Attila the Hun-is he Asian or Indo-European?
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: Steppe Nomads and Central Asia
Forum Discription: Nomads such as the Scythians, Huns, Turks & Mongols, and kingdoms of Central Asia
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13184
Printed Date: 24-Apr-2024 at 00:49
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Attila the Hun-is he Asian or Indo-European?
Posted By: Kids
Subject: Attila the Hun-is he Asian or Indo-European?
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 04:25
|
From most of books I read, Atilla is identified with Oriental (Eastern Asian) characters (yellowish skin, short, small eyes, flat nose as according to Priscus's encounter with Attila).
But why then in Hungary Attila (as a national hero in Hungary) is depicted as European like figure as well as in recent American movie Attila???
http://www.sagarmatha.com/images/2005-HU-attila0001.jpg - http://www.sagarmatha.com/images/2005-HU-attila0001.jpg
Is is because Europeans can not accept the fact that Attila is non-white?
|
Replies:
Posted By: Scytho-Sarmatian
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 04:32
| Could be. Most of the evidence suggests he was of Asiatic origin. When you read how the Romans described the Huns, you get the impression that they were physically very different from the Romans. They seem to be trying to describe a people with Mongoloid characteristics, which obviously seemed very strange to the Caucasian Romans. |
Posted By: DayI
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 05:06
------------- Bu mıntıka'nın Dayı'sı http://imageshack.us - [IMG - http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/DayI/2006-03-17_164450_bscap021.jpg - |
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 06:02
|
This is another picture that depicts Attila as European in Hungary.
From BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4435181.stm - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4435181.stm
|
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 06:03
The Feast of Attila by Mór Than
 |
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 06:08
|
"They seem to be trying to describe a people with Mongoloid characteristics, which obviously seemed very strange to the Caucasian Romans." I know. Its funny that how Caucasian people are nowdays are portrays as THE standard of beauty in this world.
Back then, Europeans are depicted as almost like monkey-like creatures (hairy and dirty...) in Chinese and Japanese records. Now, you found European models (as oppose to African models) earn more $ than Asian models in East Asia. Ironically, isnt!
|
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 06:19
 |
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 06:27
|
My mistake, Raider. Somone in my Ancient history class sent the picture to me and claimed it was from Hungary. So, Raider, do people of Hungary associate Attila as European or Asian on TV or movies??? |
Posted By: Giannis
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 06:38
|
The only movie with Attila, I've ever watched is with Anthony Quinn and i believe that he has more asian characteristics than caucasian.  -------------  Give me a place to stand and I will move the world.
|
Posted By: Leonardo
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 06:54
|
A. Quinn is half Irish half Mexican if I remember it right
|
Posted By: Scytho-Sarmatian
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 07:19
| Is it easy to get that movie? It looks mighty interesting. |
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 07:36
Well, Hungarians -generally speaking- associate Attila with a Hungarian thus a European.
Attila in a medieval Hungarian chronicle (Chronicon Pictum):
 |
Posted By: Scytho-Sarmatian
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 07:51
| Even in that medieval picture Attila looks "dark." He looks very Central Asian to me. |
Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 07:58
|
I have see a Roman mosaic depicting a Roman cavalier chasing a Hun ith a Lance, the Hun was running away about to fire a Parthian shot, they had depicted him with East Asian features (Almond eyes and hih cheek bones). ------------- |
Posted By: erkut
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 08:18
|
He is deffinetly Asian!
------------- |
Posted By: arras
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 08:19
|
Huns were Indo-European people as well as Allans, Sarmatians, all Turkic tribes, Scithians, Bulgars, Avars and other nomadic people who came from central Asia. Etnicaly they had same origin as most other European, Iranian and Indian (Aryana) people and their language was part of Indo-European group. There are some doubds if Ugro-Finish languages are part of Indo-European group but then that Hungarian people are direct descendants of Huns is questionable. Some historians claim it is only part of national myth like many similar across other nations. Notice that people of Hungaria don't call themself Huns but Magiars and they don't call their country Hungaria. Do not be confused about their "asiatic" look. |
Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 08:27
|
The core Huns were most probably Altaic speakers, the confederations they formed were with Indo-Europeans such as Alans, Goths etc. ------------- |
Posted By: xi_tujue
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 08:38
just a question why is it if someone or people played a important role in history "white"(caucasians) claime them as one of their own. ------------- I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage |
Posted By: Giannis
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 08:52
|
Strange and weird people don't have boundaries, I've heard that Cleopatra was black, Hitler a jew, Attila european and other nonsense.
------------- Give me a place to stand and I will move the world.
|
Posted By: Giannis
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 08:55
|
Scytho-Sarmatian, you can purchase the dvd Attila from here if you want www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00013T79Q. ------------- Give me a place to stand and I will move the world.
|
Posted By: arras
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 08:55
|
member_profile.asp?PF=3607&FID=5 - xi_tujue >> excuse me but I don't understand your question. Who claim who? All Indo-European people originate in Asia Minor from where they migrated westward and formed all moderm European nations (as well as historical ones like Celts, Romans, Thracians...) others migrated east to become Indian peolpe (originaly Aryana people who qonquered local non Indo-European people) Some migrated north like Georgians and Armenians. Turks and Iranians are also Indo-European. To be Indo-European doesnt allways mean also the same ethnical origin. Some groups could simply come under influence of Indo-European people and accept theyr culture and language. Of course Indo-Europeans came under influence of other races and cultures as well. But generaly term Indo-European have racial and linquistic meaning. Indo-Europeans were originaly refered as Japhetic people. Name come from one of three soons of Noe to whoom they should be descendants. |
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 09:01
|
Posted By: Scytho-Sarmatian
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 09:03
Thanks, Giannis. I'll check it out.
Arras-
We understand what you are saying. Attila's army did include I.E. peoples, for sure. We are just pointing out that the leadership of the Huns was probably non-I.E. Asiatic.
|
Posted By: arras
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 09:11
| Scytho-Sarmatian >> why do you think? Becouse of theyr "asiatic" look? Turks also look asiatic and they are Indo-Europeans. |
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 09:18
 When you said asiatic you do not mean mongoloid, don't you?
|
Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 09:20
|
no, turks are not IE, they speak an altaic language! I think u are confused, Turkish is not related to indo-european except for loan words. ------------- |
Posted By: arras
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 09:25
|
Raider >> no :) Zagros >> well I might be ...can you please write more about it? Or point to some sources of info about Turkic people and their origin? |
Posted By: xi_tujue
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 09:54
|
Turkish grammar and vocab is enriched with persian no doubt
------------- I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 11:04
Wow, too many negations! So where you use asiatic you could use mongoloid? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Slavs, are also from central asia and don't look particularly mongoloid. I think that the true answer to the question is that he is niether Asian nor European (he certainly isn't Indian), but a mix as all people are. ------------- |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 11:09
|
Turkic people were definitely not Indo-European. This is the first time I hear such a claim.
They spoke an Altaic language, the same as we speak today. Racially, they might be something between Mongoloid and Caucasian. Or simply Turanoid? I am not sure. ------------- |
Posted By: arras
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 11:41
|
member_profile.asp?PF=2586&FID=5 - Omar al Hashim >> I think he ment "mongoloid" in slightly diferent meaning than you. and as to origin of Slavs opinions differ. There are 2 theories: of migration from teritory near Volga and one of origin in central Europe. There is still Japhetic theory I already mentioned but not all modern historians respect it. But back to the topic, here are two interesting links you may look at: http://members.tripod.com/great-bulgaria/Central-Asian-Nomads-Unite/origins.html - http://members.tripod.com/great-bulgaria/Central-Asian-Nomads-Unite/origins.html http://www.kroraina.com/huns/mh/index.html - http://www.kroraina.com/huns/mh/index.html |
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 13:04
|
"When you said asiatic you do not mean mongoloid, don't you?"
Most of academic books I read about Huns relate Huns (especailly the descriptions of Attila from the Greek author) to the modern East Asians and Mongolians.
Interestingly, according to ancient Chinese records about Xiongnu, Xiongnu were described as people with blue eyes. So, I guess if Xiongnu, who lived closed to East Asia, had Indo-European appearance, there is no doubt that later Huns (whether they are related to Xiongu or not) must have Mongoloid characters.
Afterall, Center Asia has been described by historians as high way to civilizations; different people met and interact.
|
Posted By: DayI
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 13:22
------------- Bu mıntıka'nın Dayı'sı http://imageshack.us - [IMG - http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/DayI/2006-03-17_164450_bscap021.jpg - |
Posted By: DayI
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 13:27
yea after hearing from Chinese sources i got confused little bit, they also described some Kok-Turuk khans from ashina clan as having blond hairs and blue eyes but that doesnt mean they where IE-people or something similar. Last days i heard enough crazy theory's about Huns origins, even Koreans claim they where a lost Korean tribe (i swear i read it somewhere)  ------------- Bu mıntıka'nın Dayı'sı http://imageshack.us - [IMG - http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/DayI/2006-03-17_164450_bscap021.jpg - |
Posted By: ijjas
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 13:31
Let' s ask a witness.
Priscus at the court of Attila http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/texts/priscus.html |
Posted By: Maziar
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 14:45
| If Huns were IE so why there were a groupe among them called "white Huns"? I mean there must be a reason to differe the white Huns from another Huns, don't you think? |
Posted By: Mortaza
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 14:55
|
white huns are Indo-European ? |
Posted By: xi_tujue
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 15:20
some claim that they're persian ------------- I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage |
Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 15:33
|
Hun comes from the Turkish word 'Kun'. Like most empires of the Steppes, the Huns were a conglomerate of nations. It actually means 'people or nation'.
The Ak Kun (White Huns) were also known as the Hepthalites by the Greeks and Ye-Tai by the Chinese. The Chinese recorded that the Ye-Tai may have been part of the YuehiChih from western China (whom were driven out by the Huns proper). After wars with the Persians and GokTurks the divided White Huns traversed to Europe. Some believe they eventually were the Avars.
http://www.uglychinese.org/hsiung-nu.htm - http://www.uglychinese.org/hsiung-nu.htm
http://www.kessler-web.co.uk/History/FeaturesEurope/BarbarianHuns.htm - http://www.kessler-web.co.uk/History/FeaturesEurope/BarbarianHuns.htm ------------- |
Posted By: Maziar
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 15:44
have i claimed that?
|
Posted By: Seljuk
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 15:59
|
I think colors represent geographic locasions for Turco-Mongolic tribes and Chinese. Like Blue for east (like GokTurks- blue turks), red for west, white for south.(Btw there was a tribe called red huns i think)
------------- 
|
Posted By: Mortaza
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 16:01
| That is exactly what I think also. |
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 16:09
| Interesting |
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 16:12
| By the way, has anyone played Rome Total War: Barbarian Invasion? Does the customs, appearance and weapons of Huns of the game reflect the historical reality? |
Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 18:20
They could just as easily have been Tokharians or those who has mixed with them. ------------- |
Posted By: Attila2
Date Posted: 09-Jul-2006 at 17:04
whoooaaa waitaminute! Turks are not indo european...we are definately central asian :) well...we speak an altaic language at least...
oh btw,well Attila was central asian,without doubt.Dont be deceived by the pics of him depicted by the romans...those guys had a tendancy towards "enwhitening" people which they depicted&drew (Jesus,hannibal etc):P
|
Posted By: arras
Date Posted: 10-Jul-2006 at 08:33
|
I must apologize to all Turkic members here for claiming Turkic tribes
to be Indo-European. What confused me was that they should be
descendants of Japhet which were tought to be Indo-Europeans. |
Posted By: arras
Date Posted: 10-Jul-2006 at 08:40
|
member_profile.asp?PF=422&FID=5 - Kids >> RTW is nice
strategy but I would not take its historical walue too seriously. There
are many things which are not accurate and some even false. And I don't
men only military units. |
Posted By: DayI
Date Posted: 10-Jul-2006 at 09:19
------------- Bu mıntıka'nın Dayı'sı http://imageshack.us - [IMG - http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/DayI/2006-03-17_164450_bscap021.jpg - |
Posted By: minchickie
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 00:09
As a Hungarian myself I have to say that; Attila is our hero, our legend, our history, father, etc... (of course some Hungarians will differ), yes he is Asiatic/causcasian just like us Hungarians are. (we know where we come from even though we are "Europeans" today). We know we are non-Indo European. Our language and our cultural history are from Asia. It is up to the imagination of the individual themselves whether they feel a "closeness" to something or another. In my case,....Hunnic.  ------------- 
|
Posted By: JuMong
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 03:25
This guy is full of crap. He has no idea what he's talking about. An unfortunate, backward Eastern European with a racist agenda. The whole concept of Indo-European is archaic in nature. Unfortunately, he's reading from a History books that's 20 years out of date. The Romans themselves described him as having Mongoloid features. End of story. There's nothing about the Huns that's Indo-European in nature or origin, or whatever that means. History Channel had a nice feature on the Barbaric Hoards, and they talked about the recovered skulls of the Huns which clearly showed marked Mongoloid features: "The main source for information on Attila is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priscus - Priscus , a historian who traveled with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximin - Maximin on an embassy from Theodosius II in 448. He describes the village the nomadic Huns had built and settled down in as the size of the great city with solid wooden walls. He described Attila himself as:
Attila's physical appearance was most likely that of an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Asia - Eastern Asian or more specifically a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol - Mongol http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnicity - ethnicity , or perhaps a mixture of this type and the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic - Turkic peoples of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Asia - Central Asia . Indeed, he probably exhibited the characteristic Eastern Asian facial features, which Europeans were not used to seeing, and so they often described him in harsh terms." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attila_the_Hun - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attila_the_Hun Learn to Google. |
Posted By: Nagyfejedelem
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 04:43
|
European Huns had tipycal Turkish names: Munjuk, Aibars, Denghizik, Octar, Karaton etc. The origin of the Huns is solved. |
Posted By: JuMong
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 04:47
Turkic names mean crap. Languages mean crap. Only thing that's going to solve this riddle is a DNA test on recovered Hun skeletons. |
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 06:10
|
Posted By: yan.
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 07:54
Like with White Russians, or Red Chinese? Was the Golden Horde called Golden because of the skin colour of its ruling class?
|
Posted By: Scytho-Sarmatian
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 08:05
 It's funny, because before I discovered the Internet, all of my sources referred to the Huns as a people who originated in the vicinity of Mongolia. Then I come to this website and I get all these wild theories on how it is impossible for them to have been mongoloid in appearance. The actual evidence, however, clearly shows otherwise.
|
Posted By: yan.
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 08:23
|
I didn't comment on Attila's appearance. From what I have read, the appearance of the Huns is rather unclear in general, because few physical remains have been found due to the common practice of cremation. And those that have been found usually had artificially deformed skulls, making the task even more complicated.
If you'd ask me, I'd say an asian appearance would be "not unlikely".
But assuming that colours in the name of a political/ethnical group must be related to the skin or hair colours of its members seems a bit odd to me.
|
Posted By: minchickie
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 11:31
Even if they were "Turks" , they probably share very little if any DNA with that of Turks today who share the same Mediteranian genes of that of Greeks. FACT. -------------
|
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 14:55
|
"Turks today who share the same Mediteranian genes of that of Greeks"
Is that true?
But, anyway, Attila is not Indo-European, but Eastern Asia. He is probably the descendent of the famous Xiongnu (who probably had a mixture of both Asians and Indo-Europeans as many Chinese literatures and paintings shown that Xiongnu had blue eye colors. In Xingjiang province, there are even Celtic mummies with blue eyes and blond hairs!!!)
|
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 14:57
| By the way, http://www.allempires.com/forum/member_profile.asp?PF=1524&FID=5 - minchickie , you mentioned that Hungarians are not Indo-Europeans? But they looks Europeans to me.... |
Posted By: ijjas
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 17:07
|
Here is a great site:
http://www.smmi.hu/regeszet/honfogl.htm Unfortunatly I have not found the english version. 
It demonstraits the archeological excavation of the cemetery of Vörs. THe artifacts are from the VIII-IX. century, from the latest avar era until the early hungaryan era. Among others this the face reconstruction of a 25-30 years old woman. She was buried with face down, with an iron needle betwwwn shes combs. Maybe the community considered her a sorceres: 
25-30 years old woman: 
30-35 years old man. 
21-25 years old man. In his grave had found arc bones, and harnesses: 
About 25 years old women. Shes mandible was broken and whole: 
He would be the leader of second generation, single with mongoloid features: 
|
Posted By: Afghanan
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 19:02
|
Numismatic evidence displays him like this:  ------------- The perceptive man is he who knows about himself, for in self-knowledge and insight lays knowledge of the holiest. ~ Khushal Khan Khattak |
Posted By: minchickie
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 20:08
|
Of course they look European today. Hungarians all look different from one another but we have mixed with other Europeans now for over 1000 years. Still however, alot of us have such traits as high cheekbones/wide cheekbones and alot of us even have asian features in the eyes to some degree.
I have posted my picture just yesterday in the "tavern" section of this forum. Im sure you can even see some of those traits on me alone. -------------
|
Posted By: Scorpius
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 20:17
I was thinking something, about something.. to write, but minchickie ! What I see is on you alone is the definition of beauty in that thread. Nothing else, nothing more
 And I am sorry for ruining the thread. But Truth must be heard
 |
Posted By: minchickie
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 20:24
 Thank you very much. You are too kind. -------------
|
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 21:27
|
http://www.allempires.com/forum/member_profile.asp?PF=1524&FID=5 - minchickie , you are beautiful indeed!
I never know Hungary have such exciting past; the melting pot of Asian and European continent cultures, the cross road of East and West...man!
|
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 21:29
| By the way, because there are so few recources in North American regarding of Huns, do Hungarians believe Attila is buried somewhere in Hungary? |
Posted By: minchickie
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 22:00
For the most part Yes, he is said to be buried between rivers which run through Hungary since this is where he died. It was also where he made his home. No body or grave was ever found, but that is where scholars think he may lie. Im not too sure if there has been any digging in Hungary in search of it. I doubt it. BUT, there have been Hunnic artifacts found in Hungary for sure over time. I dont know if any recent archeaological study is undergoing there now since I live here in the States. -------------
|
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 22:21
|
so do you believe that the Great Attila is died from the serious nose bleeding? or he was poisoned by his new hot German wife?
|
Posted By: minchickie
Date Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 22:32
|
Ive read many books on him. and. Noone will ever really know (unless maybe if his body is one day found, maybe then.) you cannot really rule out any possibilty though. There is one logical reason which an author made in one particular book I read suggesting that he had an Anurism in a vein realated to alcohol. Which is basically when the vein bursts. The reason this happens (not that its common) is that when someone drinks heavily, their blood pressure is raised and at the same time alcohol tightens the arteries. So that too is possible. Anything could have happened though. I tend to favor the idea that he was poisoned or murdered but thats just me. -------------
|
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 13-Jul-2006 at 01:42
| I just purchased the book Attila the Hun by John Man today, and the author mentions that there are no iron stirrup found in any Huns' tombs, although one iron stirrup was found in Xiongnu's burial in Mongolia. Its interesting because Huns and Xiongnu were capable of making superbe iron arrows and weapons, yet only one iron stirrup was found in Mongolia. I am still reading the book, and I will try to update anything new to this post! |
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 13-Jul-2006 at 02:30
|
Posted By: Leonardo
Date Posted: 13-Jul-2006 at 03:40
Indo-European is a linguistic not ethnic or racial term
Hungarians are not Indo-Europeans because they don't speak an Indo-European language (Hungarian is a Finno-Ugric language) but racially speaking they are nowadays almost fully "europoid" or "caucasoid" as you prefer.
|
Posted By: Exarchus
Date Posted: 13-Jul-2006 at 05:25
|
I believe Hungarian was an Uralic language, not a Turkic one. For the asian traits, it can be a little everything, Mongols reached Hungary, Turks reached Hungary too, Budapest was the meeting point between asian and oriental cultures for a long time. I'm a bit sceptical about the Hungarians being more Huns than let's say the Poles or the Germans. ------------- Vae victis! |
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 13-Jul-2006 at 05:39
|
"I'm a bit sceptical about the Hungarians being more Huns than let's say the Poles or the Germans"
Did Huns reached Germany?
Mmm.....I wonder how the apperance of Attila and Huns impact on the Germanic tribes, such as legned, foktales.....
|
Posted By: Exarchus
Date Posted: 13-Jul-2006 at 05:47
Yes they did, it's in what would become France they were stopped (Battle of Chalons). They controled the eastern part of the Rhine of Germany. ------------- Vae victis! |
Posted By: ijjas
Date Posted: 13-Jul-2006 at 05:47
There are scripts remains from the IX-X. century which confirms the presence of turkish elements in hung. language in that era. Exprts call this te chuvas layer. The chuvas language was close to the kazar lanuage. The mongol invasion duerd 2 years. The osman elements has came via the serbian and croatian language, so they are considered slvaic loan words. |
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 13-Jul-2006 at 06:47
Attila is also a character in the Nibelungenlied, the Folsunga Saga and the Poetic Edda. He definitively had a deep impact in German folk memory.
|
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 13-Jul-2006 at 06:54
Some of the historians say:
1. The Arpads are the descendants of Attila (Dümmerth, Hóman)
2. The Arpads created a false connection to Attila for propaganda purposes. (Róna-Tas, Györffy)
3. The Arpads had no connection to Attila, they did not try to forge a connection, the whole idea is an invention of the chronicles, a copy of false Western beliefs. (Kristó)
|
Posted By: Temujin
Date Posted: 14-Jul-2006 at 16:08
Rugians were immediate part of the Hun confederacy and they inhabited modern Bavaria. however i have no idea if other tribes were also controlled by the Huns, all maps i've seen so far were pointless sicne they colored all of eastern europe as Hun dominion without hard evidence...as if there were just rome and huns and nothgin else in europe at teh time... ------------- |
Posted By: Death
Date Posted: 15-Jul-2006 at 10:40
|
Germans and Huns, i beleve, or i wish, became allys a long time ago,lol.
Attila is buried, in a local folk story, under the Tisza river close to Becej(Becse) in modern day Vojvodina. He was buried with gold and silver, .....also his closest bodygards and women and a lot of horses. This is very posible,not the location but the story about gold and horses etc.
One more story,local afcorse,......sacrafice of horses was done somewhere betwwen Kikinda,mokrin and Idjos(Nagy Kikinda, Mokrin and Hegyes) also in Vojvodina. Sometimes in the night you can still hear horse sounds while they are being slayed. This was done to please the God of(for) horses and war.
Attila was Hun,....probably Sybirian(or Uralian). I would never say that he was european realy, nor was he asian(mongolian).
Turks are a lot like Hungarians.......the can be dark and brown or light and blond,....eyes normal and european or almond shape eyes..........short or tall,hehe.
If you say your Hun and i say im Hun and you dont beleve me then its a Hun custom that we fight,lol.....
Hun is a synonym for fighting and nastyness and savageness and war,......quite nice isnt it?Everyone that is not a pacifist is a Hun in my book,hehe. ------------- Betmen, Mandrak, Fantom |
Posted By: minchickie
Date Posted: 15-Jul-2006 at 13:17
I agree with this! -------------
|
Posted By: parthenon
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 08:27
|
I also watched that American movie Attila , and the British actor made me confused: Attila, a Hun, came from Asian, why white? Then, I should say, Attila, absolutely was Asian, mongolian-like, for they all lived in North China before the Hun were defeated by Han Empire and moved westward.
As for Hun, the specific name, I think before they moved west, they already got their name Hun. At least, Hun got its name could be traced to China's Han Dynasty(202B.C to 220A.D.). In Han Dynasty, due to the frequent ravaging of the Hun across the borders of north China, people already called them Xiongnu, also Hu . See? Very similar to Hun in pronouciation. ------------- After all, tomorrow is another day.:) |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 08:49
|
Having Asian features doesn't mean being Chinese or Mongolian. As far as I know, Attila and his Huns were Turkic. ------------- |
Posted By: parthenon
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 08:53
|
There is a northern ethnic poem collected in a famous book in Song Dynasty called Chinese Ancient Poems Collections,also Yue Fu Shi Ji. The poem named Chi Le Ge, means a song of Chi Le people.
敕勒歌
(北朝乐府)
敕勒川，阴山下，
天似穹庐，笼盖四野。
天苍苍，野茫茫，
风吹草低见牛羊。
That song or poem describes the prairie scenery and the life of the ethnic groups living in iner-Mongloid. It was written in Xian Bei , one of the ethnic groups in north China, and then translated into Chinese (Han). However, many say it is a song of the Hun, for some specific words are from the Hun language, like 敕勒(Chi Le) and 穹庐(Qiong Lu).
This also can be an evidence of the Hun were from East Asia. ------------- After all, tomorrow is another day.:) |
Posted By: Death
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 15:46
|
Barish, ok. If you say that Huns are Turks then OK. I dont think Hungarians have anything against that,haha. Having Asiatic features means that you look like a Mongolian or Chenees or Korean or Japanees... Not Turk, Turks are Turks!
If Turks are Asiats then you are in that 2 bilion+ group of yellow skin and almond eyes.....and you musnt be taller then 1,75 cm.
If your prooving that Huns are Turks , same as Hungarians do to make their history more glorious then i dont know,.......but beleve me, one Hun could kick a** of two Hungarians and two Turks together,lol. ------------- Betmen, Mandrak, Fantom |
Posted By: Death
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 15:48
|
One more thing,...the piont,.....do Turks come from Ural or Syberia?If they do then Huns are Turks! ------------- Betmen, Mandrak, Fantom |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 16:36
Geographical conditions directly affects the hair and skin color. Height is not only dependant on genetics. And Turks of Turkey were mixed with Persians, Slavs, Greeks and Anatolian locals... ------------- |
Posted By: xi_tujue
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 17:59
dude yes turks are huns let me say this all huns are turks but not all turks are huns they were tribes. like you have roman and italian now.
 chinese people generaly look the same.
I wishi could say that for turkic people but I can't turks mix with every body so how further you go east how more asian they look how further you go west how more they look caucasian. but even the xiongnu(asian huns)bc era were described asian but with collored hair and eyes.
uigur
 looks lot like a chinalen rightkyrgiz
 see how he looks like the other but not the same.uzbek
 (not the best photo see he's getting more "caucasian")kazak
 looking more like mongoliansturkmen
 see even more caucasian looking bit persian also
azeri
 even more persian lookingcaucas turk(kafkas)
 me  here I look more "asian"
 ahiska turk like me prob the only large group of turks in the caucasus(not anymore thanks stalin)Tatar
 see mixed with locals(slavs)Anatolians are way to diverse to put here.
due right now i fotgot why i put these pics up so many btw I realy don't know why they're all old dude exept me haha.
so what the point is we have asian and caucasian looking there is no such thing as pure humans mabet the bush men i don't know.
cechk this xiongnu in mulan hahaha
 wen I watch this movie i always wanted tohe huns won I was 7 or 8 And I had no idea what huns were. but I was like go huns kick those chinese asses + they look badass.(turkish saying kan ceker orsomething like that it means something like the sqme blood atracts eachother)
well have fun
------------- I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage |
Posted By: minchickie
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 19:59
|
Huns were not Turks. Most Turks look olive skin color and very arab and mediterenean looking with those genes.
There was NO LEFT SCRPTS of Hun language to compare it to anything at all! I laugh when people here post "Hunnic words" on this forum; where you get this from? You made it yourself??
 This is hilarious.
Now if you look at Japanese compared to Chinese, Mongolian and Korean, the Japs dont have very slanted eyes and not very flat noses. Hungarians have the wide cheekbones still today and ligher features and almond eyes. I think some Turks have it too but most of them dont look very Asiatic. The Turks that do look Asiatic are in those eastern Turkic countries like Kazakastan , etc.
I would say maybe the Finns are closer to "Hunnic" than anyone. This theory I think is much more sensible than "Huns were Turkic people". No proof of it at all!
-------------
|
Posted By: minchickie
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 20:03
|
Turks come from Mongolians. Hungarians and Finns from Urals Much longer than "Turks". Noone even knows where Hungarian (magyar) language came from. It has alot of Turkish words but still is very different. The only thing we know is we are from the Urals. -------------
|
Posted By: minchickie
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 20:18
Some Hungarians. You can see the Asiatic features still.
  (The singer Akos, I love him!)
     -------------
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 22:26
interesting topic  Hi minchickie
|
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 23:35
Turks didn't come to Anatolia through Arabian lands. So your claim is nonsense. Are there racial Arabs among the Turks of Turkey? Of course, but I am sure they are aware of it. Our claims generally based on the names of the Hunnic leaders. By the way Attila's Huns were just a branch of Huns. There were Hunnic empires located in Asia too, streching from Mongolia to Syberia. ------------- |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 16-Jul-2006 at 23:37
Does this person look Asiatic to you? Is this a joke?
------------- |
Posted By: Kids
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2006 at 05:55
|
"If Turks are Asiats then you are in that 2 bilion+ group of yellow skin and almond eyes.....and you musnt be taller then 1,75 cm"
"Now if you look at Japanese compared to Chinese, Mongolian and Korean, the Japs dont have very slanted eyes and not very flat noses"
Actually, Japanese are shortest among East Asians, Chinese had tallest population especailly the Northen Chinese people (check the 19th century painting and photogrpah; sometimes Chinese are taller than the Euroepans and Germans). Also, Northern Chinese have much pointy nose than Japanese (dont be fool by the typical pop cutlure from Japan). Chinese models are tall and have won numerous awards while Japanese, being short, not spectacular.......
Anyway, does any guy and girl found East Asian attractive at all? It seems East Asian males are not well received as sex symbol as Africans or Whites....(which is kind of racist though as European look dominate our view of what beauty define)
|
Posted By: xi_tujue
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2006 at 07:14
|
Minichikie even if you were right the hungarians still aren't closer to the huns. how many huns stayed in hungary. 1000 10000 20000 or even 50 000. So when they mixed they bloodline got "inpure" so we could say that the hungarians have more way more slavic genes.
so according to your logic because the huns lived in hungary and mixed you can claim them.
what about the huns who went back to central asia with whom did they mix they were more of them in asia so they probably mixed with turks so we according to you are more hunnic.
 does this make sence ------------- I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage |
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2006 at 07:18
| For the Hun - Hungarian relations, its much more likely an Avar - Hungarian connection. Attila died 453 while the Magyars arrived to the Carpathian Basin cca. 895. On the other hand we know that avars lived there when the Magyars arrived. |
Posted By: arras
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2006 at 08:24
|
Raiders >> "On the other hand we know that avars lived there when the Magyars arrived" I disagree. If, than only as part of slavic population in to which they were already assimilated by that time. By the way I heared some Hungarians claim to be descendants of Avars too (as well as Huns). Is that common opinion in Hungary? JuMong >> is there something which is not crap in your opinion? Seems everithing is with exeption of your own. Well thats what I call "racist". Scytho-Sarmatian >> thanks :) ijjas >> those face reconstructions are interesting but localization of graveyard and its age is teling nothing about ethnicity of people buried there. If there were some weapons, potery, jevelry etc.. all can help to identify them. Avaric graves are usualy identified with help of artifacts buried as well as way bodies were buried. In VIII-IX ct Avars did not exist as political and military pover anymore. At last they are not mentioned in both Roman and German sources. |
Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2006 at 08:49
Nevertheless mainstream opinions (like Gyula Kristó) state that the avar population number was not significant, many of them were assimilated to the local slavs.
Sources for Avar survival:
- Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum:
Mentions Avars as a still living ethnic group (cca. 871)
- Annales of prior Regino:
Avars in 889.
- De Administrando Imperio:
Mentions Avars as a separate ethnic group in Croatia (first half of the X. century)
Additionaly:
- Some historian also presume that the expression pastores Romanorum in Anonymus' Gesta Hungarorum is also a reference for the Avars.
- Theotmar the bishop of Salzburg (~900) mentions that some of the slavs were false-christians, shaved their heads and joined to the Magyars and lived the same way. Some suggest that these "slavs" were partially assimilated avars.
There are also archeological evidences, though determination of exact dates by archeological findings is rather difficult.
|