-
January 08, 2015, 08:05 PM
#1
White Huns, Red Huns and Attila's Huns - Related?
This was something I'm wondering. Are they all related, or are the Red and White Huns distinct and different tribes?
-
January 08, 2015, 08:17 PM
#2
Re: White Huns, Red Huns and Attila's Huns - Related?
White Huns are a separate people not unlike the Alans- same group as the Alans, in more or less the same place at different times. (south of where the Huns start in the campaign) The term in outdated usage is used interchangeably, they're thought to be related. Expect MFA to chime in. I know he's probably a little disappointed over the Gothic premise.
Last edited by Lugotorix; January 08, 2015 at 08:22 PM.
-
January 08, 2015, 09:41 PM
#3
Re: White Huns, Red Huns and Attila's Huns - Related?
No, the White Huns or Hepthaltites are not Iranian Nomads like the Alans. The Hepthaltites are Hua, former vassals of the Rouran, and are related to the Huns as they are also Altaic. However, they are not Huns as they don't have the Oghur Turkic component.
The Red Huns, or Kidaritae/Chionitae, were a mix of Altaic Huns and the local Iranian Bactrians from the former kingdom of Kush.
Attila's Huns were the "Black Huns", which was about a dozen different groups that began crossing the volga around 300 AD and en-masse beginning around 360.
Finally you also have the Alkhan and Nezak Huns, two Hunnic groups in modern Pakistan that existed from the 5th-6th centuries and played an important role in the region.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules