4.18 Europe: a.d. 401 to 500  (Page 4/7)

Some further description of the Huns and their lives is warranted at this time. The origin, race and language of these people is still in some dispute. Paleo-anthropological evidence indicates that they were a racially mixed group with both Mongoloid and Europoid

We have no written language from the Huns - their scribes were borrowed or enslaved Romans, writing in Latin or Greek. But the Hun aristocracy had chiefly Turkish names, with some Germanic ones apparently borrowed from their sometimes allies, the Goths and Gepids. Many of their names and place names were Latinized by their Latin chroniclers. Many languages were spoken in Attila's kingdom - Hunnish, Gothic, Alanic, Latin and Greek, but it is probable that their native tongue was Turkic, from the Eurasian steppes. The name "Attila" comes from the Gepid "Atta" meaning "father" and his brother's name, Bledas is also German. Other names and particularly tribal names, however, were definitely Turkish.

The Huns were semi-nomadic, keeping all kinds of domestic animals, but essentially living on their horses and off their sheep. From the latter they had mutton, milk, cheese, felt, tents, shoes and caps (curved and pointed). They spun the sheep wool and made linen but agriculture was apparently at a minimum. By Attila's time, Hun nobles had houses with walls of well-planed planks and panels, containing seats, beds and draperies. They loved gold and extracted extremely large sums at regular intervals from the Romans. In the 440s East Romans paid the Huns about 13,000 pounds of gold and they also received some for auxiliaries lent to the Romans and as ransom for prisoners and through the sale of slaves obtained as prisoners of war. Trade was brisk at times, involving not only slaves but horses in exchange for gold, wine and silk, which was greatly prized by all the "barbarians". The Huns had an aristocracy and they had slaves, although most of the latter were quickly sold to the Romans. Their wharf are was rather typical of all barbarians from the steppes - confined principally to wild cavalry attacks, accompanied by much terrifying noise, lightly equipped but with accurate bows, lances, swords and shields. There is some evidence that the nobles had some types of armor, chiefly scale armor made from horses hoofs, but the commoners often fought naked, a feature which added to the terror experienced by their "civilized" enemies. They appeared to be glued to their short-legged, big- headed, shaggy, long-bodied ugly horses. They had no spurs, but did use whips. The question of whether or not they had stirrups is still not settled. Some nomad barbarians definitely had wooden or even metal stirrups (as the later Magyars) and the Huns wore soft shoes adaptable to round, wooden stirrups and it is possible that they had them. Accurate bow shooting is difficult and lance fighting without stirrups is almost impossible unless the lance is more or less tied to the horse. Saddles with a wooden tree have been identified. Horses were branded and ear-marked for identification and the warrior horses were almost all geldings. Although archeological evidence is scant, it is assumed that the Huns used horse drawn carts for supplies and loot. The stories of their atrocities are legion and most must be looked at somewhat skeptically and they were probably not much, if any, worse than any of the nomadic invaders from the steppes or even the Romans, themselves.