0
This thread is partly inspired by RussiaPrussia's thread on Huns in relation to Slavic origins.
Not all that much is really known about who Attila was and what exactly being a Hun meant. At University, the Huns were presented to me as an Asiatic based confederation that absorbed other ethno-linguistic groups along the way.
This is of coursed based on the traditional notion that the Huns can be tied to the Xiongnu. But was this really the case? Some things that call this into question:
1. The Gothic language appears to be the lingua Franca of the Huns.
2. There is evidence of Slavic being spoken among the Huns.
3. The term "Attila" is linguistically ambiguous and may actually be Gothic for "lord". So 'Attila the Hun' would have meant roughly among the Goths present, "Our lord the Hun".
There is ample evidence too that Xiongnu and Hun may be one in the same. Consider that Xiongnu would have actually been "Hunnu" in Classical Chinese. However I think this topic deserves some opinions and of course a poll.
Go!
Bookmarks