Welcome to the relaunch of the third preview of INVASIO BARBARORVM - RVINA ROMAE. In this preview we take a look at the Hun Confederacy of the 5th century. Here You'll see some examples of the portraits, events, units, and other features that we hope will capture the atmosphere of the era.
Please note that all the material in this preview are work in progress, and have been altered for the purpose of this presentation. These effects do not appear ingame.
- The Origin of the Huns -
“The nation of the Huns, scarcely known to ancient documents,
dwelt beyond the Maeotic marshes beside the frozen ocean,
and surpassed every extreme of ferocity.”
Ammianus Marcellinus
But before they entered the European stage, the Huns had become known in central Asia. In Sogdia and Bactria, Chionites, Kidarite Huns, and Hephthalites ( so called “White Huns” ) ruled in the 4th to 6th centuries AD. Recent research, however, have shown that none of the great confederations of nomadic steppe warriors was ethnically homogenous, and that the Hun name was used by different groups for reasons of prestige, or by outsiders to describe their lifestyle or geographic origin. Thus, the Romans often called the Huns Scythians, and the Avars Huns etc.
However, regardless who the so called “original Huns” may or may not have been, by the 5th century the Hun society was by all means multiethnic and multicultural, always dynamic, never static. It was still an illiterate culture, and their language, of which only a few personal names and words remain, consists of Germanic, Iranian, and other elements, which are thought to be of Turkic or Mongolic origin. Thus, the Huns who came to Europe in the second half of the 4th century AD were a confederation of warrior bands whose success was based on their willingness to integrate others. The archaeological evidence proves that these warriors, whether Germans or Huns, shared a common symbolic language and material culture.
When the nomadic Huns, living in the conditions of desperate hardship that the steppe life often means, came into contact with the higher material civilization of the agricultural peoples on both sides of the Danubian frontier, it was inevitable that they should try to improve their lives by collecting as much food and plunder as possible from the Goths and Romans. This was probably the defining moment when the Huns went from being small bands of looters to a large tribal confederacy.
- The Empire of Attila -
Attila, son of Mundzuk, at first ruled jointly with his elder brother Bleda until 445, when the latter died. Although no evidence exists to support the claim that Attila had his brother murdered, it is nevertheless a widespread and even accepted “truth” that he did. This may be due to the supposedly well known animosity that existed between the two rather unlike brothers. Priscus, the Roman historian, portrays Attila as ambitious and aggressive, while Bleda appears to have been quite content with a lavish and leisurely court life.
Bleda and Attila belonged to a dynasty that had united previously separated Hun tribes, together with many other subject groups, primarily Germanic ones such as the Sciri, Heruli, Gepids and Goths, but also Sarmatians, Alans and Slavs etc. By this time the Hun society had become more sedentary and centred around a capital near the river Priscus named Tigas, where it is said that even a Roman style bathhouse had been built.
Under Attila’s rule the Hun Empire, according to Priscus, occupied “all Schytia”, which roughly consists of all lands west of the Caspian. Traditionally, Attila himself have often been ascribed the transformation of the Huns from a people of scattered nomadic tribes into a vast Empire, but this notion have been contested by modern historians. When war became the normal state, and “kingship” became a more or less permanent institution among the Huns, the "process of Empire" was already set in motion. That the Hunnic Empire fell apart and disintegrated with the death of Attila is certainly true, but it would be highly unfair to ascribe its rise solely to him.
The Huns were, above all else, warriors and as such they offered their services to the Romans in their struggle against the Goths. They also supplied Roman generals, like Aëtius, with troops in order for him to achieve his political ambitions. For this they expected to be compensated, preferably with gold.
In all fairness one must also try to understand what kind of ruler Attila was, and what kind of Empire he managed. It was clearly not an Empire in the same sense as the Roman or Persian ones. Attila himself showed no recorded interest in exercising direct rule over vast territories, no interest in controlling the great fortified cities, and no interest in the bureaucracy of Empire. It was not uncommon for a defeated king to keep his crown and position as leader of his now subjugated people. To wine and dine in fancy palaces and to meddle in the affairs of every vassal was not Attila’s ambition. His Empire did not consist of cities and land, but of warriors. Attila was a warlord, and as such his position wasn’t based on royal lineage or tradition. He owed his position to his warriors, and his primary concern was to provide for them, to offer them wealth, status and safety. This was Attila’s policy: by alternating raids and treaties, he succeeded in pushing the yearly sums paid to him by the Romans to an unprecedented 2.100 pounds of gold, because gold was what it was all about. If Attila couldn’t maintain his aura of strength, invincibility and dread, his warriors would abandon him and he would likely be usurped. The position of warlord in the migration era isn’t so different from that of a modern mob boss. Tony Soprano wasn’t elected boss because of his name and ancestry, but because the captains of the family believed in him and were willing to let him lead. It was then up to him to provide for his subordinates, and to keep them happy. If they weren’t, he would soon find himself “whacked” and replaced by someone else.
The legacy of Attila is ambiguous. While the Christian writers styled him as the “scourge of God”, others drew a more favourable picture. Germanic legends describes him as a noble and powerful king, and lately Terry Jones argued, in his “Barbarians”, that Attila stood as something of a tolerant pagan counterpart to the oppressiveness and Christian bigotry of the Roman Empire.
It is of course true that the Huns left us no great cities, and no lasting monuments. What the Huns had achieved was a massive transfer of resources from the Roman Empire to the lands that had previously been regarded as completely void of anything useful. Barbarian warriors could thus enjoy the benefits of the Roman system, its trade and its luxuries, without having to enter it. This strategy required a growing concentration of power that became harder and harder to maintain, and collapsed after Attila’s death in 453. Hunnic groups, such as the Akatzirs, Cutrigurs, and Utigurs, continued to live in the northern steppes, and sometimes raided Roman lands, sometimes offering their services to the Roman armies, but they did never again achieve anything that resembled the position they had during Attila’s reign. Only the Avars, who came to Europe in the middle of the 6th century, successfully followed Attila’s model. But the age in which the name Huns had enjoyed the highest prestige in the Eurasian steppes was over.
Below You can see some samples of the new portraits used by the Hun Confederacy:
And here's the "reconstructed" portrait:
The practice to cut one's cheeks probably served a ceremonial purpose and was a testiment of a warrior. After all, the Hunnic warrior did not pay homage to a fallen comrade with womanly tears, but with manly blood!
The heir to the throne on the other hand sits in his tent, surrounded by the most influential and powerful of Hun chieftains and warlords who bows their heads and swears an oath of allegiance to their future ruler.
Here we a sample of one of many entirely new levels of Hunnic buildings. Below You'll see the three levels of farming available to the Huns:
The expression "if you got it, flaunt it" rang just as true then as it does now, since wealth was an effective way of saying: I'm rich, therefore powerful - or rather: I'm powerful, therefore I'm rich. Alas, the true quality of a warlord can always be weighed in gold!
Here are some of the units recruitable by the Hunnic faction:
- Hun Armoured Archers -
Their normal tactic is to rain down a hail of arrows upon the enemy, before charging and doing still more damage.
- Heruli Cavalry -
The Heruli were a nomadic Germanic people known for the fighting prowess of their light forces. They were subjugated by the Ostrogoths, then the Huns, and later joined the Lombards in their conquest of Italy.
The etymology of the name may be related to "Earl" (Erilaz) and was probably an honorary military title.
- Ostrogothic Spearmen -
A man with a spear can kill even the bravest warrior, or stop him dead in his tracks when his horse (quite sensibly) refuses to charge headlong onto a sharp spearpoint. These men are worth bringing into battle as they can provide a solid anchor for a battle line when fighting cavalry, even if they are vulnerable to attack by missiles or swordsmen.
- Scirii Spearmen -
The most notable Scirian was probably Odoacer ( or Odovakar ), who was the son of Edeco, one of Attila's lieutenants. Odoacer came into the service of the Western Roman Empire and rose to great prominence, eventually becoming the first Germanic "King of Italy".
- Slavic Cavalry -
The early Slavs were not a horse culture, and favored light, unarmored infantry using ambush, and hit and run tactics. Only much later, after contact with other horse cultures like the Huns, Avars and Bulgars, did they start to adopt cavalry.
These cavalry units fight with javelins and spears but only a padded cloth as armor, more effective against the cold than against weapons. These cavalry can fight well under most circumstances. They are certainly useful among a people who, at this point in time, are lacking in cavalry in general.
- Steppe Skirmisher Infantry -
Skirmisher Infantry are recruited from amongst the young and low-status members of a tribe. They use their own equipment, bows and arrows, a sword and are given a good lesson in obedience to their betters before being pushed into a battle line.
They are best employed to harrass enemies and thin their ranks with missile volleys before the main battle is joined. They are capable of fighting hand-to-hand, but this is not their strength and against anyone other than other skirmishers they will suffer disproportionate casualties.
They carry little war gear other than their weapons, giving them their speed over rough terrain.
If You wish to show Your support for RVINA ROMAE, feel free to use our banners:
http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/2860/banner00w.png
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/2396/banner01s.png
http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8880/banner03a.png
http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/8761/banner02e.png
---
The Team of INVASIO BARBARORVM - RVINA ROMAE, consists of:
Gäiten - Units (models (improved and new) , textures (improved and new), related text-files), overworked map etc.
Ihatemonday - Music & Environments etc.
PSEUDO ROMANUS - Late Latin Soundmod & In-game vids etc.
Joar - 2D art & Text work, traits, ancillaries etc.
| - Reference Material - |
Susanne Hakenbeck, Hunnic modified skulls: physical appearance, identity and the transformative nature of migrations. ( link ).
E.A. Thompson, The Huns.
Otto Maenchen-Helfen, The World of the Huns.
Nic Fields & Illustrations by Christa Cook, The Hun – Scourge of God, AD 375 – 565.
Peter Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire – A New History of Rome and the Barbarians.
G.W. Bowersock, Peter Brown & Oleg Grabar, Late Antiquity – A Guide to the Postclassical World. |
Re: - Preview III - The Huns -
Originally Posted by Joar
Reply With Quote
), details of the armour and clothes of your units are amazing (only shame is that the chain mail does not look so good on lower poly units). I also like the horse texture is made in style that match to the warrior.
