Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
arras
Immortal Guard
Joined: 14-Jun-2006
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Attila the Hun-is he Asian or Indo-European? Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 08:55 |
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.
|
|
Raider
General
Joined: 06-Jun-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 804
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 09:01 |
Originally posted by arras
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.
|
The identification of the Huns and the Hungarians is purely mythic. This mythic connection is strong and in my opinion the Hungarians feel the Huns as ours.
|
|
Scytho-Sarmatian
Earl
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 290
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 09:03 |
Originally posted by Giannis
Scytho-Sarmatian, you can purchase the dvd Attila from here if you want www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00013T79Q. |
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.
|
|
arras
Immortal Guard
Joined: 14-Jun-2006
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
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.
|
|
Raider
General
Joined: 06-Jun-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 804
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 09:18 |
Originally posted by arras
Scytho-Sarmatian >> why do you think? Becouse of theyr "asiatic" look? Turks also look asiatic and they are Indo-Europeans. | When you said asiatic you do not mean mongoloid, don't you?
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
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.
|
|
arras
Immortal Guard
Joined: 14-Jun-2006
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
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?
|
|
xi_tujue
Arch Duke
Atabeg
Joined: 19-May-2006
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1919
|
Quote Reply
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
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 11:04 |
Originally posted by Raider
When you said asiatic you do not mean mongoloid, don't you? |
Originally posted by arras
Raider >> no :) |
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.
|
|
Lmprs
Arch Duke
Joined: 30-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1869
|
Quote Reply
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.
|
|
arras
Immortal Guard
Joined: 14-Jun-2006
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 11:41 |
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.htmlhttp://www.kroraina.com/huns/mh/index.html
|
|
Kids
Shogun
Joined: 19-Nov-2004
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 238
|
Quote Reply
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.
|
|
DayI
Sultan
Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 13:22 |
Originally posted by Giannis
Scytho-Sarmatian, you can purchase the dvd Attila from here if you want www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00013T79Q. |
Ive seen a much newer movie then that "Atilla the Hun" whas the title.
|
|
|
DayI
Sultan
Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 13:27 |
Originally posted by Kids
"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.
| 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)
|
|
|
ijjas
Immortal Guard
Joined: 30-Jun-2006
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
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
Edited by ijjas - 07-Jul-2006 at 13:53
|
|
Maziar
Chieftain
Arteshbod
Joined: 06-Nov-2005
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1155
|
Quote Reply
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?
|
|
Mortaza
Tsar
Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 14:55 |
white huns are Indo-European ?
|
|
xi_tujue
Arch Duke
Atabeg
Joined: 19-May-2006
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1919
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 15:20 |
Originally posted by Mortaza
white huns are Indo-European ? |
some claim that they're persian
|
I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage
|
|
Seko
Emperor
Spammer
Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595
|
Quote Reply
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.
|
|
Maziar
Chieftain
Arteshbod
Joined: 06-Nov-2005
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1155
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 15:44 |
Originally posted by Mortaza
white huns are Indo-European ? |
have i claimed that?
|
|