U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-03-2019, 03:44 PM
Status: "Guns don't kill people. Your local PD kills people." (set 5 days ago)
 
1,279 posts, read 728,001 times
Reputation: 1226

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
Hungarian historians have always maintained the Huns were originally Turkic-speaking.

I don't think there should be a doubt that they were Turco-Mongols.

If any mixing occured, that was due to a east to west migration, Asians invading Eastern Europeans and assimilating them, not the other way around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-03-2019, 05:45 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
79,545 posts, read 71,997,906 times
Reputation: 78071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorel36 View Post
I don't think there should be a doubt that they were Turco-Mongols.

If any mixing occured, that was due to a east to west migration, Asians invading Eastern Europeans and assimilating them, not the other way around.
"Westerners" were already in the East, in the Tarim Basin north of Tibet, when the Huns were marauding. The Huns chased most of them out, and west into Afghanistan and north India and Kashmir, where they founded the Kushan Empire. Those who stayed behind were assimilated by the area's nomads, including the Qiang, or prorto-tibetans. Chinese chronicles refer to them as the Yue Zhi. It wouldn't be surprising if some were taken prisoner and assimilated by the Huns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2019, 06:19 PM
 
Location: western East Roman Empire
6,740 posts, read 10,805,853 times
Reputation: 5994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
Update: Atilla was born in the Caucasus in the 5th Century AD, which is far too late to tell us anything about the Huns' original ethnicity. An anthropologist friend points out the obvious, too: his heavy beard would indicate he's Caucasian, anyway, not Asiatic. By the time the Romans encountered the Huns, the latter were heavily admixed w/Caucasian types. Atilla lead an army that included Ostrogoths and Alans.
I've long had the impression that "ethnicity" is a contemporary western European propaganda concept retrojected far back into history, meaninglessly.

Like all words, the original Greek word and the Latin loan-word (or even natio) has changed meaning several times over the many centuries and will continue to change going forward.

All we know about so-called "Huns" comes through what ancient writers wrote about them and is extant, though, to be sure, archaeology can help, more or less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2019, 06:37 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
79,545 posts, read 71,997,906 times
Reputation: 78071
Quote:
Originally Posted by bale002 View Post
I've long had the impression that "ethnicity" is a contemporary western European propaganda concept retrojected far back into history, meaninglessly.

Like all words, the original Greek word and the Latin loan-word (or even natio) has changed meaning several times over the many centuries and will continue to change going forward.

All we know about so-called "Huns" comes through what ancient writers wrote about them and is extant, though, to be sure, archaeology can help, more or less.
Would you prefer the word, "race"? I don't care what word anyone uses. We were talking about whether the Huns were definitively Asiatic (phenotypically), or Caucasoid (Indo-Euro, whatever you want to call it ).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2019, 06:52 PM
 
Location: Ohio
20,347 posts, read 14,467,325 times
Reputation: 16529
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESTER MANIFOLD View Post
Huns are the Germans
The Huns are not Germans.

When Attila retreated, he left four lieutenants and their clans to guard a mountain pass in the Carpathians.

If you want to see what Attila looked like, how he dressed and how he talked, you go see the Csango People in Romania.

When the Huns came back and retreated, they left people in the Pannonian Basin, modern-day Hungaria and the Transylvania Region in Romania.

The people are the Szekely People in Romania and eastern Hungaria.

If you go today, most people in eastern Hungaria are Slovaks, especially around Gyula and Bekescsaba. They were invited to settle the frontier lands to help against invading Ottoman Turks, in the same way Germans from Niedersachsen and Sachsen were invited to Romania to help defend against the Turks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2019, 07:15 PM
 
1,565 posts, read 899,095 times
Reputation: 643
think the "Germans are Huns" thing came from WW 1 propaganda when the Allies that compared the war crimes of the German army with that of the ancient Huns which in turn may be traced back to Kaiser Wilhelm's speech to German troops being sent to China to help put down the "Boxer Rebellion" (1900) to treat the rebels severely with no quarter "...llike the Huns under Attila....".

Last edited by georgeinbandonoregon; 09-03-2019 at 07:25 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2019, 07:26 PM
 
Location: Texas
35,726 posts, read 19,630,725 times
Reputation: 21309
Quote:
Originally Posted by georgeinbandonoregon View Post
think the "Germans are Huns" thing came from WW 1 propaganda when the Allies that compared the war crimes of the German army with that of the ancient Huns which in turn may be traced back to Kaiser Wilhelm's speech to German troops being sent to China to help put down the "Boxer Rebellion" (1900) to treat the rebels severely with no quarter "...llike the Huns under Attila....".

Also, Hungary (Austro-Hungarian Empire) was an ally to Germany in WW1.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2019, 07:30 PM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
4,087 posts, read 2,327,438 times
Reputation: 2718
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
So the Huns are now officially the Xiong Nu

But they dont explain when, and why the crossed the Urals and into Europe
I don't think they crossed the Urals, the Urals stop right around the Kazakh/Russian border, so everything south of that is just an empty flat steppe that stretches from Moldova to Mongolia, with some gentle hills here and there.

Or if they did cross over it would be in the southern part of the range which are little more than grassy hills anyway.
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.3000...7i13312!8i6656
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2019, 09:15 PM
 
1,565 posts, read 899,095 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
Also, Hungary (Austro-Hungarian Empire) was an ally to Germany in WW1.
yes indeed but I would think that for practical purposes Austro-Hungary (and it's possible Hunnish antecedents for the Magyars) took very much a back seat in the public consciousness of the Allied powers and right, wrong, or indifferent the "Hun" and "Kaiser Bill" WERE the face of the enemy. I would also add that the other member of the "Central Powers" was in fact the Ottoman Empire---itself originally created by Turkish warrior from the steppes of central Asia probably from the same general area the original Huns may have came from and maybe akin to them "racially" and/or in culture???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2019, 10:04 PM
 
6,514 posts, read 6,566,624 times
Reputation: 3032
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
Hungarian historians have always maintained the Huns were originally Turkic-speaking. And they certainly inhabited the part of Asia that was the cradle of the Truko-Mongol peoples. But that doesn't necessarily prove anything; early Indo-European nomads made it as Far East as Mongolia and Manchuria not too long after the Ice Age was over. I can't say exactly why some historians or archaeologists are now surmising the Huns were Indo-Euros; I haven't looked into it in detail, but I've come across several references to that theory in my researching early Indo-Euro history in Asia. It could also be, that their armies incorporated both ethnicities.

Very interesting coin, btw. Also notice the Spock-like ears. Thx for posting!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
"Westerners" were already in the East, in the Tarim Basin north of Tibet, when the Huns were marauding. The Huns chased most of them out, and west into Afghanistan and north India and Kashmir, where they founded the Kushan Empire. Those who stayed behind were assimilated by the area's nomads, including the Qiang, or prorto-tibetans. Chinese chronicles refer to them as the Yue Zhi. It wouldn't be surprising if some were taken prisoner and assimilated by the Huns.
By the time the Xiong Nu, and Han Dynasty were fighting, the Greeks had already reached Bactria if not beyond.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top