact that they were in China is a lot of evidence. This is evidenced by Chinese chronicles and archaeological excavations in the north of China and Altai, where many burial places of white people - Tokhars - were found. And among the first Chinese emperors were blue-eyed white people.
The book of the writer Yuan Ke "Myths of Ancient China" tells about a certain sage and court historian Lao Zi (literal translation - the old sage), who had the real name Li Er and lived about 500 years BC. It turns out that Li Er was not of Chinese origin. He was born in the village of Qu-jen, Li volost, Ku county, Chu inheritance in the area of ​​present-day Beijing, where at that time there lived not Chinese, but tribes of some whites, whom the Chinese called "Di". These white Di about 1000 years before the new era created their own state there, called Chaoxian or Xian-yu with its capital in the city of Phin-hsiang-chen (Beijing?). It is also mentioned that in the 5th century BC. the white Di tribes left China forever and went somewhere to the north, and then turned to the west, where the Chinese soon began to be referred to as the Yuezhi tribes, that is, the Kushan and Tochar tribes, who later formed the huge Kushan kingdom.
And the traditional depiction of Li Er allows us to make sure that he really was not a Mongoloid.

Third hypothesis: Let's return to the Huns, who first appeared on the Volga somewhere in the 2nd century. Yet where did they come from? And if you look not in Chinese abroad, but somewhere closer, for example, among your own? Why not a hypothesis?
We take, for example, a map of Arkhangelsk in our hands and if we sail from Arkhangelsk to the north-west, along the coast of the Dvina Bay, then 170 km away we meet the Unskaya Bay (it is very clearly visible on the map, such a cozy bay, on its horns the Unsky lighthouse and Pertominsk) . And Unsky Bay. And the river flows into this bay called Una. And the ancient village on it is Una. And Unozero is also there. And there are many places with that name. And the area used to be called Unskoy. Only all this was written with two "n" - Unna, Unno, Unna.
And if you climb up the Dvina and Onega from the Unskaya Bay, then the Don and Volga are within easy reach. And then they often traveled this way, it turned out, they sailed from White Russia to Blue (middle) and further Red (southern) to relatives, and the portages were good. And restless and thirsty for adventure on their own and other people's heads (and their opposite, from which legs grow) have always been enough in Russia too.

Did not Roman historians write about these northern Huns, the descendants of the same Hyperboreans, who lived in the north beyond the Meotian swamp (Sea of ​​Azov) near the Arctic Ocean? They also unambiguously indicate that the basis of Attila's invincible army was the Slavs. And the ambassador Priscus of Panius, sent to Attila, describes the customs of the Huns as purely Scythian, he slips between words that "the Scythians are supposed to do this." What are these conquerors who adopt the customs of the vanquished? Moreover, the ambassador was regaled with honey and kvass. And where did the Chinese Xiongnu learn to cook Russian mead and kvass?
The story of Procopius of Caesarea about the first skirmish between the Huns and the Goths is also well known. The Goths who lived in the Crimea considered themselves inaccessible, because they were protected from all sides by the sea and a narrow isthmus. But one day the young Huns, hunting for a deer, pursued him to the very sea coast. For some reason, the deer was not embarrassed by the water surface, he calmly entered the water, but did not swim, but continued to walk.
So the Huns discovered the opportunity to go to the Crimea, barely getting their feet wet. And get into the deep rear to the Goths, who are fenced off by impregnable ramparts.
There is one "but". Procopius of Caesarea claimed that the deer helped the Huns to cross ... the Bosporus (this is the Kerch Strait!).
The Kerch Strait could only be forded many millennia BC, when the Sea of ​​Azov did not exist at all. But by the time of the Huns, as now, I do not advise you to climb into the water of the Kerch Strait, not knowing how to swim. Yes, and I can too. No wonder the Greeks called it the Cimmerian Bosporus, as if emphasizing the waywardness, similar to the waywardness of their Bosphorus.

Rather, the deer and after him the Huns crossed the Meotida (Sea of ​​Azov) ford not through the Bosporus, but in another place. It is generally shallow, but there is a long spit called the Arabat Arrow (that's right, and not the Arbat Arrow, as it is often called). This spit stretches from the coast of the Sea of ​​Azov to the coast of Crimea. It's possible there.
Be that as it may, the Huns found themselves deep in the rear of the Goths, and having cornered such successful warriors, they finally believed in themselves. Since then, their ascent to the heights of power in the Black Sea region, and then in a large part of Europe, began. Let me remind you that only the Pope managed to persuade Attila not to smash Rome (by the way, he even advised the emperor to give his sister to the leader of the Huns). And the first serious victory on the Catalaunian fields over the Huns was won only in 451, almost 70 years after their active appearance on the historical stage. Yes, in fact, there was no defeat of the Huns, it's just that Attila did not win.
Now let's try to analyze.
If we proceed from the Gumilev version of the identity of the Huns and the Xiongnu, it turns out that, defeated in China, they dashed at a vigorous trot to the Volga steppes and for some reason settled there for a long time. So for a long time that they managed to adopt the customs and even the language of the local population, under the influence of local cuisine, having lost a narrow section of the eyes.

And for some reason, the very militant local population accepted the eastern guest performers almost with open arms. At the same time, the Huns-Xiongnu completely forgot their language, because not a single Chinese word was added to the locals. But as soon as the guys crossed the Arabatskaya Spit after the deer, the nomads suddenly woke up their genetic memory and decided to take revenge on the Goths for the insults inflicted by others in China. And off we go...
Somehow it doesn't fit very well.

And if we assume that the Huns are not distant Chinese Xiongnu, but the White Sea Huns, who sailed to their relatives in Red Russia, where they could well find a use for themselves. They could also easily learn how to control a horse and improve their military skills. Naturally, it was not women with children who sailed, but, first of all, warriors. Then the non-resistance on the part of the locals, and the absence of language barriers, and "forgetfulness" in relation to Chinese culture, language and customs are understandable (look at the map of the settlement of the Scythians, the borders of the Proto-Slavic language, near the White Sea just a circle of the Proto-Slavic language). And also the absence of the Mongoloid appearance of the Huns in the bas-reliefs. And one can not explain the statements of ancient historians about the origin of the Huns from the shores of the White Sea by the fact that they (historians) simply did not have a map in front of their eyes and therefore confused China with the European coast of the Arctic Ocean.
In general, this is an interesting trend - to explain everything that does not fit into a fictitious theory with a lack of knowledge among the ancients.
Maybe you should take a closer look at their work? You never know what else there is, although it refutes the established theories of famous personalities, but it well explains the absurdities in their intellectual conclusions ...
Want more about Attila? Pretty mysterious person. He is credited (perhaps it was in fact) with exceptional cruelty. But at the same time they recognize the mind and education. The case of Honoria can mean both amazing naivete and cunning calculation.
He had many wives, and even more just concubines and slaves.
Faith allowed you to make as many women happy as you like. And yet he died because of a woman. Perhaps she is not directly to blame for the death of the Thunderstorm of Rome, but she was present at the same time. Still, it all happened on their wedding night!
This is the case when a person remained in the memory of descendants, literally doing nothing for this. Ildiko was another wife sent by some of the Germanic tribes to strengthen Attila's disposition. Only one thing is known about the girl herself - she was very beautiful. Of course, we don't keep the bad ones.

The stormy wedding feast ended as usual - with the solitude of the newlyweds. In the morning, surprised by the long sleep of their master, the servants ventured into the bedroom and found Attila dead, with the girl weeping over him. Thunderstorm Europe choked with blood coming from his nose. If he had been sober, or even awake, this might not have happened.
It’s hard to believe in death from a banal nosebleed of a person who spent his whole life on a horse and with weapons in his hands, so they immediately came up with many versions that Ildiko was a “mishandled Cossack”, about the poison she carried, about a dagger ... But the fact from this has not changed: Attila died during the wedding night, choking on his own blood, although before that he had easily shed someone else's blood for twenty years.

And he was also buried in a peculiar way (after many centuries, Genghis Khan would do something similar, by the way, according to the Mongolian chronicles, he was also white and blue-eyed): the waters of the river were diverted for a while, and after being placed at the bottom of the coffin with the body of Attila, the water was returned to its place.
Where did the Huns go? Here again is a mystery for historians. Quite quickly after the death of the last strong leader Attila, the Huns suddenly disappeared by themselves! They were and were not, they didn’t go anywhere, they didn’t die on the battlefields, they didn’t return home to China ... They just flowed away like water into the sand. This does not happen with strong nations. They don't appear out of nowhere and they don't go nowhere.
But it is worth remembering that in the famous battle on the Catalaunian fields, the army of the formidable Hun Attila consisted almost entirely of Germans. Where did these Germans go after the death of their leader? They became Germans again and returned to their tribes. And the rest?
Similar. The Huns again became Sarmatians, Germans, Goths, Gepids, and so on, that is, those who they were before Attila's entry into the army. No wonder the same ambassador Priscus called the Huns synonymous with the word "rabble". By the way, the name Attila is clearly of Gothic origin and means ... "daddy." It turns out that at the head of an ordinary, albeit very disciplined gang was the godfather (daddy) Attila. But as soon as the strong daddy gave up, the gang simply broke up. That's how it usually happens.

So maybe there was no Great Migration?
Nobody moved from China to the Volga, and then throughout Europe (that's why Europeans did not add Mongoloid markers)?
Just at first, the very restless youth of the White Sea region went to seek their fortune from distant relatives closer to the Black Sea.
Having settled in a new place, they became the basis of a military alliance of the same restless called the HUNS (from their former UNNA, as, by the way, they were often called by Roman historians).
In the same way, after a few centuries, a brotherhood of the Varangians and Vikings is formed. The Vikings did not have a pronounced nationality, just restless and strong men of Scandinavia (and the same Kola Peninsula, and the White Sea coast too) tried to seek their fortune on the side. The Vikings also turned Europe upside down, but, moving on ships, they simply could not involve anyone else in their movements. And the Huns moved by land, it was much easier to go with them for the company.
Why, then, are great movements of peoples constantly mentioned? First, what peoples and where? The tribes constantly moved along the Black Sea steppes and no one called it the Great Migration. Secondly, it is quite natural that the adventurers of the Huns carried along a lot of local youth, including women. Heroes, even thugs, are always popular. And when they still managed to win so much ...
Who will refuse to follow the winner even to the ends of the world, let alone conquer Great Rome? It was the mothers who stayed at home, and the daughters got into carts or even horses and followed the gentlemen ...
By the way, the Book of Veles admits that, having doubted a little, the Rus sided with the Huns. That is, at first they were convinced that yesterday's gang was generally successful and decided to join before it was too late.

Why did the Huns manage to win so many victories, in fact, bringing the mighty Roman Empire to its knees? Firstly, the Roman Empire itself was going through hard times, secondly, iron discipline and the desire to take the world at the tip of its sword made the Huns and excellent warriors who joined them, thirdly, the same courage ...
It turns out that the war of the Goths and the Huns was like a civil war between their own? Yes, yes. Yesterday's (if not outcasts, then certainly not the main ones) showed Kuz'kin's mother first to their elders, and then to everyone else they managed to get to. Almost all historians of antiquity and those who were personally acquainted with the Huns themselves write about the army of the Huns as a rabble of anyone. Priscus, for example, spoke about one of the Huns, who, upon closer acquaintance, turned out to be ... a Greek merchant! But how could yesterday's Greek become a Hun? You can change your appearance, even gender, but it is impossible to become Chinese by being born in Greece. Unless the Huns really are the name of the freemen, the basis of which were the Huns of the White Sea.
You can not accept the last two versions, but we have to admit that the arrival of the Mongoloid Huns from the back streets of China does not explain anything at all, but it raises a great many questions.
And Gumilev Lev Nikolaevich?.. Unfortunately, even geniuses are not always right. He loved the Steppe very much, and therefore he was too eager to bring out of it all the greats, except perhaps those who lived in southern Africa.

Ancient about the Huns.

Roman historian of the 4th century A.D. Ammian Marcellinus, who knew the Huns only by hearsay, speaks of them as if they were a nomadic people who lived beyond the Miotia (Azov) swamp.
“They,” this historian narrates, “have brutal morals and a disgusting appearance; in childhood they cut their chin, face and cheeks so that hair cannot grow. With the greatest disgrace of the face, their bones are strong, their shoulders are broad and, moreover, they are so clumsy, and disordered, that seem like two-legged cattle.For the preparation of food they do not need either fire or spices; they feed on wild roots and raw meat, which they put instead of a saddle on a horse and steam it with a fast ride; agriculture is alien to them; they do not have permanent dwellings. they know, from childhood they wander through the mountains and forests, and get used to endure cold and hunger. Their clothes are linen or sewn from the skins of wood mice; they change it only when it falls off the body in rags. They are inseparable from their small but strong horses, on which they eat, drink, sleep, and do all their business; even at social meetings, everyone sits on horseback. They carry their dirty wives and children behind them in carts. They do not know shame and decency and have no religion. gee; exorbitant greed for gold incites them to raids. Their weapons are spears and arrows with bones pointed at the end; they know how to skillfully throw lasso at enemies.
In their movements they are extremely fast, they suddenly fly into the enemy formation from all sides, bully, scatter, run away and then unexpectedly attack again ... They boast most of all about killing enemies, and instead of taking off their weapons, they take off their heads, tear off their skin and with hair they hang on the chest of horses.
Elsewhere, Ammianus says that "The Huns do not know kingship; they noisily follow the leader who leads them into battle," etc.
It is reliably known that the named historian did not have direct acquaintance with this people, but borrowed the information reported by him from other persons, namely: in describing the appearance and way of life of the Huns, their manners and customs, he repeated word for word Pompey's Trog (I century BC). R.X.), which tells about the life of not the Huns at all, but the legendary Cimmerians or Kmers, allegedly expelled in ancient times by the Scythians from present-day southern Russia beyond the Caucasus, to Asia Minor (according to Herodotus). This description, transferred to the Huns, thanks to the fear of their disastrous invasion of the Western Roman Empire, gave Roman historians a reason to increase these fears to fantastic proportions, and later classify this people as a Mongol tribe that supposedly emerged from the unknown depths of Asia.
Meanwhile, Claudius Claudian (the end of the 4th and the beginning of the 5th century A.D.) clearly and definitely says that the Huns lived on the eastern side of the Tanais (Don), which was then considered the border between Europe and Asia. This area for Westerners was the extreme east, and for us southeastern Russia, where the Don and Volga flowed.

Iornand, who wrote about a hundred years after the death of Attila, which followed in 453, based on unknown sources, described the appearance of this leader as follows: "Small stature, broad chest, gray hair, snub-nosed, swarthy - he showed the features of his tribe" . In a word, he describes him in the most unattractive colors, although above he speaks of Attila's inquisitive gaze and his proud posture.
Further, Iornand, repeating the words of Trogus Pompey and Marcellinus about the ugliness of the Huns, says that those who could resist them in the war could not stand their terrible appearance and fled in fear.
These last lines say it all. The psychic phenomenon - mass fear of a formidable enemy, the cowardice of the demoralized troops of the Western Roman Empire, which had already decayed by that time, historians of that era tried to explain by nothing more than some unprecedented ugliness of their opponents, who supposedly instilled supernatural fear in the troops.
No dirty wives, no children in carts followed the Huns. This is the fantasy of Ammianus Marcellinus, cited by him in imitation of Trog Pompey. He considered the Huns to be the fabulous Cimmerians, and therefore he used Pompey's ready-made description of their life.
In addition, this historian did not see the invasion of the Huns in Western Europe, since this event took place many years after his death. The same mistake was repeated by subsequent historians Iornand and others. The movement of the Huns to the west is not a migration of peoples, which in fact did not exist, since all the peoples of the Sea of ​​\u200b\u200bAzov and the northern shores of the Black Sea, described in the 1st century by Strabo, for the most part remained in the same places, like: Small Aorsy or Small (Zadonskaya) Russia. Alans, Roksolany, Chigi, Goths, etc. This was a campaign of the allied Slavic peoples, organized by the efforts of the Greek emperors to curb the western provinces that had settled from them, especially Gaul and Italy. Consequently, the question of the "Mongolism" of the Huns disappears by itself. Huns or Unns (the Greeks wrote) - from the Latin unus - one, unity, union of peoples.

Warsaw professor D.Ya. Samokvasov, who was engaged in research on the Scythians for a long time, did not find any Mongolian peoples in southeastern Europe, from where Marcellinus, Claudian, Iornand and Procopius (6th century) bring out the Huns, i.e. from the eastern shores of the Sea of ​​Azov, from the Zadonsk steppes and the lower reaches of the Volga. Ptolemy (2nd century A.D.) speaks of the Huns as neighbors of Roksolan and Bastarn. Armenian historian of the 5th c. Moses Khorensky, reporting on the invasion of the Bolgars from the North Caucasus into Armenia, adds that the area where they settled was called Vanand, i.e. the land of the Wends, by which name historians called the Slavs from ancient times.
Dionysius Periegetes in his "History of the Universe" about the Huns (Unns or Funns) says that they forced the Medes to pay them 40,000 gold coins and generally had so much gold that they made beds, tables, chairs, benches and so on from it.
Of the Western or Latin writers, Venerable Bede calls the Western Slavs Huns. Saxo Grammatik speaks of the war of the Danes with the Hunnic king, who was in alliance with the Russ, and by the Huns he means some tribes of the Baltic Slavs. "Edda the most ancient" or Semundova mentions the Hunnic heroes, including Yarisleif, i.e. Yaroslav, and in general by the Huns he means the Slavs. "Vilkinga-Saga" calls the city of the Slavic tribe Velets the capital of the Huns. Iornand called a significant part of ancient Russia the country of the Huns or Gunivar. Holmold says that in the language of the Saxons, the Slavs were called dogs, by the convergence of the name "Hun" with the German word Hund. Using this consonance, the Saxons turned the name of the Slavs "Huns" into a swear word. The country of the Huns, according to Helmold, was called Gunigard (Hun cities). Safarik, in his historical work, says that in the Valis canton, in Switzerland, the Germans still call the descendants of the Slavs who once settled there the Huns.

In the most ancient historical acts, beginning with Ptolemy, the Huns are spoken of somehow vaguely, inconsistently and not as a separate people, but as a group, an alliance of several peoples who lived somewhere beyond the Don, which then served as the border between Asia and Europe.
Procopius (6th century) usually calls the Huns Massagets, i.e. Great Sakas-Gets; Priscus Rhetor, who knew these people well and personally negotiated with their famous leader Attila, almost everywhere calls them Scythians, i.e. collective name; Constantine Porphyrogenitus calls Attila the king of the Avar. And in the full title of Attila, given by Iornand, not a word is said about the Hunnic people. Here is his title: "Attila of all Scythia is the only (only one) ruler (king) in the world - Attila totius Scythiae solus in mundo regnator". A similar title was at all times the property of Russian grand dukes: "Grand Duke of All Russia" or "Autocrat of All Russia." Byzantine historians speak of the duality of the Hunnic people, calling them either Varkhunites (Menander), or Var-Hunn (Simokata), from which it must be assumed that the dominant class among the Slavic-Huns was the people of Var or Caucasian Avars.
Attila really united all the Slavic tribes of Great and Lesser Scythia, i.e. Dnieper and Zadonsk Rus and, having concluded a secret agreement with the Greeks through the ambassador, the historian Priscus, moved to smash the western Roman provinces, which had almost already seceded from Byzantium. All this was done by gold, the precious gifts of the Greek emperors, and the promised booty in the western provinces. Of the Hunnic kings, or rather leaders, from 376 to 465, the following are known: Donat, Kharaton, Roa or Rado, whom Iornand calls Roas, and Prisk - Rua basileus, Western historians as the governor of the Scythians - Rhodas; then Attila and his sons: Vdila, the sons of Mundiukh or Mundyuk; Dangichig, Irnar, Danchich (Danzic) and Yaren. Of the other Hun leaders are known: Valamir, Bled, Gord, Sinnio, Boyariks, Regnar, Bulgudu, Horsoman, Sandil, Zavergan, etc.
The names Donat and Kharaton are Christian. And Attila, Vdila, Danchich (Danovich, that is, the son of the Don), Valamir, Gord and others are Slavic.

Greek historians of the 6th and 7th centuries. R. The Volga was called the Tilo or the Black River (Theophylact), Attila (Menander), Atalis (Theophanes) and Atel (Konst. Bagr.). In Tatar, this river was called Edil, among the Arab writers of the 9th century. Itil, among the Ossetians - Idil. Consequently, the formidable leader of the Huns bore the name of the great Russian river Volga. He subordinated to his power all the Volga, Azov, Caucasian and Dnieper Slavic peoples, i.e. Volgar or Bolgar, Aorsov, Alan, Cherkasov, Chigov, Massagetov, Roksolan and others, and also attracted the Caspian-Caucasian Avars, a warlike and strong people, known to this day, to their union, and with them moved to the Danube in order to continue the war started by his predecessor Rado against the Greeks. Here he was met by the ambassadors of the Greek emperor. From the notes of Priscus it is known what conditions, gifts and tribute the Greeks paid off from such a formidable conqueror.
In 451, Attila with an incalculable force, stretching, according to some historians, up to 500, and according to others - up to 700 thousand people, invaded Gaul (present-day France) across the Rhine River and devastated it.
On the fields of Catalaun, where now Shalons on the Marne, he was met by the Roman legions under the command of Aetius, who was in alliance with the king of the Goths Theodoric, as well as with the Burgundians, Franks, Saxons and others.
A gigantic battle took place, in which the peoples who converged from the Volga to the Atlantic Ocean fought. Theodoric fell in battle. The allies were defeated. At the site of the battle, according to Roman historians, up to 300 thousand corpses remained. Other historians claim that Attila was defeated in this battle.
But the very next year, Attila moved through the Alps to Italy, took Milan by storm and encamped on the river. Mincio.
Then an embassy from the emperor Valentinian came to him and with a cross in his hands Pope Leon himself. The formidable conqueror was touched by the eloquence of the head of the church and gave peace. This circumstance sufficiently confirms the legend recorded in the "Wilking Sang", in the "Nibelungs" and other chronicles that Attila was a Slav, like his predecessors Donat, Kharaton and others.

Attila and Pope Leon I.
In 453, Attila died on the Danube on the day of his wedding with the beautiful Ildika, drunk, as Iornand says, to insensibility with wine.
There is a hypothesis that he was poisoned.
The palace of Attila, which stood in a large village in eastern Hungary, was, according to the story of Priscus, more magnificent than his other palaces. It was built of logs and boards, skillfully hewn, and surrounded by a wooden fence with towers. There were many houses inside the fence: some were built from boards with carved work, others from hewn and leveled logs. Between the buildings there was a large bath, built of stone brought from afar. The royal house was larger than the others and stood on a hill. Inside, there were benches near the walls, around which tables were placed for three, four or more persons. Attila's bed was in the middle of a large room: several steps led up to it. It was covered with thin, colorful curtains, similar to those used by the Romans and Greeks for newlyweds. At the feasts of Attila, guests were served excellent dishes on silver dishes, while the king himself only had meat on a wooden plate, since in everything he showed exemplary moderation. Cups of gold and silver were offered to those who were feasting, and his bowl was wooden. Of the drinks used: wine; honey ikamos or kama, prepared from barley, something like mash or beer.

The clothes of the king were also simple, without any decorations, although they were neat.
The envoy of the Greek emperor Prisk, who was present at such feasts, conveys the rituals of honoring guests and entertainment, consisting in the following: they sang epics, listened to the ridiculous and absurd speeches of the holy fool (jester) Scythian and the breaking of the Greek hunchback, who distorted the Latin language with Hunnic and Gothic, etc. P.
When Attila entered his capital, he was met by virgins walking in rows, under thin white veils, which were supported on both sides by standing women; there were up to seven or more virgins in a row, and there were a lot of such rows. These virgins, preceding Attila, sang Scythian songs. When, Priscus says further, Attila found himself near a house, past which the road to the palace went, the hostess went out to him with many servants: some brought food, others wine - this is a sign of special respect among the Scythians.
Attila, sitting on a horse, ate dishes from a silver dish, raised high by servants. Priscus was admitted to the chambers of the wife of King Kreki.
The floor was covered with expensive carpets. The queen lay on the bed.
There were many slaves around her. Slaves, sitting on the floor opposite her, painted different patterns on the canvas. Coverlets were sewn from this cloth, worn over clothes for beauty - guni.
Are Attila and his court like the nomads of Asia? Of course not. And the appearance of Attila described above by Jornand is hardly true, since this historian, who wrote a hundred years after his death, does not say a word from where he got this news.
Iornand also tells us that the Huns also had a custom to make a funeral feast on a grave hill, called strava, and this is the Slavic feast.

Source ruskrugul.ucoz.com/