What happened to the Huns?

E.Bretschneider "Mediaeval Researches. From Eastern Asiatic Sources." v.1,  2001 edition, originally published in 1887

pp.306-307
...The Yuan ch'ao pi shi notices that two rivers which Subutai had been ordered to cross, viz., the "Djayakh" and the "Idil".
   The first of these rivers, the original Turkish name of which is "Iaik" or "Djaik"  (in Kazak language - "Jayiq" - A.), is  the Ural river of modern Russian maps. We find it first mentioned in the Byzantine writers. Zemarchus, sent in 569 by the Byzantine emperor to the khan of the Turks, on his way back came to the "Daich" river, and then to the "Attila" (Volga). Constantin Porphyrogenita (tenth century) calls the "Iaik" (Yule's "Cathay," clxvi.). As I have stated above, the ancient Russian annals write this name "Yaik". Pl.Carpini styles the same river (743) "Jaec"; Rubruck (274), "Jagac". In Haithon's itinerary the name reads "Jaic". On the Catalan map (1375 A.D.) it is called "Jayech". In the Mohammedan historians of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries the river "Iaik" is frequently mentioned. Rashid notices it in his account  of the Kipchak. This is also "the great river Yak, which has its spring in the land of Siberia, near the river Cama, and runs through the lands of "Nagay", fallen into the Mar Caspium" oin jenkinson's narrative of the journey to Bokhara in 1558.
   The other river is Volga. By the name of "Idil" or "Atil", meaning "river" in Turkish, the Turks, and after them all Mohammedan geohraphers , have designated the Volga, which latter name, used by the Slavic nations, seems to be derived from the ancient city of Bolghar, situated on the Volga. In the tenth century Istakhri states (p.2) that the Khazars live on the river "Atel", which runs through their country. Ibn Khurdadbeh (also in the tenth century) speaks also of a city "Atel".  This is believed to answer to the present Astrakhan. In the Byzantine writers the name appears much earlier; the river "Attilia" in Zemarchus itinerary (v.supra). Plano Carpini, 775: "Ethil quam Rusci vocant Volga". Ibidem, 743: "Flumen Volga super quod vadit Bati est valde magnum." Rubruck calls the Volga always "Ethilia". On the Catalan map the name is "Edil"...   


Kazakh name for Volga river is Edil.
 


Edited by Akskl

Originally posted by Temujin Avars and Bulgars mostly, Magyars not, they came much later,

i've read a theory suggesting it was only appr 100 years betwen the death of attila and the magyar conquest of todays hungary (honfoglal�s)

so if this was true, the connection between the hunns and the hungarians might have been closer than we thought..

here is a link, unfortunately only in hungarian

http://www.kitalaltkozepkor.hu/tothgyula_amagyarkronikak.php

it's pretty interesting. did you ever hear of that theory?

and about the �rp�d name,, I also thought this was exclusive for hungary, and I never saw a reply to raiders question.. is this name really common in turkey??

Edited by sebike

Originally posted by Raider   and about the �rp�d name,, I also thought this was exclusive for hungary, and I never saw a reply to raiders question.. is this name really common in turkey??

Dunno but one of my far nephew is called Arpad.

Originally posted by sebike Originally posted by Raider i don't think we can accept seriously Herbert Illig's theory. not knowing much about either him or his theory (the source is all i've read about this theory) i have to ask; why not?

Well his books were rather popular and widely known. It was printed two or three times. The publisher even organized public discourse in this issue. Even the Rubicon (a periodical edited by historians and university professors) has a special account to confute the theory.

By the way this theory always makes me laugh. Those nationalist who propagate it try to use it to back their nationalist ideology. And they seem to forget that this theory also "solve" the problems of the daco-roman continuity.

Rene Grousset "The Empire of the Steppes - a History of Central Asia" transl. from the French by Naomi Walford.  Rutgers University Press, 6th paperback printing, 1999

p.80,   9th line from the bottom:

"...Lastly, as was just seen, Huns of Europe, who were no doubt of Turkic stock, held sway over Russian steppe (it was occupied by  Russia only in the end of the 18th century - A.) in the region adjoining sea of Azov and the mouth of the Don, although the rivalry of their two hordes - Kutrigurs in the west, Uturgurs in the east - undermined their power.
   Among the vassals of the Juan-Juan, say the Chinese, were the Tu-chueh, a Turkic tribe which has given its name to a whole group of nations sharing a common language. Pelliot says that the Chinese name "Tu-chueh" must represent a Mongol (Juan-Juan) plural form "Turkut", from singular "Turk". Literally, it means "strong". According to Chinese annalists, the Tu-chueh totem was the wolf. They were descendants of the old Hsiung-nu, a fact borne out by the proto-Turkic character attributed to the Huns by Pelliot..."


Edited by Akskl

A clear, fast and sharp solution for this "problem". 

In 2005, a group of about 2,500 Hungarians petitioned the government to be a recognized minority of direct decendants of Attila. It was a failed bid but gained the group publicity.

I have always wondered why estonian word "Att" or "�tt" means " a very old man" or " an old clan" 

Originally posted by Tanel I have always wondered why estonian word "Att" or "�tt" means " a very old man" or " an old clan"

At means horse in Turkish, the word ata means ancester tho.what do you call ancester in estonian?

I was littlebit uncorrect , the word �tt also means Grandfather