The Huns

Attila the Hun
Attila the Hun

I mention in 'Uroko' that modern Hungary was founded by Magyar and Kabar tribes which had migrated there from Khazaria beginning in the late 9th century.  Not only were the Magyars close allies of (or practically synonymous with) the Huns, their Arpad leaders claimed Attila the Hun as a direct ancestor.  

Before this Magyar/Kabar migration the Huns had already pushed westward into Europe once before, in the 4th and 5th centuries.  At the height of their prowess the Hunnic empire stretched from the steppes of Central Asia to Germany and from the Black Sea to the Baltic.  Apart from that and their notorious warlike nature, not much is known about them.

The Huns didn't leave written records so historians are left only with what others wrote about them.   They are widely thought to have been a Turkic people, a hypothesis based largely on what scholars know of the Hunnic language.  It was noted in Byzantine annals that the Huns spoke the same language as Turkic tribes such as the Bulgars and Avars, while Chinese chroniclers compared their language to that of the Töles, also a Turkic tribe.  In the 18th century however orientalist Joseph de Guignes pointed out that the Huns had migrated into Central Asia from Mongolia and should be identified as the Xiongnu.  The name Xiongnu may even be a cognate of 'Hun', and this hypothesis of a Xiongnu/Hun connection has gained a fair amount of acceptance. 

Hunnic Empire

These two views are seemingly in conflict, and most things you will read about the Huns simply note that their origins are in question, touch on the Xiongnu and Turkic hypotheses and leave it at that.

It seems clear to me the Huns were the Xiongnu, and they were Turkic!  I don't know for certain, but there are some clues that may have gone unnoticed by the historians.

The Hungarian language is regarded as Ugric, or Finno-Ugric, since a similar tongue is spoken in Finland and Estonia.  In 2009 when the ethnic Uyghurs of China were in the news I happened to be pondering this topic, and it hit me that 'Uyghur' and 'Ugric' might be related.   Add to that, there are numerous pockets of Uyghur populations in China, Mongolia and Central Asia along the exact route that the Huns would have taken in their western migration had they and the Xiongnu been one and the same people.  How does this possibly fit with the Huns speaking a "Turkic" tongue?

One day I was searching for information about the Arpads (the clan name of the Magyar leaders of Hungary) and I came across the name written together with a variant: Arpad/Arvad.  

Ugarit, Arwad, Sidon, Tyre and Mt. Aqua

What's Arvad? – I thought. I googled 'Arvad' and got, "did you mean Arwad?". Sure, why not, let's google 'Arwad'. Turns out, Arwad, sometimes spelled Arvad, is an island off the coast of Syria. Arwad is pretty small, and as I was looking up and down the coast of the biblical Levant on a couple of maps trying to find it, another coastal city caught my eye, one I was aware of because it is the location of one of the richest neolithic archeological finds in the Mediterranean, with artifacts dating back 7000 years or more … it's just a little ways up the coast from Arwad. Ugarit (!!!).

Now, if Ugarit, Ugric and Uyghur are not connected somehow I'd be very surprised. 

Ugarit was located on a section of the (modern) Syrian coast near Turkey dominated by a large mountain, Mt. Aqraa.  This mountain was known in antiquity by other names, it was called Mt. Hazzi by the Hittites and referred to as Mt. Zephon/Zaphon in the bible, and was the center of pagan Ba'al worhip in the area.

Could it be that a Turkic people living in that northern stretch of the Levant migrated all the way to the Baltic (where they would be known as the original Finno-Ugric people) and to Mongolia where they were known to the Chinese as the Xiongnu?  And could many of them subsequently have left the area, some forming a second migration to the Baltic lands of Finland and Estonia, the rest heading west to Central Asia from where they would storm Europe in the 4th century as the Huns?  And could they have left descendents in China, Mongolia and other pockets along the way back to Central Asia who became known as the Uyghurs? 

Incredibly, there is one more clue which suggests that is more or less what happened, which is found in Hungarian mythology.

In the Hungarian myth of the White Stag, Ménrót or Nemere (synonymous with Nimrod, the biblical founder of Babylon), fathers twin sons, Hunor and Magor, by his wife Eneth.  Hunor and Magor become great hunters, and a white stag they are chasing leads the twins to Scythia.  There they take Sarmatian brides and father the Hun and Magyar tribes.  

This could be nothing more than just a made up story, but there are some things about the myth which indicate it does have Mesopotamian origins.  First, the name of Ménrót's wife, Eneth, is close to the Assyrian name of Nimrod's wife, Anuta.  Ménrót's father in the myth is Tana, whereas the father of Nimrod was the Sumerian king Etana.  Most convincing is that there is a similar Assyrian account whereby Nimrod also fathers twins, one of whom is named Magor, just as in the Hungarian myth.  To pile on one more tantalizing tidbit, the people of ancient Subartu which was in northwestern Mesopotamia not far east of Ugarit and Mt. Zephon (modern Mt. Aqraa), believed themselves also to be descended from Nimrod.

I don't know about you, but I'm convinced.  Uyghur, Ugric, I'll bet you dollars to donuts those terms originate with Ugarit, or alternately, all three share the same (unknown) origin.

I am not one bit surprised that the Huns and the Vikings shared roots in Mesopotamia. The two peoples had much in common, both being fearless, bloodthirsty plunderers, in fact you could easily call the Huns Vikings on horses, or the Vikings Huns in ships.  Both drank from the skulls of their enemies, as I have pointed out.  (To be correct, it is unknown if the Huns drank from skulls, but there are historical accounts that the tradition was practiced by the Xiongnu, by Scythians and by Krum, a Khan of the Bulgars, all of whom connect to the Huns.)  It is not known if the Huns practiced human sacrifice or not, but the Armenian chronicler Moses Daskhuranci recorded that they offered horses as burnt offerings to their gods. 

There is one other allegation floating around which connects the Huns and the Vikings at a more recent date.  I can't vouch for it, but it should at least be mentioned.   Some contend that Uldin, a great chieftain of the Huns of the late 4th century, and Odin (Woden), the great king of the Vikings were one and the same person.   The guessed life-spans of the two differ by a couple hundred years, but there are some correllations between Uldin and Odin which are intriquing –

Uldin – It would be difficult not to notice the similarity between the name of the Hunnic “king”, and the name of the Asian leader of the Norse Sagas named Odin. Odin is characterized as a great warrior who won many battles upon crossing the River Don. The historic Uldin was considered by some authors to be the man who united the Huns and led them to their decisive victory over the (Eastern) Ostrogoths who became subjects of the Huns. The link between the Goths and the Huns is reflected in their joint campaign (possibly led by Uldin) against Adrianople where two thirds of the army of 80,000 men and the Emperor Valens were destroyed on 9 August 378.  In 400 a German rebel named Gainas incurred the wrath of Uldin who, with some considerable effort, finally managed to beat the forces of his opponent, and Uldin sent the slain man’s head to Constantinople on 3 January 401 to be displayed – with the demand that he be paid “gifts”, thereby sealing a treaty with the Eastern Romans. This historical record bears some similarity to the Odin from the Sagas whose story is tied in with the severed head of a man…

…Either way it appears that there was a solid link between the two peoples whose lifestyle and culture at the time did not differ in any significant way.

Two final footnotes on the Huns.  The Xiongnu were so feared in China that the Chinese built the Great Wall to keep them out.  But the relationship between the rulers of the Xiongnu and the Chinese was more complex, and treaties and even marriages were arranged between them to try and keep the peace.  Scouring over the available genealogy trees of the early Hunnic (Xiongnu) kings do show several Chinese princesses, agreeing with the notion that Chinese rulers offered their daughters in marriage to the Xiongnu on a few occasions.  But blood seems to have flowed the other way as well. Liu Pang, Liu Heng (Wen), Liu Qi (Jing) and Liu Che (the great Wu) were all Han dynasty emperors, and they were all of the Liu family.  The Liu were Xiongnu!!!

Maybe I'm daft, but isn't there obviously a connection between 'Hun' and 'Han'!??  When was the Han Dynasty first known as such?  How could the Han and the Hun, whose names are so close and whose leaders (of the 1st and 2nd centuries BC) seem to be so interrelated by blood, not be cousins?

Five arrows

Lastly, I point out in 'Uroko' that the bundle of five arrows symbol displayed on the Rothschild bank logo is a Hun symbol. There is a story floating around that the 5 Rothschild sons who dominated the banking industry from the capitals of Europe and England beginning in the early 19th century were told by their mother that while one arrow can easily be snapped in two, five arrows bundled together can never be broken. This anecdote may or may not be true, but it's significant, and the 5 sons of Mayer Amschell Rothschild are sometimes referred to as "the five arrows" – in fact I once read their being so described on an N.M.Rothschild bank website.

The tale the Rothschild sons were alledly told by their mother obviously derives from the story of Alan Goa, a mythical figure from the Secret History of the Mongols.  In the legend, Alan Goa is the mother of 5 sons whose progeny later become the Hunnic tribes.  Two of her sons don't get along with the other threee, who were born after the death of Dobun-mergen, the father of the first two.  Their mother tells the boys the same thing Gutle Rothschild is rumored to have told her sons … individually you can be easily vanquished, but if you all stick together like the bundle of 5 arrows, no one can defeat you …

The wife of Dobun-mergen was Alan-goa (Outstanding Beauty), and she bore him two sons: Bugunutei and Belgunutei. He died shortly after their birth, yet Alan-goa gave birth to three more sons; Buqa-qatagi, Buqatu-salji, and Bodonchar-mungqaq. Now Dobun-mergen had a faithful servant called Maaliq Baya'ud, whose father he had saved from starvation in the wilderness, and after the death of the chieftain this servant remained and dwelt in his yurt. Then the trueborn sons of Dobun-mergen whispered against their mother, saying:

"This mother of ours has produced three sons, without our father's older brother, younger brother, or cousins or any husband. Only the Maaliq Baya'ud man lives in this yurt. They are probably his three sons."

Alan-goa, hearing these rumors, brought her five sons together and gave each an arrow, which she commanded him to break. When they had done so, she tied five arrows together and again commanded each son to break the bundle. When each had tried and failed, she related to them this story, in order to allay the suspicion of her two firstborn sons:

"Every night, a shining yellow man came into the yurt through the light of the smoke-hole and over the top of the door. He caressed my belly and his light sank into it. He slunk sheepishly away like a yellow dog by the light of the sun and moon… All five of you were all born of this same belly. Alone, you can be broken easily by anyone. Together and of one mind, like bound arrow-shafts, none can easily vanquish you."

Note – from the later 2nd millenium to the middle of the 1st millenium B.C. the Hurrians maintained a large kingdom centered in Subartu, which at its height encompassed Ugarit. One of the major tribes of the later Hurrian period were the Mittani. Nicholas de Vere has made the claim that his family the de Veres, who have flourished on the sidelines of the royal houses of England and Britain as the Earls of Oxford for a millenium, descend from the Mittani.

– Which makes the following very interesting reading…

…The land known by Sumerians as "Subar-Ki" or "Subar-Tu" was inhabited by the Hurrians, whose language was the oldest form of Sanskrit – consequently, the mother of all Indo-European languages! Therefore, the Hurrians cannot be directly related with Hungarians. Yet, they were not the only people in that region and their tongue had also many words in common with Sumerian and Elamite, that are agglutinative languages. The Hurrites indeed were associated with (or subdued by) the Mitanni, that became the Hurrian élite in the same way as the Chaldeans and the Magi in other States, as it will be exposed later in this essay. In fact, the same country was known under different names, depending on the people taken as reference: in Assyrian documents they are mentioned as "Sapar-da", Egyptians called them "Magor", in Persian records they are known as "Sabarda" and "Matiene/Mada", while the Biblical name Haran/Charan is obviously connected with the Hurrians. Greek sources refer to those peoples as "Sapir/Sabir", "Makr/Magar" and "Matiene". All these terms point out to the denomination of two Hungarian tribes: Sabirs and Magyars. These two names however, may belong to one and the same people that probably split into two branches. The Sabirs seem to be the oldest group from which Sarmatians originated, as they dwelled in a vast area from Central Asia to the heart of Europe. Indeed, the name "Siberia" (Sibir') is ascribed to them, but also the Roman name of the western area of present-day Hungary was "Sabaria", and was indeed, inhabited by Sarmatians (Yazyg). The writer István Gyárfás in his work "The History of the Jász-Kun" ("The History of the Yazygs and Kumans"), vol. I, reports that the Greek geographer Ptolemy mentioned the Jász dwelling in present-day Szombathely, Hungary. The Jász (Yazyg) were known by the Romans as "Sabarians" or "Savarians". Byzantine documents concerning the Hungarian prince Termatzu from Árpád's lineage assert that the oldest name of the Hungarians was "Sabartoi Asphali", recalling their ancient Mesopotamian name Subar-tu and Sabir-ki, while Asphali was the Arab name of the Lower Zab river, in Assyria. Professor Csaba Hargita suggests another possible explanation: if they were speaking of themselves on their own language, Hungarians may have said "azfile Szavardok", that is "a kind of Sabartians", as it is an usual answer to say "I would be a kind of…" that could be heard by the Greeks like "Asphaloi Sabartoi". 

In reference to the Mitanni, the northern Mesopotamian region was also known as "Mada/Mata/Madja" (not to be confused with Maday, the land of the Medes, that was beyond the eastern border of Assyria). The term that may be transliterated as "mat", "madh", "madj" means "country" or "district" in Sumerian, Subarian, Parthian, and other related languages, and it was also used by the Assyrians and Egyptians with the same meaning. Notice that in those languages, the phoneme "dh" or "dj" is equal to the modern Hungarian "gy", and "megye" is still "district" or "province" in Hungarian.  Therefore, if the denomination has been transferred along the generations, the Magyars might be the ancient tribe of Mitanni. The territory of the Mada or Mitanni is referred by some Egyptian documents as Magor.  There are many other linguistic evidences that prove the close relationship between modern Hungarian and Sumerian/Subarian tongues; for example, in Hurrian/Subar language, the word "tarshua" means "all the people", while in Sumerian "shag" conveyed the meaning of people as well as head or high. In Hungarian, the combination of both is seen in "társaság", that means "society"; "köztársaság" is "republic" (notice that "s" in Hungarian sounds like "sh"). Also the name of the horse, warhorse and chariot in Hungarian are found in Northern Mesopotamia. 
Therefore, the Scythian component of the Hungarian ancestry was closely associated with the descent of the ancient Mitanni…

Sources and further reading:

The Ancient Identity of Hungarians:
The Hungarian-Hebrew Connection

The Origins of the Huns

Copyright (c) 2015 Eric Westfall.
Original content may be quoted or replicated under the Fair Use doctrine. All other rights reserved.

5 Comments to 'The Huns'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'The Huns'.

  1. terezia said,

    Awesome, thank you! As a sarmata hungarian, studying along this line, I also came to the same conclusions, also using anthropology….

  2. Koguryo said,

    You need correction my friend. The Huns were a Mongoloid peoples from FAR EAST ASIA. The Romans described Attila the Hun and the Huns as being MONGOLOID!
    The confusion people are getting into is because the Huns had CO-OPTED the TURKS in their invasion and conquering of Europe. This is why Turkic words were adopted by the Hungarians. What you forget is that the Europeans were filling into the ranks of the Huns because the Huns were tiny in population just as their cousins were, the Mongols! The Mongols also had to co-opt the Turks since they were small in numbers.
    The migration of Europeans soon made the Huns extinct. The Hungarians today are erroneously remembered by their conquering Asiatic masters.
    The Huns are famous for their archery on horse-back just as the Mongols were. This is a trait of the Mongoloids which is why Koreans are the best archers in the world today – gold medalists. The Koreans are a branch of the Xiongnu and understand Xiongnu was not a single ethnic people but it had others such as the Europeans who moved into Western China. I cannot get into it but there are a lot of similarities between the Xiongnu and Koreans such as shamanism, “Parthian Shot,” and other cultural, religious, and ETHNIC similarities.
    So, please refrain your outrageous and unscientific methods without archeological nor genetic support of such claims. I have them which cannot be discussed due to time.
    Lastly, remember, the Asians were in Europe which is why many areas up there have Japhetic names in the times of Noah. Magog once were where Turkey and up to eastern Europe and possibly into England as well since Dolmens (a trait of the Mongoloids) are found mostly in the regions of Korea and Manchuria and a few in Europe.
    The largest concentration of dolmen in the world is found on the Korean peninsula. With an estimated 35,000 dolmen, Korea alone accounts for nearly 40% of the world’s total.[6]
    And if your curious, Korea and Manchurians and the other North Eastern people of Siberia and Central Asia are Magog who shall turn against YAHOVAH AFTER the 1000 year reign of Yahshua. AFTER the 1000 years and not just before Yahshua’s return.

  3. admin said,

    The Huns/Xiongnu, I am convinced, were LED by Ubaid via Scythia, then Mesopotamia, then Mongolia. The Chinese recorded their arrival in 1200 BC. Where were they before that? They migrated there from the Holy Land. Check out the myth of the White Stag. Consider the similarity of terms – Arpad/Arwad.

  4. kevehun said,

  5. admin said,

    Cool, Thanx for all that info!

:: Trackbacks/Pingbacks ::

No Trackbacks/Pingbacks

Leave a Reply

301 Moved Permanently

Moved Permanently

The document has moved here.